Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-03-10 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE JANUARY 8, 1981 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Sinek, Seiberling, Summerwill, Haupert, Lilly, Wegman MEMBERS ABSENT: Wockenfuss, Lafore, Alexander STAFF PRESENT: Hauer, Chiat, Tyler GUEST PRESENT: Jerry Meis FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: The Committee recommends the approval of the preliminary design plans for signage submitted by Lenoch and Cilek. The Committee further recommends that one sign be located on the north end of the west wall in such a way as to project over both the brick and tile facade of the building and the second sign be located over the door on the College Street entrance, that Lenoch and Cilek not use reflective materials in the sign, and that the proposed brown lettering and beige background be retained with the stipulation that the beige match the brick and not be pink in tone. (In order to assure proper color control, the Committee suggests that Lenoch and Cilek send a color chip matching the brick color to their sign manufacturer.) i SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Minutes of December 4, 1980 were approved as circulated. DISCUSSION OF THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS OF LENOCH AND CILEK Jerry Meis of Lenoch and Cilek presented the preliminary design plans for signage explaining that the company hoped to use the True Value logo superimposed with the Lenoch and Cilek logo. The proposed sign will be two overlapping ovals of beige plexiglass with brown letters raised approximately two inches. The sign will be face -lit. The proposed size for the "True Value" oval is three feet long and for the Lenoch and Cilek oval, four feet. Meis proposed placing one sign above the entrance on the Plaza and the other sign above the entrance on College Street. He stated that the sign above the Plaza entrance door would be centered, leaving approximately two inches of molding exposed above and below the sign. Members made a number of suggestions. They pointed out that the sign to be located above the Plaza entrance was rather large for the space it would occupy. They pointed out that the sign might be placed on the brick and facia exterior at the northwest end of the building. This placement might accommodate the size of the proposed sign in a better fashion and simultaneously tie together the two elements (brick and tile) used in the building's exterior. Meis agreed to investigate the possibility of changing the placement. 6293 MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE JANUARY 8, 1981 PAGE 2 Meis stated that the company was especially anxious to retain the two ovals in the sign as this has been the logo used by Lenoch and Cilek in all their advertising for several years. Haupert stated that he was sympathetic to the company's desire to retain their logo. Meis pointed out that the transient population of the University would not immediately identify Lenoch and Cilek which made the company feel that a consistent logo was especially important. Seiberling questioned the use of plexiglass as the main sign material. She stated that a shiny surface might not be very attractive. Members suggested that the plexiglass might be treated in various ways or a flat or enamel paint be used in order to avoid a shiny surface. Members cautioned Meis to match the beige color in the sign with the color in the brick to avoid a pinkish cast. They recommend sending a color sample to the sign company to help control the color in the sign. Meis indicated that the company would be able to control the color. Haupert moved and Sinek seconded that'the Committee recommend the approval of the preliminary design plans for signage submitted by Lenoch and Cilek. The Committee further recommends that one sign be located on the north end of the west wall in such a way as to project over both the brick and tile facade of the building and the second sign be located over the door on the College Street entrance, that Lenoch and Cilek not use reflective materials in the sign, and that the proposed brown lettering and beige background be retained with the stipulation that the beige match the brick and not be pink in tone. (In order to assure proper color control, the Committee suggests that Lenoch and Cilek send a color chip matching the brick color to their sign manufacturer.) Motion carried unanimously. SIGNAGE FORTHE PARKING RAMP Members questioned Chiat about the interior signage in the parking ramps. He informed them that the signage was part of the contract. He added that he thought that Carl Walker and Associates had probably designed the interior signage. Several members complained that the lettering was difficult to read because of the letter face and the poor location. They stated that the City needs to establish a graphic system for the City rather than using a haphazard, inadequate system. Seiberling suggested that the City consult an architectural graphic designer rather than relying on a graphics person who was on the staff but was not necessarily an architectural expert. Chiat pointed out that the ramps were constructed under the supervision of the Public Works Department. Members discussed communicating with the City Manager concerning this matter. a93 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES i i MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE JANUARY 8, 1981 PAGE 3 ROLE AND IMAGE OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE - r The Committee deferred discussion on this topic until the next meeting. !r 1 Prepared by: Andrea y er .� Minute Taker f j i i i i i r j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES -MOINES V. 3 >; N IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT South Riverside Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Office Phone (319) 354.1800 Ext. 357 A CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION **SPECIAL MEETING** FEBRUARY 19, 1981 MEMBERS PRESENT: DIETERLE, REDICK, SAUEGLING, PHIPPS MEMBERS ABSENT: GEORGE STAFF PRESENT: ZERR, BROWN GUESTS PRESENT: NONE The following pointe were discussed in reference to the leases with the FBO. (1) Codify minimum operating standards, update insurance provisions, include exemptions for fuel dispensing. (2) Define lease boundaries, including building leased. (3) Leave shop building lease as is.. (4) Terminal Building: j reserve commission's right to take back if necessary and provide I PRO with comparable apace, (5) Omit language which is no longer applicable, (6) Rent provision: provide for three year review instead of five year. (7) Provide for commissions right to install fuel farm, building, etc. (8) Raise flowage fee to 3F, (9) Clarify adequacy of insurance and define liability. (10) Delete provision whereby commission is obligated to operate premises ae airport or provide equal facilities during term of lease. GO Clarify how rent is to be determined in case part of leased premises is destroyed by fire. (12) Term of lease and option to renew: 10 year term with 10 year option--thru 2001. (13) Consolidate T -hangar leases into one document. A special meeting was set for February 23, 1981 in the law Library of the Civic Center at 7:30 P.M. to discuss additional points of the lease. Meeting was adjourned at 8:05 A.M. i MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a9,� V- L" M M IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT South Riverside Drive Iowa City. Iowa 52240 Office Phone (319) 354.1800 Ext. 357 IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMI.SSION ME1:1'LNC FEBRUARY 23, 1981 IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Dieterle, Sauegling, George Members Absent: Phipps, Redick Staff Present: Zehr, Brown, Wright Guests Present: Scipio Thomas (DI) Chairperson Dieterle called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. and asked the members to further consider the problems involved in rewriting the leases which are held with the Iowa City Flying Service The recommendations which came out of the last special meeting were discussed. It was suggested that the leases for the T Hangars and the Old United Hangar should be separate from the rest. It was concluded that Manager Zehr and Attorney Brown will rewrite the leases and the Minimum Operating Standards. Brown estimated a draft of the leases eduld be prepared in about one month. Brown will check the city code to determine whether the Commission can pass its own ordinance regarding Minimum Operating Standards. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Recorder: Priscilla Wright i MICROFILMED BY 'DORM MICROLAB CtOAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a9� MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION FEBRUARY 6, 1981 10:00 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: A. Arneson, L. Carlton, M. Clover, M. Kattchee, G. Scott, J. Williams. MEMBERS ABSENT: W. Summerwill. STAFF PRESENT: L. Benz, B. Meisel. GUESTS: Ann Sorenson, H. & E. Carroll, Leroy Brockman, Betty Ockenfels, Rachel Dennis, Thea Sando, Margaret Fuethey, Maurice Luther, David Perret, Lee Poynter, Margaret Bonney, Robert Welsh, Marianne Volm, Joella Antes, Nadine Bender, A.C. Forwald, Lucy Luxenburg, Marion Van Rosen, Ellen Kuennen, Joann Von Rosen, W.W. Morris, Nan Seelman, Tom O'Mara, William Nowysz, Ethel Dohac, Pearl Zemlick, Gwen Fountain, Florence Spaine, Katherine O'Brian, Lorna Mathes, Laurine Ralston, Bernice Holub, Dorothy Whipple, Agnes Kuhn, Horace Amidon, James Hall, Milo Pecina, Ruth Taylor, Mary Rock, Leo Cain, Kay Cain, Irene Welsh, Margaret Stevenson, Laura McGarrett, Dale Helling, James Hencin. Chairperson Scott called the meeting to order and welcomed the guests. She introduced the Commission members. Kattchee moved and Carlton seconded a motion to accept the minutes of the Commission meeting on 12/4/80. Unanimously approved (6 yes - 1 absent). Motion declared passed by the Chair. Carlton moved and Kattchee seconded a motion to accept the minutes of the Commission meeting on 12/19/80. Unanimously approved (6 yes - 1 absent). Motion declared passed by the Chair. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Scott invited discussion from the public, and identified guidelines for speakers so that the maximum number of people would have the opportunity to speak. The following comments were received: Florence Spaine: Is the Senior Center to be for Iowa City only or also for Johnson County? Scott responded that the Senior Center is a joint project of Iowa City and Johnson County, and those governmental bodies have committed funds to the project. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES a4.5 Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 2 Leroy Brockman: Mr. Brockman read a statement demanding the Senior Center Commission give more consideration to input from the Council of Elders. Staff is to implement the C of E's decisions, not to make them. In addition, he opposed City offices in the Senior Center. Scott responded that the Commission has invited and expected input from the C of E, and that all Commission meetings are open. Scott reviewed the factors considered in the development and use of the third floor. Jim Lapitz, Chairperson of Council of Elders: Stated that the staff is Complained that the blocking information from the Council of Elders to the Commission. Commission meetings. He wants the ission sCouncilogofzEldercnie sltoaelect �na representative and alternate to report directly to the Commission, and report back to the Council of Elders. This would establish a direct line Of communication with the Commission. Kattchee acknowledged that there appears to be a communication problem, and he welcomed input from the Council of Elders on improving the lines of communication. Agnes Kuhn, former member, Council of Elders: Discussed the original role of the Council of Elders relative to the Commission. She stated that it was her understanding that the Commission would not policy for the Center, and that the Council of Elders would encourage volunteers for programs and activities. She expressed concern that the Council of Elders was abandoning these goals. Her perception of staff is that they are generally interested in older people, and they have sought direction and advice from them. She appealed for more positive relationships. A.C. Forwald, former member, Council of Elders: Delighted with what the City has done in developing the Senior Center. Need to keep receiving input from the elderly, and set aside petty criticism. He suggested using elderly volunteers to work with staff to provide greater involvement with the project. Florence Spaine, Johnson County Task Force: The staff seems to be guided by the City Council rather than the Commission. Thea Sando, former member, Senior Center Commission: Made requests for a structure involving ofthe nCenterSe Sheostatednthatemostple ivolvd �of the proth thblems cannbe traced back to the manner in which the organizational structure was developed. Staff and the Commission have ignored this recommendation. Williams and Carlson clarified that the Senior Center is not part of the Parks and Recreation Department and has its own budget. Lorna Mathes: Feels there is confusion regarding to whom the staff and Commission are responsible. Carlton and Scott explained the procedure that the City follows in appointing Commissioners, and the responsibilities of the position. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES L", l_ Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 3 Leo Cain, Vice President, Council of Elders: Three new members have been appointed to the Council of Elders. The annual election wil be delayed until the Center opens, so that the people using the Center can vote. The Council of Elders wants to establish communication with the Commission to convey their recommendations about programs. Bob Welsh: Asked whether the Commission stated that they wouldn't object to the City using the third floor or did they specifically endorse the idea? Kattchee replied that the Commission didn't want to stand in the way of the City Council if they want to use the third floor because there are some positive fiscal considerations that the Commission recognized. Scott read the proposed City Council resolution regarding use of the third floor. Welsh asked what facts were considered in making the Commission's recom- mendation? He stated that the old Post Office was purchased solely for Senior Center use, and that this promise is not being kept. Kattchee responded that the Commission considered the many positive points in the City using the third floor as long as it is not encumbered for any great length of time. This issue has been blown out of proportion. He emphasized that, once a decision is made by some majority, it should be honored and implemented. Pachel Dennis: Ms. Dennis worked with the original group that explored 0., development of the Senior Center. She recalled that the group had considered renting most