Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-06-30 Bd Comm minutesJ;- MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1981 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Vanderhoef, Harris, Hall, Barker MEMBERS ABSENT: Bartles STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Woito, Knight, Tyler FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: V-8104. That an application submitted by Micki Soldofsky for a variance to 8.10.21E to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence located at 229 Lowell be approved. V-8105. That an application submitted by Brad McQuillen for a variance to Section 8.10.23B.2 to permit the addition of a garage to an existing residence located at 101 Glenn Drive be approved. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order. Woito called the roll. Barker moved and Hall seconded that the Minutes of March 24, April 7, and May 7, 1981, be approved as corrected. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE ITEMS: V-8104. Public hearing on an application submitted by Micki Soldofsky for a variance to Section 8.10.21E.1b of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence located at 229 Lowell Street. This item was a continuation from the previous meeting. Knight recapitulated and clarified the order of discussion. There were visual aids. The applicant's property is on a corner lot. Wilson Street is the official front yard. A major nonconformity is the existing garage. The best alternative for the addition would be to add to the house, but this would be expensive. The studio addition would be on the back of the existing nonconforming garage. The request is to extend this non- conformity. The staff recommended denial. Those present looked at the photos of the site. Vanderhoef said that as far as vision goes, the tree already cuts off the view and the garage wouldn't make much difference. Vanderhoef asked about the size of the tree and the foliage coverage close to the existing garage. 4� MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB .CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES L 903 V;_ MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1981 PAGE 2 ou neend defsko stated that she is an use he. least expensive alternatst and ilve. There were v problems owith j the addition of a studio to the back of the house cutsintouch athehuselofbthe across the back, kitchen windows, and havingo breezeway. oofline Her producitect e the necessary 400 squarested it would cost e0feetuof space the one else who would wish to speak in favor of the There was a request for any variance. Tom Gelt, the attorney for the applicant, mentioned that the delay oeye variance to this meeting was to give the Board time to view the property. He spoke in support of the change which wasn't a large one, onl5 feet. y 1 be I Thcornr neighboretoo the l the west unusual. has his change nts,d He lsa d that eittwould i preserve the condition of the neighborhood to approve the variance. he T neighbor to the north has concerns that the view would be blocked but in Gelt's judgment, it doesn't seem so. There le the expense softhe any otherhardship methodlack the roofline, expense alteration sexpenseY for alook the kitchen elsewhere and and wo id fittwellconsthe back of ct. The building eYgaragwould Glet awkward proposed allowance of the variance under the present law due to hardship. Strom ren, the neighbor to the north, opposes the variance. The zoning exists to protect the property owner from encroachment and sheacan existing property she stated. She does have her own property (2) build on. The reasons for Stromgren's opposition are (1) because of hose on ofthe proposed tion,h sand saddiS 3) privacy d mished market value t value ofthe property, and (4) the offensive encY oachment on the rights which she now tion to and protest to the variance. holds. She stated her continued opp ip stated at �arrissupportnow �thexvariance and hastreassessedathe rieria for hsiitu tion as to he the ould concerns of the neighbors. Hall stated that he believed the tree cuts the yard anyway and now that he has seen the property, he doesn't feel as bad about granting it as before. nded it. Vanderhoef moved that the variance be granted and Barker seco y g was more SoIdofsk stated that the northern light referred to by the neighbor above was t a concern in this countr and that the ever efficiency her concern. She stated that she would not put windows on the north side. indows be no uld Barker rkerth sade would makeeit�moreeacceptable or be anfact that thereoacceptablewcomprom�sethe 610 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES ...7 903 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1981 PAGE 3 Stromgren reiterated her opposition to the variance. Gelt said that the windows planned for the northside were small and high. Soldofsky stated that there already are windows on the garage which exists there. The property rights were not being encroached upon; the view could be obstructed with no hinderance to the right to air and light; but there was no encroachment of actual space. Boothroy stated that under the ordinance a fence could be added up to eight feet high, which would effectively block the neighbor's view to a comparable degree as the proposed addition. Woito noted that if there was concern about an applicant with conditions it could be noted what was required in the order and filed with the Johnson County Recorder's Office. It is possible to note that there be no north windows on the building site plan. Mr. Soldofsky stated that there were windows in the garage now. Mrs. Soldofsky added that the garage could be converted right now as long as the size wasn't extended and therefore the privacy contention was not valid. She has researched, she stated, other ways of attaining studio space - renting and buying, and was unable to find anything feasible. Mr. Soldofsky mentioned that if she worked at night in another structure away from the home, he would worry about her safety in commuting. The motion to grant the variance was approved unanimously. V-8105. Public hearing on an application submitted by Brad McQuillen for a variance to Section 8.10.238.2 to permit the addition of a garage to an existing residence located at 101 Glenn Drive. Photographs were presented and entered into the record. The location of the proposed construction is Washington and Glenn Drive on the east side of town. The applicant is located on a corner lot which has some terracing to rear and side. To the rear of the property is a church at the top of a hill. Across the street is Arbor Hills which is unique because it is a Planned Area Development which doesn't line up to a row of houses. There are some constraints to deal with. The terrain for the construction might have drainage problems if the applicant were to.locate the garage improperly. There are no neighbors who objected to the plan so it is assumed not contrary to public interest. This is the only house without a garage on the street, so the construction is reasonable and in the spirit of the ordinance. The uniqueness of the property and terrain and the essential character of the neighborhood will be maintained or improved. To use a garage for storage will look better than the present method. The spirit of the ordinance which requires the corner lot be larger is still maintained in that adequate vision lines are still available and the MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES god MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1981 PAGE 4 addition creates no hindrance because it sets back. Also, the addition will create a straight line with other houses as much as the other houses are already in line. It was recommended that the variance to Section 8.10.23.82 be granted. The property line is 19 feet, not the 20 feet as shown on the map because ! the applicant measured right to the sidewalk and the property line starts one foot behind the sidewalk. There was informal discussion. ! Mc uillen stated that people think it is a good idea. There is no hardship for people in the area. Harris stated that the drainage issue was a problem. He didn't see the I pitch problem from the neighboring yard. Mc uillen suggested that when the drainage pipe is put in and goes to the {{street it still doesn't totally carry the water off from the terracing. I There was a lot of water in the basement of the house during the spring Ej melt before he moved in. It was his belief that a garage in back would hold water. I no alternative to building the garage in Harris questioned that there was back without creating a drainage problem. I �_ Mc uillen said that the water drains both ways, down the steep terrain toward Washington. � Harris suggested that he could put the garage behind the Swale. McQull en i 'said he would prefer having the garage attached to the house. Hall said that it would help heat bills to have it attached. Kni ht said that if the garage was built in back, it would cut off most of the open space in back. 1 Mc uillen said that the price was about the same for attached or free- standing. Barker said that there could be additional paint and additional parking ,I fora drive to the back. Mc uillen said that concrete was a big expense. Barker said that the drainage problem in that area had satisfied him that t ere was a hardship. Mc uillen said that an attached garage was the most usable, that electricity would be easier to place. He wanted to build for storage and weather; the house would look better with the keep his car out of the garage attached and appear more like houses in the neighborhood. 9e3 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 0 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 26, 1981 PAGE 5 Vanderhoef asked if the additional length of the house would replace the storage shed. McQuillen said it would. McQuillen said he would not extend the garage quite as far as creating a j problem with the roofline. Barker moved and Hall seconded that the garage variance be granted not to reduce the front yard to less than 18 feet and otherwise to conform in general to the details of the application. An individual roll call vote was taken. The motion passed unanimously. The procedures regarding deadlines and extenuating circumstances of construction regarding building permits were clarified. March 24, 1981 Page 2, strike first 'non-' before conforming. Add 'h' to demolis in second to last paragraph. Page, 3, 5th line, strike 'd' from issued, add s. Paragraph 7, change position of 'separable' to follow 'zoning ordinance'. Paragraph 8, delete entire paragraph.' Page 4, paragraph 6, change spelling of council to counsel. The minutes as corrected were unanimously approved. i April 7, 1981 Page 3, paragraph 6, change limber to lumber. Page 4, paragraph 7, change '3 front year' to '3 front yard'. +j The corrected minutes were approved unanimously. I I May 7, 1981 Page 2, insert to change meaning of paragraph 8, 'staff report maintains that'. The corrected minutes were unanimously approved. i Meeting adjourned. Prepared by:r� Approved by: as Bbpthroy, ATTACHMENT - Letter from Stromgren I j MICROFILMED BY `JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1 Imo..,. May 26, 1981 Mr. Douglas Boothroy Planning and Zoning Commission Civic Center Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Boothroy: As I understand it, the Zoning Code exists, in part, to protect homeowners from encroaching upon each other's property rights. In this instance, my neighbor is requesting to encroach upon me in asking permission of you to take away some of what has been mine, publicly, without my consent, and with- out compensat ion, in order to enhance her property interests, to the detri- ment of mine. This she asks even though she has property to which her rights are exclusive upon which she could build in conformity with the existing code, and to no -one's detriment. With regard to building with no windows on the north side of the proposed non- conforming extension, the windows of themselves are irrelevant. It's the building framework that will hold the windows where they will then destroy privacy that is the offending construction. Furthermore, it is well known among those who work with color (including me --I am considered an alumna by the School of the Art Institute of Chicago) that the north light is the truest light in which to work. An artist's studio without northern light would be deprived of one of its most valuable natural assets. I do not believe that the non -conforming extension as applied for would remain without such light for very long, so that I could not take any offer to build without north windows seriously. Besides the crowding, aesthetic lopsidedness and diminution of market value therefore, as well as loss of privacy and invasion of life -space that would occur should such variance be allowed, it would disturb the status quo between myself and my neighbor for as long as we continue to be neighbors. The feelings tied up with property rights are deeply embedded in a person's (or a nation's) make-up, and altering them inadvisedly leads to ill -will and bitterness tha# sometimes lasts for generations. The appeal of my house and property means as much to me as hers means to my neighbor. I too hold a recent Master's Degree from the University of Iowa. At present, I am working on a theory of social justice. I also work at home. Any encroachment upon what is mine is offensive to me, as it would be to any one who is encroached upon. The dedision the Commission is to make may not be easy --in all probability it will be difficult, but, whatever it is, let it be just. I press my continued protest to the variance under consideration as an encroach- ment upon those rights which I now hold and the maintenance of which I value highly, as to the fact of my presence and testimony here bears witness. 221 Lowell Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-8115 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 4- Resp sub tted, Sylvia Stromgren 903 -I Fr/ MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 9, 1981 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Barker, Harris, Vanderhoef, Hall. MEMBERS ABSENT: Bartles. STAFF PRESENT: Siders, Woito, Boothroy, Franklin, Shima. FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: V-8106. That an application submitted by Richard Haman for a variance to Se ticon 8.10.23A of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a wooden deck in the required rear yard at 315 Third Avenue be deferred until June 25, 1981. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order. Woito called the roll. Minutes of May 26, 1981, were not yet completed. Harris reviewed the meeting structure. VARIANCE ITEM V-8106. Public hearing on an application submitted by Richard Haman for a variance to Section 8.10.23A of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a wooden deck in the required rear yard. Boothroy introduced staff member Franklin who continued with a visual presentation and explanation of the item in question. The applicant wishes to build, out of treated wood, a new deck which according to the applicant would be the same dimensions as the old deck. The deck in question intrudes into the 30' required rear yard. Staff recommended that the variance be denied since no undue hardship could be shown. Franklin presented photographs of the structure, taken May 28, 1981, to the Commission. Staff indicated that legal counsel had advised them that the proper public hearing notification had been given for consideration of the request for a variance and the request for an interpretation of the code. There was discussion by the Board of the variance which included the dimensions of the yard and the history of yard regulations. Siders explained that at the time the house was built, in 1967, the required rear yard may have been calculated in such a way as to allow for variations in