of the third floor for operating revenue. She views the City's offer to finish remodeling that space with a commitment to leave when it's needed as an asset. Programs need to be formulated gradually. Every space doesn't need to be filled every hour, but the Center should grow gradually. Thea Sando: The staff presented only the City's point of view to the Commission during discussion of the third floor. Sando claimed the staff criticized the Council of Elders and did not make that organization's concerns known. Williams responded that staff wasn't criticizing this Council of Elders, but, rather making the Commission aware that there were problems. Staff was looking for direction and help in how to facilitate communication. Arneson recalled the original simple request for a Senior Center that was presented to the Chamber of Commerce. He reviewed the course of events that lead to considering the old Post Office as a site. He cited the support and commitment which the City Council and Board of Supervisors have made. All these activities were based on cooperation, faith, and trust in each other, and he emphasized that this is what is needed now. Arneson recommended that tours of the Center be conducted to see the space that is available. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 4 Joella Antes: Asked whether the City plans to pay rent for the third floor. Scott replied that the City owns the building. Why would they pay rent to themselves? The City plans to use their own funds for the remodeling. Jim Hall: Mr. Hall complimented the Commission and City Council for the work being done on behalf of the elderly. The only problem he perceives is a lack of communication. Scott replied that communications can be facilitated through a publicity campaign, and she invited participation in disseminating information about the Senior Center. Florence Spaine: How many offices are on the mezzanine? Scott stated a library, a conference room, multi-purpose office, and the program specialist's office. Kattchee replied that the specifics of where agencies will be located hasn't been decided by the Commission. Jim .Lapitz: Requested that L. Benz bring blueprints to the next Council of Elders meeting. Bob Welsh: Asked that the facts be identified in writing as to what was considered by the Commission in making their recommendation about the third floor. Scott stated this will be made available. Welsh asked the Commission to reaffirm his understanding that the City will not be a direct service provider. Scott stated that this is correct. Kattchee replied that the facts that were considered by the Commission are identified in the minutes. He emphasized that the decision is now in the hands of the City Council. Margaret Bonney, Chair, Committee on Community Needs: Clarified that the Committee on Community ;feeds recognizes that it is not responsible for acting on Senior Center policy and programming. The Committee on Community Needs has rescinded its previous action of having an open forum to receive comments on the Senior Center, since the Commission has been made aware of the problems that exist and is now responsible for acting on the matter. PUBLICITY PLANNING Scott stated a publicity program should be planned to introduce the elderly in larger communities to the Senior Center. She invited comments and input. Rachel Dennis recalled that in 1979 an outreach effort was made by staff to inform rural residents about the Senior Center. This effort should be made again to update rural residents, and build on the original project. Scott stated that the Johnson County Task Force would also be a good contact through which this information can be disseminated. 0195 MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 5 Bob Welsh volunteerd to assist with publicity relative to developing and disseminating books and materials in cooperation with service providers. Williams stated that it is important that the service providers as a group decided what publicity they want to generate. CONSTRUCTION UPDATE Tom O'Mara, architect, reported that the project is on or ahead of schedule in terms of supplies or construction. Most of the equipment that is going into the building is going into the site now. The windows will be delivered in March. Construction should be completed the first part of July, or at the latest in August. The sheet rock is going up next week. Finishing work is now occurring on the plumbing and electrical system. Kattchee asked whether any supplies would delaycompletion? O'Mara replied that the windows should be here by mid-March. Every window in the building will be replaced, and the building will be totally insulated including the ceiling. All the heating and air conditioning systems will be installed which will keep energy use at a minimum. Six zones in the building can be heated or cooled independently. Kattchee asked who will service the heating and cooling systems. O'Mara has recommended that the City either enter into a service agreement with the contractor to maintain the City's mechanical systems, or place someone on staff to maintain this sophisticated equipment. The architect will make the final inspection of the building before moving in. However, it will need to be finely tuned after it is opened and in ,ise. The water fountains will be a both regular and handicapped level. Every restroom in the building is accessible to the handicapped. BUDGET HEARING Meisel stated that the City Council is still in the process of reviewing budgets. No final decision has been made. PROGRAM STATEMENTS The application for space and programming has been discussed with service providers, adn that input is now being considered by the Commission's subcommittee. Applicatiosls won't be expected until mid-April. The Commission will receive and act on the applications. No space has been assigned. L. Luxenburg asked whether the application is for approval/disapproval or for information. Scott replied that the application will provide information about what service providers and organizations want to provide at the Senior Center. The Commission will then review the space requests and program information, and attempt to fulfill the needs. Williams stated that current information needs to be submitted by the agencies. Clover commented that the same application form will be used for both agencies and organizations. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 6 COUNCIL OF ELDERS UPDATE Reports of the current status of the Council of Elders was received during the public discussion. i PUBLICITY PLANNING Scott asked the Commission for suggestions. Williams recommended that Commissioners begin thinking of the kind of publicity that is needed. Scott stated that there needs to be a general way of disseminating information. Use of cable TV, development of newsletters, fliers, a logo, a specific name for the Center are possible sources of publicity. Williams stressed the importance of giving information to the general public about the Senior Center. The Press -Citizen can also be approached to publicize plan events and programs. Benz reported that the Commission's application for special third class bulk rates have been denied by the Post Office because it had not been shown that the Senior Center is an "educational organization". Benz asked if the Commission would like to appeal this decision. Discussion about the educational aspects of the Senior Center followed. Kattchee moved and Carlton seconded a motion that the staff be instructed to continue pursuing a bulk mailing rate for a newsletter with the assistance of Kattchee and Williams. Kattchee and Williams should be consulted prior to submitting the appeal. Unanimously approved (6 yes - 1 absent). Motion declared passed by the Chair. Welsh recommended tha the Council of Elders be given the first opportunity to tour the Senior Center. He also suggested simply calling the facility the Senior Center. Kattchee stated that the most important piece of information that the public needs is that the Center will be opening in July, not the stage of completion. He recommended the staff schedule tours with the contractor beginning with the Council of Elders. Kattchee moved and Clover seconded a motion to authorize and instruct the staff to set up tour times, not to exceed one per week, with the first tour to be offered to the Council of Elders. Unanimously approved (6 yes - 1 absent). Motion declared passed by the Chair. Kattchee also recommended that copies of the floor plans be offered to those persons touring the building. Williams suggested offering the service providers the second opportunity to tour. COMMISSION MEETING TIME Commissioners were asked to consult their calendars. Williams seconded a motion to hold the next meeting on at 10:00 A.M. Unanimously approved (6 yes - 1 absent) passed by the Chair. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Kattchee moved and Friday, March 13, Motion declared a9.5 Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 7 Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: Lori Benz, Program Specialist Michael Kattchee, Secretary MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES-MOIIIES i i I i j ; Senior Center Commission February 6, 1981 Page 7 i Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: Lorenz, Fifogram Specialist , Michael Ka6chee, Secretary j - MICROFILMED BY !JORM MICRO_ LAB :CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I I. i i i a961 V., MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION JANUARY 27, 1981 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Fett, Gartland, Hamilton, Hotka, Sanders, Schwab. MEMBERS ABSENT: Sheehan. STAFF PRESENT: Tinklenberg. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None. REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Hotka called the meeting to order. Sanders moved, Hamilton seconded, to approve the minutes of January 13, 1981. Approved gnanimously. Zoning Ordinance - Recommendations to P&Z The Commission discussed the items listed in the January 13, 1981, RCC minutes. They decided to explore whether there should be a definition of mechanical device which would include solar systems. On the question of solar access, it was decided to defer action until the State acts on this. In regard to Neighborhood Commercial Zones (CN -1), questions were raised concerning a desirable size. Staff was asked to inquire about what other cities have done. All other items were dropped as being unfeasible or unnecessary. The RCC was interested in what the energy use maximum is in Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin's, zoning code. Also, what the State Energy Code requires. Staff will contact them. Staff Update Tinklenberg reported that the solar projects are being monitored. Four building energy audits were done in December. Currently a report is being prepared for the City Council in connection with the FY82 budget process. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES L.. WM a�. V,— e'1 Resources Conservation Commission January 27, 1981 Page 2 Other Business COBG Funds: The RCC felt the emphasis should be to make housing more efficint heatinand reorted that he will also Proposera continuat on of he heatlloss rscanning and community energy monitoring. Agenda for February 17 Meeting: -Zoning Ordinance -West side apartment development -Report on CCN meeting -Election of new officers -Other business Sanders tt commendation to eJohne Brownd,for shish work as an present intern certificate oed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 6:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg, Pat Fett, Secretary. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 18, 1980 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Vetter, Lehman, Jakobsen, Blum .'A MEMBERS ABSENT: Horton, Kammermeyer, Ogesen STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Scholten, Tyler RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL: The approval of the amendment to Section 8.10,11.Band 8.10.35.11.0 of the Code of Ordinances of Iowa City, permitting free standing and monument signs to be located in the CBS zone, the full text of which is attached to these minutes. ZONING ITEM: Public discussion of an amendment to the Sign Ordinance to permit free standing and monument signs to be located in the CBS zone. Jakobsen called the meeting order. She explained that confusion had arisen in the last City Council meeting over the ordinance the Commission had sent to the City Council recommending allowing free standing and monument signs in the CBS zone. Boothroy explained that the Council was asking for clarification regarding the square footage permitted for free standing and monunment signs when located in the CBS zone; that is, 50 square feet per sign, or 50 square feet per sign face. Blum explained that he had attended the City Council meeting and had reported that the Commission had restricted monument signs to fifty feet per sign face but not free standing signs. The City Manager had reported that Staff had understood the Commission's intent was to restrict both free standing and monument signs to 50 feet per sign face. Therefore, the City Council had referred the amendment back to the Commission asking for clarification. Lehman stated that the Commission restricted both types of signs to 50 square feet total and that Staff had correctly interpreted the Commission's intent. However, he felt now that perhaps the Commission had been mistaken in its judgment. Blum questioned the wording of Section 7, which reads "signs with more than two faces shall not exceed that allowed if all faces were in a single plane". He pointed out that the Commission might not need to change the wording of the amendment as it said, "More than two faces." Boothroy stated that that particular wording was not correct and should have been "two or more faces". i MICROFILMED BY `JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES L. . a97 Planning $ Zoning Commission December 18, 1980 Page 2 Lehman stated that he felt it was illogical to allow 50 feet per face for a two sided sign (this would allow 100 square feet total) but only 50 feet total for a three sided sign (this would make each face approximately 16 square feet). Boothroy stated that under the present Sign Ordinance only 2 sided signs were allowed. He suggested stating allowed footage in terms of per sign face. He also suggested that the Commission might want to reconsider the allowed footage for monument signs. He pointed out that free standing signs are generally 10 to 12 feet in elevation and that makes the sign appear smaller. Monument signs, on the other hand, are close to the ground. A 50 square foot monument sign could appear much more massive than a free standing sign of the same size. Lehman suggested that perhaps 50 feet per face was too large for the CBS zone. Blum responded that 50 feet was consistently used throughout the proposed zoning ordinance. He pointed out that this standard, although somewhat arbitrary, had