actual depth or irregular lots. The support structure of the old deck and the new one was discussed. Repair of the deck and the technical aspects MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDA9 RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9643 L" Board of Adjustment June 9, 1981 Page 2 of the ordinance were also discussed. There was a question as to procedure and whether the item was going to be viewed as a variance request or an examination of the ordinance. It was stated, in response to a question from Barker, that the Planning Department became aware of the problem when the applicant first applied for a variance. The staff went to the site and took photographs a week or two after the application for the variance. There was a momentary recess. The section of the code 8.10.21 concerning nonconforming buildings and uses was strictly interpreted by the building inspector. Siders felt that destruction of the deck by the applicant constituted a decrease in the degree of nonconformity and that denial of a permit to rebuild the deck followed the intent of the statute to decrease nonconformi ties. The new deck is approximately 2/3 or 3/4 complete now. The deck was apparently built at the same time the house was built. The rear yard setback at the time of building was not known by Mr. Haman as nothing was said about it at the time. Earl Yoder sold the lot and contracted to build Mr. Haman's house, according to Mr. Haman. The question of the validity of the nonconforming structure analysis was brought up. Woito suggested that the original deck may have been illegal, making any discussion of nonconformity a moot point. Some discussion occurred regarding tract depth and lot depth. Interpreta- tions of the facts were not clearly resolved. It was postulated that the tract depth could have computed incorrectly by the original building inspector.. More discussion of the position of the deck followed including a statement by the applicant that a parking lot exists behind the yard. It was mentioned that the house itself projected into the required rear yard. It was speculated that the house was built with the deck added on later since it was not included on the building permit or the original blueprints. It was stated by the applicant that the houses were all on lots of peculiar shape in this area. It was asked if it were possible to find out if decks were allowed in 1967 and suggested that the deck would be seen during the final inspection so the nonconformance would hvae been observed. The ordinance wording was questioned again as well as the 1967 building inspector guidelines. Some inspectors may have neglected strict building guidelines at that time. The difficulty of dealing with this benign neglect of the rules was mentioned by Siders. A motion was made by Barker to request the Legal Council and the staff to look into the matter. The following statement was made by Barker to the applicant in order to clarify the Board's position for the applicant: The 4- MICROFILMED BY .JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9403 Board of Adjustment June 9, 1981 Page 3 Board understands that the applicant assumed that he was replacing a replaceable deck and the Board did not have a problem understanding how the applicant thought it was replaceable. The applicant was questioned as to whether he understood that the request to rebuild must be fitted into the powers and abilities of the Board. The staff report shows a fair number of the complicated aspects of the problem from the City's point of view and everybody must be directed in accordance with the rules. The question of whether consideration should be given to the variance or to the interpretation of the ordinance was deferred until the next meeting. •The legal counsel took responsibility for the question of assuming it was merely a nonconforming building in a variance issue rather than looking into all aspects and possibilities. It was asked if the deck was to be considered an infringement upon the setback and secondly whether the tract depth consideration in 1967 was under different rules. The concern that it was a nonconforming structure was to be looked into. There was no question that the original deck had been destroyed, but the abandonment of a nonconforming structure came into question. There was no evidence it was stated, which clearly showed abandonment or nonconformity. Vanderhoef stated, "We would like to say 'Yes, go ahead'; but we can't figure out a way to do that yet and conform to the rules." The applicant brought forth a bill and statement of the deck changes which were submitted into the record. The deck was with other changes made at the time of building. Clarification was still sought as to what the staff and legal counsel should look for before the next meeting. Could it be shown that the deck was nonconforming? If the deck was created with the consent of the City of Iowa City, it would be nonconforming. A nonconforming use, restoration, and abandonment are all descriptions which must be considered. To show abandonment under the law, it must be proved that there is an intent to abandon. It is a separate act to recreate the new deck. As a policy matter, there is no prior evidence as to what the first deck looked like. There is no way at present to tell whether the nonconforming deck has been increased since the Board did not see it before. Pictures of the previous deck were requested. A zoning ordinance doesn't have any building definitions for decks nor prohibitions of decks from the rear yard. The building permit seems to indicate that the deck was extra and added on afterwards as it was not on the plan. The possibility that the deck was added without the knowledge of the building inspector was postulated. The bills brought by the applicant were requested, subject to return after proceedings. The applicant acquiesed and mentioned they were xerox copies. The dimensions of the original deck are on the bill. The likelihood of clarification after looking into the matter was questioned. The legal staff was confident that it would be a good idea. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 4 r 943 _t Board of Adjustment June 9, 1981 Page 4 The motion to defer carried by voice vote. The staff was encouraged to get relevant information and the building inspector was delegated to contact the previous inspector. The building code and the zoning ordinance were examined and it was stated that the two rules were separate; zoning does not describe buildings so that is when the building code is invoked. A change in the date of the next meeting was noted which came to light after the agenda had been mailed. Additional information which seemed of interest was how the building inspector countenanced the building of the deck at the time. He may have permitted it, knowing its dimensions and structure. Some concern with the definition of a balcony arose. The matter will be resumed two weeks from this meeting on the 25th of June. The date of the mailing of information for that meeting is the 19th of June. The meeting was adjourned. Prepared by o=� G�u•c an Crowe Mi Approved by oug o roy Secretary I i I i i 903 j MICROFILMED BY `JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r V, - MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS JUNE 3, 1981 - 12:50 PM IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Bonney, Cook, Daly, Lockett, Pecina, VanderZee, Whitlow. MEMBERS ABSENT: Barker, Haldeman, McCormick, McGee. STAFF PRESENT: Hencin, Keller, Nugent. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Pecina moved and Cook seconded that any funds remaining in the Senior Center project contingency be used to finish the third floor of the Senior Center to the extent that those funds will allow. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Prior to the meeting, members of the Committee toured the new Senior Center with Lori Benz, Senior Center Program Specialist. Chairperson Bonney called the meeting to order at 12:50 PM. Minutes of the May 6, 1981 meeting were approved as read. Report on Neighborhood Meetings: Bonney stated that minutes of two of the neighborhood meetings (Creekside NSA on May 18, 1981, and North Dodge Street NSA on May 20, 1981) were included in each member's agenda packet and asked if anyone had questions or comments about the meetings. Daly, who had attended the May 27, 1981, Iowa Avenue meeting, reported that residents mainly discussed creek problems and the lack of maintenance, but that there were other areas of interest (housing conditions and code enforcement) as well. VanderZee asked how it would be decided which sidewalks on the creekside area would be built. Pecina inquired whether they would be new or replacement sidewalks. Hencin responded that staff would survey residents about priority locations and these would be new sidewalks. Plans would be developed by the City Engineering staff. Bonney suggested holding another neighborhood meeting once sidewalk plans were prepared. She also asked Committee members to think of ways to get better turnouts at neighborhood meetings. Pending Items: a. Curb ramps. Bonney reported that the sidewalk curb ramps in the downtown area, which were requested by a group of handicapped 9�y I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i -.7 0 Vi - i Committee on Community Needs June 3, 1981 Page 2 persons, were being built by the City's Public Works Department. No further action by the Committee needed to be taken. b. Third floor of Senior Center. Bonney called attention to the memorandum from Hencin. Members discussed that a decision on the contingencies monies had to be made, whether they would be used for the Senior Center or another project. It was recognized that even though there were no plans to use the entire third floor now, it would eventually be needed for programs in the Center. Pecina moved and Cook seconded that the Committee recommends to the City Council the completion of the third floor of the Senior Center using the project contingency. Members expressed concern that this motion implied other funds might have to be sought in order to finish the third floor. Pecina and Cook agreed to Daly's suggestion to amend their motion and second to recommend to the City Council that any funds remaining in the Senior Center project contingency be used to finish the third floor of the Senior Center to the extent that those funds will allow. The amendment carried unanimously. C. 4 -C's brochure. Hencin reported that this request could not be funded through the CDBG program. Members agreed to send a letter to Vicky Grube, representative of the Community Coordinated Child Care (4 -C's) program, listing alternatives as discussed by the Committee. Pecina excused himself to leave at 1:30 PM. Bonney stated that this was his last meeting and expressed the Committee's appreciation for his service. She presented a certificate of appreciation from the Committee and City Council. CDBG Entitlement Application: Hencin explained that three parts of the Community Development Summary were sent to members in a folder, the Community Profile, Community Development and Housing Needs statement, and Comprehensive Strategy. He requested the Committee to review them prior to the July meeting at which time staff could answer any questions. The remainder of the application will be sent out prior to the July meeting. Keller explained that another important section of the application, the Housing Assistance Plan (HAP), was included in each member's folder. He briefly reviewed each table of the HAP and stated that the Committee would discuss the plan during their July meeting. The meeting adjourned at 1:40 PM. Prepared b "—'"a` " 511 Hencin 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 900 I MINUTES BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TUESDAY, 4:00 P.M., MAY 19, 1981 CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM I I MEMBERS PRESENT: Pepper, Eskin, Terry, Madsen, Johnson. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. ohn OTHERS PRESENT: Kane Blou9hNewban urn from Synthesis Young Arts Workshop,JMr. and Mrs. Bill Norton. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. MATTERS PENDING COUNCIL -COMMISSION DISPOSITION: Acceptance of Extension Policy to be filed with and approved by the City. The extension policy affects those areas of Iowa City that are A) newly annexed areas of the City not then served by aBTNdent dwel new housithining areas developed within the City limits, or C) any r the City limits and 200 feet of existing network. MATTERS PENDING COMMISSION DISPOSITION: The BTC must also determine the appropriate cable channel designation for cfuture hannel 26 (thens. public accesslchannel)her telethons should be allowed on shall be addressed. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: Three citizens appeared to complain that they did not receive cable TV. One case was resolved, the other will be affected by the full service policy to be determined by the City's Legal staff. Hawi policy be revised and ieresubmitted t at inthennext�BTC mmeeting. requested this p Y It was determined a "Full Service Policy" was also needed and legal counsel was requested to assist in this development. The BTC requested Hawkeye provide statements and records pertinent to this policy. Shaffer reported NTIA (National TeleccommunicationacedInformation Administration) grant equipment arriving and is being plin the new Shaffer reported othe status ofv16 complaints riorites receivmonth.urinthe next ed during the last month. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 905 Broadbandf� Telecommunications Commission May 19, 1981 Page 2 Hawkeye reported areas of Iowa City newly completed and those yet to be finished (which affect about 100 households). Also that there are now 6500 subscribers in Iowa City. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 4:13 P.M. MINUTES: Moved by Terry, seconded by Eskin, to approve minutes of April 21 meeting. Unanimously approved. Moved by Terry, seconded by Eskin, to approve minutes of April 28 meeting. Unanimously approved. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Terry had one telephone call from a woman supporting the telethons being placed on channel 26. The next BTC meeting will be June 23, 1981 at 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Conference Room. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Mr. and Mrs. Norton, of Sand Road, complained they have not yet been able to get hooked up for cable television by Hawkeye Cablevision. Mr. and Mrs. Norton also complained an ATC representative, at franchising time, had promised they would be served by cable TV. Also, Mr. Norton produced Hawkeye ads saying everybody who wants cable TV can get it. Mr. and Mrs. Norton will be affected by whatever full service policy is finally determined by the City. Blough said there were two ways to hook-up Mr. and Mrs. Norton. One way could cost $40,000-$50,000, the other way could cost $6,000-$7,000. There are about 20 homes per mile density on Sand Road. The BTC requests the assistance from the Legal staff in determining the relevancy and possible resolutions of several sections of the ordinance pertaining to both the Norton case and what used to be called a "Full Service Policy". The extension policy (Section 14-78(b)(2)) and Ordinance 78-2917 applies only to what conditions Hawkeye Cablevision will service new housing areas 200 feet or more beyond the existing cable TV network and for the period after April 18, 1982. The full service policy would apply under what conditions Hawkeye Cablevision will service existing houses in Iowa City that have yet to be wired (due to what Hawkeye might consider to be unreasonable inaccessibility of the households). Sections of the ordinance that are pertinent include Section 14-61 (the service area of Hawkeye is all of Iowa City), Section 14-79(e) (100% of Iowa City must be wired by April 