been through sign review committees and looked over by others. He questioned changing the figure for another arbitrary size. He added that if the ordinance is enacted and the size is too large, the ordinance can be changed. Furthermore, the Commission had no evidence showing that 50 square feet per sign face is inappropriate. Both Jakobsen and Vetter stated that they had no strong feelings about the size. Boothroy stated that he was concerned that 50 square feet per sign face might be too large for a monument sign. He pointed out that the base of the sign is not necessarily included in computing the allowed sign area. He stated that part of his concern was that the CBS zone allows for a mix of residential and commercial uses and that a la••:;e monument sign in that zone might be undesirable. Blum rejoined that 50 square feet was allowed in the proposed neighborhood commercial zone which is even less commercially oriented than the CBS zone. Blum moved and Vetter seconded that the City Council approve the amended ordinance the full text of which is attached to these minutes. The amended ordinance is the same as that originally presented with the following exceptions: Delete M7 Insert "per sign face" after "50 square feet" in Section A.B.a. and A.B.b. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned. L, Prepared by: q—QoSy /1nYrea Tyler, ute a"Tcer Approved by: Dick Blum, Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 0197 MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1981 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jakobsen, Horton, Vetter, Blum. MEMBERS ABSENT: Lehman, Ogesen, Kammermeyer. STAFF PRESENT: Woito, Boothroy, Tyler. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. That the Council approve the application submitted by Shaler Enter- prises Inc. for the preliminary plat, Planned Area Development and Large Scale Residential Development Plan, located one-half mile west of Mormon Trek Boulevard subject to acquiring easements for sewer access, and legal papers containing procedures for review of the development when it is approximately half -way completed, and a Storm Water Management system for lot q8. 2. That the Council approve the application submitted by Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Company for the preliminary and final Large Scale Development plan, located at 2200 Lower Muscatine Road subject to the Storm Water Management basin being shown on Procter and Gamble property. FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: That the discussion and final vote on an application submitted by Bjorenson Investment Corporation for rezoning a 2.6 acre tract of land from R3A to C1, located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 6 and Lakeside Drive be deferred until the next regularly scheduled meeting. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Jakobsen called the meeting to order. There being no public discussion, the Commission proceeded with the formal agenda. SUBDIVISION ITEMS: S-8016. Public discussion of an application submitted by Shaler Enterprises Incorporated, for the preliminary plat, Planned Area Development and Large Scale Residential Development plan, located one- half mile west of Mormon Trek Boulevard; 45 -day limitation period: 1/21/81; 60 -day limitation period: 2/5/81. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP IDS -DE S .IV MICS A17 Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 1981 Page 2 Boothroy explained that the application was for a large scale residential development entitled Hunter's Run consisting of fl/ acres and 253 units. fhe projected Lime schedule for completion is approximately B-9 years. The development will be located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard in such a way so that the proposed alignment of Interstate 518 will cut through the northeast corner of the development. Part 1 is that section located south of Rohret Road. It is designed at a rural density due to its present lack of sewer and water service. Part 1 is divided into eight lots. The developer has limited the points of access to Rohret Road by providing common drives. However, the Commission has previously suggested a standard of access along one side of an arterial street to be every 300 feet centerline to centerline and the alignment of two drives would have to be changed in order to meet this standard as they are now approximately 250 feet centerline to centerline. Boothroy explained that the northern section, Part 2, will include a mix condominiums,of ous mounts of green space are �provided rin the lareasnorth oand f Rohret Road r(designated as Part 2) including several acres of park area which the Parks and Recreation Commission agreed to accept on January 14, 1981 as City park area. Part 2 will have a series of streets including Duck Creek Drive which is proposed to run parallel to 518 perhaps eventually extending to Melrose Avenue. The park areas will separate higher and lower density areas. Walkways are planned throughout the development. Boothroy stated that the applicant was willing to make revisions and had in fact made revisions however, some deficiencies and discrepancies remain. The private drive accesses along Rohret Road must be addressed. Sewer easements should be provided for access to sewer located on the adjoining property to the north. An agreement should be provided for review of the planned area development in three or four years to determine compliance with the development time schedule. Boothroy noted that Engineering had determined that lot N8 in Part 1 did comply with the Storm Water Management ordinance on a preliminary basis and that future resubdivision of lot N8 will have to provide Storm Water Management plan before being taken to Council. Members of the Commission discussed various aspects of the development ascertaining that the development was located about ; mile from the city limits and that Rohret Road will be developed as a secondary arterial. Members stated that they were somewhat concerned about the placement of the driveways at less than 300 feet but that they saw no ready solution. Since the development is within City limits, it is difficult to limit development but they would not like to see a pattern established on Rohret Road of driveways every 225 feet. The Commission also expressed concern about vacant property between this development and the rest of the City and problems of access between the two. They stated that a walkway should be provided under 518 to provide access to the rest of the City. a97 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS - DES !101NES Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 1981 Page 3 Members agreed that the developer should obtain easements to the sewer before approval. The development plans to use the trunk sewer being extended to the County Home which has a limited uncommitted capacity. In order to obtain access to this trunk line, the developer must obtain easements from the adjoining property owner to the north on whose property the sewer is being located. The developer objected saying that getting the easement might be time consuming. The Commission responded that the Council would not consider the development plan until the easements had been obtained. Woito asked for a waiver of the time limitations so that easements could be obtained. The Commission unanimously approved that motion stated by the Chair that the Council approve the application submitted by Shaler Eneterprises, Inc. for the preliminary plat, Planned Areas Development and Large Scale Residential Development Plan, located one-half mile west of Mormon Trek Boulevard subject to acquiring easements for sewer access, and legal papers containing procedures for review of the development when it is approximately half -way completed, and a Storm Water Management system for lot N8. S-8017. Discussion of an application submitted by Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Company for the preliminary and final Large Scale Development plan, located at 2200 Muscatine Road. Boothroy explained that this was the third modification of the LSNRD plan for this location. This action is chiefly concerned with designating a temporary building as permanent. He pointed out that a provision in the code governs temporary buildings, allowing them to remain for two years, with an extension period. This extension period is now up and Procter and Gamble is applying to have the structure become part of the permanent facilities. They have determined that the building is beneficial and are willing to bring it up to code. They have submitted a letter of intent and do comply with the Storm Water Management Ordinance. In the revised plan there is a slight problem with the boundaries as drawn which need to be changed so that the Storm Water Management basin appears on Procter and Gamble property. The Commission agreed unanimously with the motion stated by the Chair that Council approve the application submitted by Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Company for the preliminary and final Large Scale Development plan, located at 2200 Lower Muscatine Road subject to the Storm Water Management basin being drawn on Procter and Gamble property. ZONING ITEM: Z-8003. Public discussion of an application submitted by D,joren,en Investment Corporation for rezoning a 2.6 acre tract of land from R3A to C1, located on the southeast corner of the intersection of highway 6 and Lakeside Drive; 45 -day limitation period: 1/25/81. 9.177 MICROFILMED By JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP IDS•DE`, '101N1I Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 1981 Page 4 Knight stated that according to the Comprehensive Plan the property was zoned for 8 to 16 dwelling units per acre and that the only justification for changing the zoning would be the relocation of the proposed South Neighborhood Commercial Center. The Plan further suggests that the main tenants of the NCC should be a grocery store and a drug store. This proposed use would be a convenience store. Although the Comprehensive Plan does not directly deal with convenience stores, staff feels that there was an intent to limit the number to avoid commercial property being scattered throughout residential property. The City Engineer has indicated that the property is suitable for "dry us" onl that iflthe applicantwould uses the property This so my as presently planned. Because of adjacent C2 zoning, the possibility of strip zoning developing does exist. If rezoning is allowed here, staff feels that a feasible alternative may be that of Planned Commercial instead of Cl. This rezoning would allow for the development of this area in a "planned" manner, providing for both automobile and pedestrian access. Angela Ryan, representing the owners, stated that the building of a Quik Trip on this spot would be advantageous to the neighborhood and the city. She pointed out that people in the neighborhood could walk or bike to the store. Furthermore, such building would increase the tax base. She stated that the owners were willing to agree to a dry use. After study of the site, they decided that the only appropriate use for the land would be a convenience center. Addressing the concern for strip zoning, Ryan stated that Lakeside property was already fully developed and that the mobile home court owner was not interested in developing any more, so that strip zoning would not be occurring. She pointed out that LconcBe would include extensive landscaping. In answer tquestions out that the Plan ning consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Ry pointed was to be a flexible working document. She added that the Staff Report seemed to indicate that Quik Trip would be taking the place of the Neighborhood Center which is not the intent. She noted that people want convenience stores and see a real value in them. Ryan stated that gas pumps would be included at the location. Ryan stated that Bjornsen had sold the land to Life Investors who wished to lease the land to Quik Trip. Tom Cilek, representative of Life Investors, stated that Quik Trip would be doing extensive landscaping on the site. Cilek stated that Life Investors was willing to enter an agreement with the City stating that the Quik Trip store would be the only item built on the site. Jakobsen responded that P&Z could not enter i noparch of an agreement. Blum pointed out that P&Z would be rezoning a land nota particular store. Cilek responded that given the sewer problems, little else could be done with the site. 29 7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP 119 •- N Ito 1:I1G Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 1981 Page 5 Woito pointed out that the current zoning for the parcel appears to be unsuitable and this plan does seem suitable and that Legal would recommend the rezoning. Blum stated that he was concerned about rezoning 2.6 acres when less than 1 acre would be used for Quik Trip. He said he was also concerned with possible use of the adjacent land which is zoned C1 and C2. He pointed out that if the area is rezoned there would be little the Commission could do to prevent undesirable development. He stated that if the Commission wants planned commercial development, the development has to be controlled. Boothroy pointed out that the sewer problem was short term and sewer capacity could be provided within 5 years. Boothroy also pointed out that some neighbors were objecting to building Quik Trip on the proposed site; however, they could not attend the meeting because of a conflicting school board meeting. He stated that the neighbors were raising a petition against the rezoning. Jakobsen suggested considering Planned Commercial zoning. Cilek responded that he was unsure how much control the City would gain with Planned Commercial since the developer would be submitting an LSNRD. He stated that the developers would even be willing to dedicate part of the remaining land to the City. He did state that he had to concede the strip zoning issue as they had no control over what other owners might do with their property. Blum pointed out that if the Commission could control the development of this site through the use of Planned Commercial zoning, they would be able to apply the same standards to the rest of the land in the area. Blum stated that it was in the proposal's favor that the land is totally unsuitable for any other use. He pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan is flexible, that this is a piece of land that does not conform. He stated that the new use did not bother him and that there were plenty of barriers between the area and Randalls to make the store really convenient to neighbors. However, his major concern was the best method for PU to control zoning. Cilek asked what additional action the developer would have to take with Planned Commercial Zoning that they would not have to take with an LSNRD. Boothroy stated that with PC the developer would be committing to zoning and a development plan at the same time. This would require an economic feasibility study, and an impact study on the surrounding property, a traffic impact study on the surrounding streets, and a set back of 40 feet in the front, 20 feet on the side and 20 feet on the back. (The tip of the triangle is 20 feet wide.) LN MICROFILMED By JORM MICROLAB C E 0 A R RARIIIS - NL R01N11 Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 1981 Page 6 The chair moved that the Commission recommend the rezoning of the 2.6 acre tract located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 6 and Lakeside Drive from R3A to Cl. The motion was defeated with Vetter and Horton voting aye. Jakobsen stated that she was concerned with the neighborhood beyond Lakeside Apartment and Bel Aire. Blum stated that he was voting against the approach, not the concept. He added that the timing of the school board meetings did not allow neighbors to express their feelings. He stated that he would reconsider his vote if the applicant would give the Commission a waiver on the time limitation to give the Commission time to work out a solution. The Commission explained that the procedure would be to waive the 45 -day limitation period, then the item would be reposted. This would avoid the refiling fee. Cilek and others agreed to waive the 45 day limit. Blum moved and Jakobsen seconded that the Commission reconsider the vote. Motion carried unanimously. Blum moved and Vetter seconded that the Commission defer the vote until the next meeting. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned. Prepared by: (IfA.y.o,o Andrea Tyler, M to Taker Approved by: Dick Blum, Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES %)[NiS l OU ORDINANCI NO. ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8.10.35.11.6, AND 8.10.35.11.0 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF IOWA CITY, PERMITTING FREE STANDING AND MONUMENT SIGNS TO BE LOCATED IN THE CBS 7ONE, SECTION I.PURPOSE. The purpose of this amendment Ts tc permit free standing and monument signs to be located in the CBS zone. SLCTION II. AMENDMENT. Section 8.10.35.11 of the Code of Ordfinances—is hereby amended by the following: A. Section 8.10.35.118 of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by adding the following paragraphs: B. No more than one (1) of the following signs (a and b) shall be permitted: (a) One (1) on -premises identification or advertising monument sign not to exceed one (1) square foot per lineal foot Of building frontage. Said sign shall not exceed 50 square feet per sign face and may be internally or externally lighted. (b) One (1) On -premises identification or advertising free standing sign not to exceed one (1) square foot per lineal foot of building frontage. Said sign shall not exceed 50 square feet per sign face and may be internally or externally lighted. B. Section 8.10.35.11C.2 of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by deleting said section and by replacing with the following paragraph: 2. All under canopy exceed a maximum (6) feet and/or than seventh -five MICROFILMED DY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DIS 1101 IFs signs shall not dimension of six in any case more (75) per cent of a9 the width of the canopy to which it is attached. No portion of said sign shall be less than ten (10) feet above grade level. C. Section 8.10.35.11.0 of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by adding the following paragraphs: 6. All monument signs shall extend not more than five (5) feet above the grade. SECTION III. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances to conflict with the provision of this ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION IV. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such ajudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION V. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication as required by law. Passed and approved this MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK 997 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES L.'. MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 1981 7:30 P.M. IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT: GUESTS PRESENT: Barker, Bonney, Haldeman, Hall, McCormick, McGee, VanderZee, Whitlow Pecina Chiat, Hauer, Hencin, Steinbach, Vezina Hillstrom, Keller, Milkman, B. Bachman, Daily Iowan; B. Honetschlager; D. Lewis, Riverfront Commission; N. Seiberling, Project GREEN; S. Stanar, Press -Citizen REVIEW OF PROPOSALS FOR CDBG FUNDING: Cha irpeson.Bonney called the meeting to order. Bonney explained the purpose of the special meeting, that it was to be a work session for the Committee to review CDBG funding proposals that have been received and to set priorities and goals for programs over the next three years. She stated that there would be no public discussion period, but guests representing specific proposals would be invited to provide additional comments for the Committee's consideration. Bonney reviewed neighborhood revitalization strategy goals which were outlined in the fifth year hold -harmless grant application: minimum housing code enforcement, housing rehabilitation, energy conservation, neighborhood site improvements, and Ralston Creek flood control. She reminded the Committee that many of these goals are still applicable to present community needs. Bonney called attention to the summary table of CDBG funding proposals that were sent to CCN members. Under Neighborhood Programs, A. Neighborhood Strategy Areas, she said that members had received reports on the five areas, and reminded them that commitments were already made for monies to be set aside for the Lower Ralston Creek area. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE DECISIONS: B. General Neighborhood Projects I. Housing code enforcement - high priority. Staff responded to questions by members concerning effectiveness of program and other program details. 2. Sidewalk construction - consider for inclusion in NSA's. 3. Tree planting - consider for inclusion in NSA's. College Green Park may not fall in designated NSA. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES .1 V, Committee on Commur,..y Needs Page 2 4. Park acquisition - Miller Street/West Benton area may not be an NSA. `i. Cemetery retaining wall - consider for incIuslon in NSA. G. Ralston Creek Improvements - monies have already been allocated for improvements. 7. Bus shelters - consider for inclusion in NSA's. B. Alley paving - consider for inclusion in NSA's. 9. Energy conservation - high priority. Committee wished to see result - oriented program; suggested combining efforts with other agencies, e'. g. HACAP. 10. Street lighting improvements - consider for inclusion in NSA's. U. Soccer fields - low priority. 12. Sewer replacements - no further consideration. 13. Retaining wall on Kirkwood Avenue - no further consideration. Staff to forward problem to Public Works Department. Elderly and Handicapped Programs I. Hickory Hill Park - low riorit i 2. House for "Independent Living" Program - high priority. CCN wished I to consider proposal and clarify certain aspects. Staff will reproduce written proposal for members to review. 3. Group home for frail elderly - high priority. CCN interested in proposal and wanted some clarifications. Suggested alternate funding I under assisted housing programs. 4. Group home/halfway house for persons released from hospitals - no further consideration. i 5. Crisis Center - no further consideration. Housing Assistance Plan Implementation I. 'Public housing sites - high priority. 2. Housing rehabilitation - hi- ht— riorit , Staff responded to questions on program efficiency and' m strat ve costs. Central Business District. Revitalization 1. Dubuque Street improvements - medium priority. Staff suggested improvements just to west side of Dubuque Street; also, "matching" CDBG monies with City funds in the Capital Improvement Program. 2. Revolving loan 'fund for commercial rehabilitation - CCN requested additional information. Staff to return with specific ideas and examples. Programs with City-wide Impact 1. Rocky Shore Bikeway - medium priority. D. Lewis explained that the Riverfront Commission considered this a high priority because of riverbank deterioration and safety problems for pedestrians and bicyclists. She said that CDBG monies were used to design the bikeway and this would be a logical next step. 2. Ice skating rink - no further consideration. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 2i" L". e'� Committee on Commun._j Needs Page 3 3. Swimming pool - no further consideration. 4. River buffer and trail system and fishing access - lowpry. iority. Staff to recommend alternate funding for Riverfront Commission. 5. Economic development assistance program - CCN requested additional information.. Staff to return with specific ideas and examples. 6. Rock Island Railroad depot - no further consideration. 7. Traffic light at Gilbert Street and Iowa Avenue - no further consideration. Funding for this project is included in the City's FY82 Capital Improvement Budget. Members and staff discussed ways to approach neighborhoods on the availability of CDBG funds for neighborhood improvements. VanderZee moved and McGee seconded a motion to hold neighborhood meetings in the North Dodge Street area and Creekside area on possible NSA designation. Motion carried unanimously. It was decided to meet Monday, February 23 in the North Dodge Street area and Thursday, February 26 in the Creekside area. Meeting adjourned at 10:05 P.M. Prepared lM im Hencin CDBG Program Coordinator I MICROFILMED BY iJORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES a 19, a] MINUTES RIVERFRONT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 1981 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Knight, Sokol, Lewis, Oehmke, Boutelle, Vetter, Baker. MEMBERS ABSENT: Jean Fountain, Joanne Muldoon, Sally Johnson, David Wooldrick. STPFF PRESENT: Franklin, Tyler. GUESTS PRESENT: Don McDonald, Norman la Haugh of the U of I Minutes of the January 7, 1981 meeting were approved as circulated. WATER QUALITY ISSUES Franklin announced that Sheila Johnson was unable to make her presentation this evening. { Don McDonald of the University of Iowa Department of Environmental Engineering spoke about the quality of water in the river. He stated that the quality of the water is now being affected more by agricultural run- off than by municipal run-off or sewerage pollution. He pointed out that water quality has improved since 1964 with turbidity, bacteria and phosphate counts down. Water quality at the Coralville Reservoir has also been improving. The ban on commercial fishing has been lifted. He stated that there had been a big jump in the nitrate levels in the past three years, which is due largely to the increased use of fertilizer. Extremely high nitrate levels can harm infants but nitrate levels in the Iowa River are generating far below these danger levels. One concern was that changing pattern of higher nitrates at times of low water levels, instead of during spring run-off, might indicate that shallow wells are being contaminated. The nitrates appear to be leaching through the soil to the subsurface tiling systems and entering the river via the tiles and the shallow ground water. McDonald pointed out that the Reservoir has been silting in. The Corps want to raise the minimum pool in order to guarantee more water retention in case of drought. Some downstream farmers are anxious about raising the minimum pool because they feel this will increase the chance of flooding. McDonald explained that the chance of increased flooding is very slight and encouraged the RFC to support raising the minimum pool. BUDGET REPORT Sokol reported that he and Bernadine Knight attended the City Council budget meeting and requested $500 for miscellaneous expenditures. The MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES V h., 211 V_ a Riverfront Commission February 4, 1981 Page 2 Council suggested that a written proposal be submitted. Franklin's salary was approved. After submission of the proposal, the allocation for miscellaneous expenses was also included in the FY82 budget. PROPOSALS FOR FUNDING FROM CDBG FUNDS Oehmke reported that he and Muldoon attended the CCN meeting at which proposals were made for funding projects. As RFC's representative he made three proposals: a. Construction of the Rocky Shore Drive bike trail. b. Use of the water treatment plant site. C. Stabilization of the river bank south of the bridge. The Chair informed applicants that they would have to work hard to get their proposals approved as there were many, many requests. Franklin stated that she had supplemented the requests with a memo to CCN. The second week in February CCN will hold a meeting to set priorities and begin to determine NSA (Neighborhood Strategy Areas). Members expressed that the chances of funding were slim but worth pursuing. Lewis and Muldoon stated they would try to attend the meeting. PARKS AND RECREATION FIVE YEAR PLAN Franklin explained that Parks and Recreation applies for funds from various agencies and in order to show need for funding and uses of past funding, has prepared the five year plan booklet sent to the members in the most recent mailing. P&R has asked for RFC's approval of the plan. Members responded that they had several questions and reservations about the plan. They questioned why no one on the Riverfront Commission had been consulted as the plan included work done by the RFC. Members expressed the feeling the P&R claimed the battramp as an accomplishment when in reality RFC had to push hard to get it built. Boutelle pointed out that several sections read as if they were responses to the Stanley recommendations. She stated that if the position outlined in the plan is intended to become new City policy, the RFC needs to discuss it. Franklin stated that it was reasonable for the Commission to defer recommendations until they could get clarification on the purpose and intent of the plan from a Parks and Recreation representative. Baker moved and Oehmke seconded that the Commission expressed reservations about the Parks and Recreation 5 Year Plan and requested a representative from Parks and Recreation be present at the next RFC meeting in order to clarify the plan. Motion carried unanimously. j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 9299 Riverfront Commission February 4, 1981 Page 3 OTHER BUSINESS Baker stated that not much progress had been made on the snowmobile trail situation at the Coralville Reservoir. A meeting scheduled with the Corps of Engineers and other interested people had been cancelled. A meeting had been held with Clemens Erdahl and another meeting is scheduled. Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: Andrea Tyler Minute Taker K MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 'CEDAR 'RAPIDS -DES -MOINES l I i i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 'CEDAR 'RAPIDS -DES -MOINES