18, 1982), Section 14-88(2)(b) (cable service shall not be refused to any person or organization) and (c) (fairness and accessibility rules are in effect and where such rules are MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB ICEOAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1%95 sT L1. Broadband Telecommunications Commission May 19, 1981 Page 3 not effective to resolve disputes they will be submitted for resolution to the BTC ), Section 14-78 (grantee will, within a reasonable amount of time, extend the BTN to include new housing areas, newly annexed areas or any resident with 200 feet of the BTN) and Section 14-76(a)(3) wherein it states the grantee may make a charge to subscribers for installation connection where unusual circumstances exist, such as remote or relative inaccessibility. i John Kane of 522 Rundell appeared to complain he has not been able to receive cable TV. Blough explained the problem in that area and promised Mr. Kane would have service sometime this summer. Pepper suggested a letter explaining the situation to everyone on that street requesting service might be appropriate. Two Commissioners reported complaints they received regarding difficulty in customers or potential customers getting different answers each time they called Hawkeye, or not having calls returned. Pepper asked for a response or statement from Hawkeye (separate from the extension policy) about service to households that were existing in Iowa City on April 18, 1979 that Hawkeye has until April 18, 1982 to serve (according to Section 14-88 where 100% of the households must be wired) unless under Section 14-88 some of these households will be considered to be inaccessible by Hawkeye. The BTC requested from Hawkeye what they would constitute as being reasonable inaccessibility and/or a policy for extended service to these households that are affected and at what costs. The BTC also asked for a statement as to how many dwelling units in Iowa City were not included in the original design of the cable TV system and, of those that have requested service. The BTC will ultimately decided whether it reasonable or unreasonable to service certain households in Iowa City. SPECIALIST'S REPORT: Shaffer reported the Chicago NFLCP (National Federation of Local Cable Programmers) midwest regional conference he and a dozen Iowa Citians attended was a deemed a success. Chicago is going through franchising at the present time. Support and advice offered by Iowa Citians was considered valuable many conference participants. Shaffer gave Hawkeye's subscriber agreements, apartment owner agreements and annual reports checklist (all reports that must be filed by Hakweye on an annual basis) to BTC members for perusal and comment. Shaffer stated equipment obtained from NTIA grant funds have arrived. This includes several video portapacks and a video editing system. Shaffer reported City Council live cablecasts were continuing and most of our problems have been resolved. Further plans to be worked out with Hawkeye include moving the City video playback deck to the new library MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Broadband Telecommunications Commission May 19, 1981 Page 4 (for solving the logistics difficulty of playback problems) and placing a remote character generator keyboard capability in the Civic Center basement for continued input from City departments. Shaffer said budget amendments were being submitted to allow for continued support of part-time assistants to the BTS, for one-half inch videotape and to replace cords and adaptors in the City's use that are Shaffer's property. Shaffer said two interns from the Broadcasting and Film Department have been selected. These interns will operate the video editing facility and oversee and assist public and City trained users while using this facility. Priorities during the next move to the new library include: 1) physically transferring all video/cable related equipment to the newt library, 2) designing new policies and procedures for the operations of checkout and return of video equipment, the editing facility, training workshops, i etc., 3) completing the City introductory/promo tape, 4) facilitating the { start of a public interest access cable users group in Iowa City, 5) the design and completion of a program about the cable access system and programming in Iowa City. Shaffer reported 16 complaints over the last month. The majority of these complaints dealt with cases that will be affected by the extension policy I to be discussed today. Some complaints involved underground cables that i were buried 4-8 inches (some citizens report cutting through these cables while gardening, etc.). HAWKEYE'S REPORT: Blough reported there are now several new areas in Iowa City that did not exist when the system was originally designed. These include the east side of Friendship Street (the 200 block), Hanover Court, Sterling Court, the south side of McBride. Blough said Hawkeye will continue to concentrate on completing those areas of Iowa City that were here two years ago before working on any newly developed areas of Iowa City. Areas yet to be completed include portions of McBride, Westgate Avenue, Westwind Condominums, Samoa Drive. North Seventh Avenue, Esther and Dover Street, Westwind Drive, Burlington and Van Buren, Lower West Branch Road, Oberlin, Tulane, and Mark IV Apartments are all recently activated and completed portions of Iowa City. The remaining portions to be completed in Iowa City affects approximately 100 households. Hawkeye is now moving their studio into the public library. Hawkeye is continuing to move aerial plant to underground in the downtown urban renewal area. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Broadband Telecommunications Commission May 19, 1981 Page 5 Hawkeye now has 6500 subscribers, 7000 by June are projected, 8000 by July, 8500 by August, 9000 by September, 10,000 by the end of 1981 (8500 of which will be from Iowa City). Blough requested that the circumstances leading to the grantee's ability to move into other towns, such as Coralville, be made clear to everyone. The ordinance provides the grantee can move into other communities once it has "substantially completed" (which means 90% completion) Iowa City. Hawkeye achieved over 90% completion in Iowa City in early 1981. HAWKEYE'S EXTENSION POLICY: Hawkeye Cablevision submitted an extension policy of their own design for BTC approval (which is required in Section 14-78(b) of Ordinance No. 78- 2917). This extension policy would apply to new or newly annexed areas that did not exist at the time of franchising. The extension policy statement reads as follows: "For any potential subscriber dwelling beyond two hundred (200) feet from the nearest point of the existing network but within the City limits, the following extension formula will apply: franchisee shall, at its expense, extend its system to provide service to all residents of newly annexed areas or new housing areas within the City limits not then served by the system where the average density is eighty (80) dwelling units per lineal mile of new plant including new necessary interconnecting truck. When in the opinion of the franchisee it is not economically feasible to extend service to a new area of the City, the franchisee may petition the Broadband Telecommunications Commission for relief. The Commission shall make determinations on the requests based upon the merits of the presentation made by the franchisee. The decision of the Commission is final." This policy was based on a 40 household per mile break-even point, figuring one-half of the 80 homes per mile would subscribe. Iowa City has a density of 135 households per mile on the average. University Heights as 80, Coralville has 128. The return of investment for Hawkeye is figured at 13-17% per year. The industry currently operates on a 48 month payback. The BTC requested documentation and statistics backing up the proposed extension policy for deliberation at the next BTC meeting. It was suggested the policy may 1) build in options for consideration of this policy to be changed or reviewed at a two or four year period, 2) it should include the assertion that the BTC wants every home in Iowa City to have access to cable TV unless the provision of access to them is unreasonable because of financial burdens upon the company. The burden of proof to show unreasonable financial burdens falls on the company, and/or 3) justification for any density figure that is used. It was decided the following agenda items (including Citizens' Informa- tion, Records Report and Telethon Report) would be continued at the next BTC meeting because the City Council meeting was about to start. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 4 905 Broadband Telecommunications Commission May 19, 1981 Page 6 f NEW BUSINESS: None. ADJOURN: Eskin moved to adjourn. Seconded by Terry. Unanimously approved, Ad-) Went a •M Respect ully subm ted, William Drew Shaffer Broadband Telecommunications Specialist. i MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9e� a I MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION JUNE 2, 1981 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER LAW LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Fett, Gartland, Hotka, Sanders, Schwab, Sheehan. MEMBERS ABSENT: Hamilton. STAFF PRESENT: Helling, Tinklenberg. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None. REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER None. SUMNARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN Sanders called the meeting to order and the minutes of May 18 were approved as read. Agenda for Joint Meeting with City Council The Commission is interested in exploring its relationship to the City i Council in general terms illustrated with concrete examples from various issue areas. 1. The relationship of energy to the local economy. Gartland presented some preliminary information and will have a full report ready by the end of this week. 2. The City Council's general view of how the RCC can best serve them and communicate with them. 3. City -sponsored financial incentives for energy conservation ideas. Should the RCC explore award system options? 4. How active does the Council want the RCC to be in public awareness? I This is not listed as one of the Commission's duties in the establishing ordinance, but the RCC has been active in this area in the past. 5. Local energy code. Topics to be covered: MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES 906 i i D a r-. Resources Conservation Commission June 2, 1981 Page 2 -Lighting -Building envelope (floor, roof, & wall windows, etc.) insulation, doors & -Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems -Zoning and subdivision provisions Why these provisions are needed. Enact these provisions through a single code or through existing codes? 6. Iowa -Illinois Gas & Electric franchise renewal. The Commission offers itself as a resource in the Iowa -Illinois franchise negotiations. 7. Transportation. a. Transit system. -The RCC feels it is important to keep a moderate bus fare to encourage energy conservation. -Is the Council interested in concrete suggestions from the RCC such as: the use of shuttle buses for football games, and tying bus fares and parking fees together so that both rise in equal proportion. b. Traffic controls. The RCC is interested in gasoline changes in traffic control- such as he use of flashing nredsoand Yellows during certain hours at night. C. Bicycle use. Existing traffic laws should be rigorously enforced year -around. Other_ Business Sheehand, SAhwab seconded, to send a letter to the City Council and Manager volunteering the RCC's services as a resource in the Iowa_ Illinois franchise renewal. Approved five ayes, Hotka abstaining. The next meeting was scheduled for June 16. The meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg. Pat Fett, Secretary. 9oL i MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING May 21, 1981 Storyhour Room 4:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Cavitt, Gritsch, Immermann, Ostedgaard, Richerson, Zastrow MEMBERS ABSENT: Bartley, Bezanson, Hyman STAFF PRESENT: Eggers, McGuire, Tiffany OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Drum, FRIENDS of ICPL Liaison SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION The meeting was convened at 4:05 p.m. by President Ostedgaard. Minutes of the Owner/Contractor (Building Committee M1) meeting of April 29 were distributed and reviewed. These minutes and the ones of the regular meeting of the full Board were approved, with the following corrections to the regular meeting of. 4-23-81: 1) Page 2, paragraph 1 - ". .expenditure of funds not to exceed $1,700 from Gifts and Bequests..."; 2) Page 3, last sentence in top paragraph - $6,000 in pledges outstanding."; 3) Page 3, paragraph 2 - "...music which they will provide on Saturday evening, June 13. 2,500 programs will be printed, with the cost not to exceed $100. Hyman/Richerson." Richerson/Zastrow. Disbursements from May 1 and 15 were unanimously approved. Zastrow/Gritsch. The New Building Gift Fund through May 16, 1981, was reviewed. The Board informally authorized the Director to shift funds remaining at the end of the fiscal year to the materials budget. In another informal action, the Board authorized expenditure from the Gifts and Bequests Fund for a full-page ad in the Iowa City Press -Citizen's new building supplement to acknowledge and thank a t e contri utors, including the four Board members who served during the year of the referendum campaign (FY1979), and those who have made special "in-kind" donations to the new building. Director's Report 5-21-81 The Director reported on the following: 1. The FY81 budget will provide adequate funds for the extra staff hours needed during the move. 2. The major hurdles to get over before the June 13 opening: Picture hook shelving, telephone system, City inspection, finishing of College Street paving. The appearance before the Appeals Board is set for Thursday, May 28. 3. There are many other minor items yet to be completed, but few will hinder opening day service. `-_1_ (over) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 90 MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY MAY 21, 1981 PAGE 2 4. The security system is completed and has been in partial use since Tuesday, May 19. 5. The Press -Citizen supplemented is reported to be well underway. The Board should discuss their preferences regarding an ad recognizing contributors. 6. It is recommended that we make a special effort to recognize former Library Board members Kirkman, Farber, Moore and Newsome during all opening activities. 7. City Attorney Hayek has confirmed the opinion of the legal staff that there can be no alcoholic beverages at the pre -opening party on June 13. President Ostedgaard reminded those Board members who have not already done so to fill out their pink cards as move volunteers. Richerson reported for Building Committee N2 that local artist, Byron Burford, will place one of his works in the new building for consideration for purchase as recommended by the Art Placement Committee. I �. Cavitt reported for the Pre -Opening Events Committee that plans are ready. i Immermann reported for the Nomination Committee that the following names had been submitted for the FY9182 offices of the Library Board of Trustees: President - Ed Zastrow, Vice -President - Carolyn Cavitt, Secretary - Linda Gritsch. This slate of officers was unanimously approved, and congratulations were extended by the current President. Richerson/Ostedgaard. These officers will serve beginning July 1, 1981. During its review of the new building's budget, the Board approved the allocations as proposed and told the Director to move ahead generally with the plan. Furnishings of the old building were discussed. The consensus of the Board was that the Director should establish a date after which the building and all its furnishings become the responsibility of the City, to dispose of according to their policy. A suggestion was made that items which are of particular benefit to libraries be designated for sale or distribution to libraries. Suzanne Richerson has submitted to the City Council her resignation from the Library Board as of July 1. The Board's next regular meeting has been scheduled for the Large Meeting Room of the new building (123 S. Linn). The date has been changed for this meeting from the fourth Thursday, to Tum, June 23 at 4:00 p.m. Newly appointed members for FY82 will also be invited to attend this meeting. New and old members will dine together following the meeting. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES L.,. 907 r - MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY MAY 21, 1981 PAGE 3 Since Board members need to be well acquainted with the new building and its service capabilities before the opening events, an informal orientation meeting tour was scheduled for Wednesday, June 10, at 8:00 AM in the new building. I Acting upon staff recommendation and with approval of the City's legal staff, the Board unanimously approved a contract with Servicemaster for cleaning services in the building starting June 1, 1981. One correction was noted in the language - Section V.b: "All materials, supplies and jequipment not used by the Contractor shall be suitable, environmentally safe and not harmful to the surfaces to which they are applied." Two f Yr endly amendments were proposed - 1) Section VI.b. "Worker. compensation..." and 2) Section VII.a. "The Contractor's on-site supervisor...". The Board enthusiastically approved the logo for the new library which was designed by Dick Blazek, graphic specialist for the University of Iowa Foundation, as a volunteer project for the FRIENDS of ICPL. A letter of appreciation will be written to Blazek. Zastrow/Richerson. The Board unanimously approved a written proposal prepared by Blums' Blooms Ltd. for interior landscaping and its maintenance in the new building. All areas except the Window Greenhouses for the second floor were approved. Richerson/Immermann. The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 P.M. Susan McGuire, Recorder 4_ MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES 1401NES 907 i 3.� MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD MAY 14, 1981 8:00 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Goldene Haendel, Carol Karstens, Mike Farran MEMBERS ABSENT: Rachel Dennis, Kathleen Graf, Mark Koenig, Rev. Leonard VanderZee STAFF PRESENT: Judy Hoard, Dave Malone, Mike Kucharzak, Dave Brown SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN: Chairperson Haendel called the meeting to order. Carol Karstens moved to approve the agenda and Mike Farran seconded it. David Brown, legal advisor, stated for information that some of today's cases would be dealing with the old code instead of the new code and this should be kept in mind. APPEAL OF MR. ROGER MRAZ Others Present: Roger Mraz Mr. Mraz is appealing the requirement of a minimum of 100 square feet for total kitchen and dining area in an 8 -unit rooming facility at 1131 Third Avenue. Mr. Mraz presented a diagram with exact measurements of the two kitchens which did total over 100 square feet. Carol Karstens moved that the Board dismiss the violation and Mike Farran seconded it. The motion was passed unanimously. APPEAL OF MR. GARY FINK Others Present: Gary Fink Mr. Fink is appealing a violation of lack of natural light in two rooms of Units 3 and 4 of a building located at 114-116 E. Washington. Judy Hoard stated that she had gone to these units yesterday to inspect them. Units 1 and 2 are rented out as business storage. Unit 3 is using what is designated as a "dining room” on the submitted diagram as a bedroom and Unit 4 is using the "dining room" as a dining room. However, these rooms do receive indirect sunlight through openings to both the kitchen andthe bathroom. Since structural correction of the problem would deface the lovely apartments and asking the tenants to change the rooms around to comply could cause mental anguish, especially to the older tenant, Carol Karstens moved to dismiss the violation and Mike Farran seconded it. Mike Kurcharzak stated that there would be a problem of not being able to site the violation again on this property in the future if the violation were dismissed. Mr. Kurcharzak stated that if upon reinspection the rooms had been changed or structural correction had been made, there would be no violation. Carol Karstens withdrewirst ion and ed that that ah rulingdcouldest that the be made underrtherNew Code. Mike Farran seconded it and it passed unanimously. Mr. Fink verbally made the request for inspection and it is to be done today or tomorrow. APPEAL OF MS. GRACE KELLY Others Present: Ms. Grace Kelly and her daughter j MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 900' MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD MAY 14, 1981 8:00 A.M. PAGE 2 Ms. Kelly was sited for failure to comply with the required location of a lavatory near a toilet and came this morning to appeal for a variance. Judy Hoard stated that this toilet had been installed because of medical problems. Ms. Kelly had been directed to use the stairs as little as possible. There are also 2 full baths in the house, one on the 2nd floor and one in the basement. Ms. Kelly is the ex- clusive user of the toilet which is in violation. Ms. Kelly presented pictures and stated the toilet was never meant to be a bathroom and was only installed because of her health. Michael Kurchzak stated that we should document the files that the toilet is for occastional use exclusively by the owner and its use was directed by a doctor; therefore, a lavatory would not be required. Carol Karstens moved that the Board grant a variance due to the exclusive use by the owner. However, if the house is ever sold the variance would not apply. Mike Farran seconded it. It passed unanimously. APPEAL OF MR. JOHN ROFFMAN Others Present: Mr. John Roffman j Mr. Roffman is appealing a violation of no rental permit and a violation of over- crowding of the property located at 507 Bowery St. Mr. Roffman admitted that i he was ignorant to the fact he needed a permit, but he would get one. As to the overcrowding violation, Mr. Roffman stated that he wished the Board to grant a variance since 5 people living in his house did not constitute any health or safety violations. The violation was due only to a change in the code. After much discussion on the definition of the word "family", the Board upheld its position that 5 people living in Mr. Roffman's dwelling constituted a rooming house and he would have to apply for a rooming house permit. Carol Karstens moved to uphold the violations and mike Farran seconded it. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Roffman stated that he would probably petition City Council for a change in the definition of family as far as the Housing Code standards go, but that he would apply for the permit.within the alloted 20 days. Mike Farran made a motion to adjourn and Carol Karstens seconded it. Goldie Haendel declared the meeting adjourned. APPROVED BY:�%�e MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES 4� MI. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4, 1981 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Blum, Jakobsen, Jordon, Horton, McDonald MEMBERS ABSENT: SEWARD STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Knight, Woito RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL: S-6106, subdivision .item for.an amended Large Scale Residential Development plan of Emerald Court Apartments located west of Emerald Street between Melrose Avenue and West Benton Street, submitted by Edwin K. and Ethel D. Barker, was approved by a unanimous voice vote. Zoning items 8.10.35.1K and 8.10.35.1L.1, amendments to the Sign Ordinance redefining facia signs and front wall were approved by unanimous voice vote. Zoning items 8.10.3 and a proposed amendment to the Area Regulation of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Rooming Houses were withdrawn from the agenda. Proposed amendment to Chapter 22 of the Code of Ordinances and creation of a Residential Mobile Home Zone was deferred until June 18th, 1981, meeting. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: The meeting was called to order and there was no public discussion or items not on the agenda. A correction to the minutes of the May 21, 1981, meeting is the correct spelling 'Frances' to be substituted for 'Francis' on pages 1 and 2. An addition to the minutes of the May 21 meeting is to append to the end 'The meeting was adjourned to an informal meeting for the purpose of informal discussion of the mobile home ordinance.' The corrected minutes were approved. SUBDIVISION ITEM: S-8106. Public discussion of an application submitted by Edwin K. and Ethel D. Barker for approval of an amended Large Scale Residential Development plan of Emerald Court Apartments located west of Emerald Street between Melrose Avenue and West Benton Street; limitation period: waived. There was no visual aid for this discussion though one is available. There were seven difficiencies and discrepancies listed which have been taken care of. There was no discussion from the audience or the Commission. S-8106 was approved by unanimous voice vote. ZONING ITEMS: Public discussion of a proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance redefining facia signs (8.10.35.1K) and front wall (8.10.35.1L.1). A revised draft is available and corrected an error of an angle listed at 30 degrees which should have been 45 degrees to make the perpendicular. This agrees with the new zoning ordinance. The subject amendments were approved by unanimous voice vote. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 4, 1981 page two Public discussion of proposed amendments to the Definition Section (8.10.3) of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Rooming Houses and to the Area Regulation of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Rooming Houses when located in a multi- family zone, have been withdrawn from the agenda to give staff time to make further revisions. Mr. Dick Ziock pointed out that the higher density did not seem consistant with the comprehensive zoning ordinance. Boothroy concurred with the idea that the density was the problem and was going to try to come up with something a little more practical. He Will probably have that ready for the meeting of the 18th. Public discussion of a proposed amendment to Chapter 22 of the Code of Ordinances, and creation of an RMH (Mobile Home -Residential) Zone. There was much discussion of the deferment of this item until the following meeting. The further discussion of the item was postponed until the June 18th meeting. Tom Alberhasky brought up discussion as to who was responsible for the proposed ordinance. The Commission asked for a zone that did not rezone the area commercial and asked the staff to draft the ordinance. Alberhasky again wished to know who was responsible for the ordinance. The Planning and Zoning Commission took responsibility again. Alberhasky said that although his attorney was not available he wished the item be postponed and anything pertaining to this item be postponed till the next meeting. He also stated that he wished to know how this ordinance was created. He was advised, he stated, by his attorney to ask these questions. He wanted to know who was qualified to come up with something like this. He stated he thought there should be a good ordinance without a doubt but here is something . . . it is bad. A member of the Commission asked for his suggestions. Alberhasky requested at the next meeting June 18th that time be set aside for this. He wanted to give input and to bring in qualified people. He stated again that his attorney could not be here tonight. Blum asked who was his attorney. He replied that his attorney is Meardon. Blum said he certainly has had every opportunity to determine the qualifi- cations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission are appointed by the City Council to advise the Council. The qualifications are well known. Alberhasky stated that there was a real problem with the draft of the ordinance. He stated that he wished to wait till the next meeting to bring up specific I MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r A i 3'^ r— ..1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 4, 1981 page three problems. Horton asked why he didn't bring out his comments at this point. Alberhasky said he wanted to get a legal opinion. The chairperson Jane Jakobsen stated that she would expect, should the item be postponed, to have a list of objections in writing before the next meeting. A long list of objections could not be discussed during the meeting without prior examination. Alberhasky asked to whom he would need to give this list in writing. The chairperson suggested that he give them to her. Jakobsen said that the ordinance had not been kept secret. Although she had no objections to giving Alberhasky more time, she wished it made known that the ordinance had been published in the paper and that they had been working on it for at least 6 weeks. She reiterated that they had no objection to waiting until the next meeting for further discussion. Alberhasky stated that. he would like to have a little input because he has had quite a bit of experience. He suggested that Meardon and Linda discuss it before the next meeting. Boothroy said that he thought the written statements should be ready in time for the informal meeting of the 15th. He also suggested that rather than objections, the written statements should be referred to as suggestions. Alberhasky thought that was fine. He stated that he was not there to criticize but simply thought that he could offer his professional assistance as he too wished to have a good ordinance. He thought that the Commission should talk to a few people who have experience in the field and stated that he had had more than 30 years. But he didn't wish to be misunderstood and reiterated that he wished there be a good zoning ordinance. A member of the Commission wished to ascertain that he would come to the next informal meeting. Alberhasky replied that he just wanted to help. The next informal meeting will be next Monday,the 15th of June. Jakobsen stated that the comments would need to be ready by then to be in the packet of information for the Commissioners, by noon. Alberhasky suggested they call him if they wanted his help. He promised to work with Bill and Linda to make sure the Commissioners had the written statement. Chairperson Jakobsen asked if there was any further discussion from the Commission. Boothroy said that he thought it should be pointed out that the draft which the Commission had in hand was a revised copy. Descriptions of the changes were minor wording changes and in open spaces requirements. Some comments were made on the wording. A motion was made to continue the discussion on the item for the next meeting. It was pointed out that the 4� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES M ,r - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 4, 1981 page four ordinance had been in the Commission's hands for three years. Actually, it was added, it had been around for 6 years and had been set aside for a few years. There were 12 meetings around town and at each meeting this ordinance was discussed. I Alberhasky said he hadn't been invited and was sorry about that. Blum said that there .had been a mailing to every household in Iowa City and every Iowa Citian was invited. The ordinance had not been kept a secret. Alberhasky said it was probably one of the most critical actions of the Commission and wanted to make his input known. The motion to continue the meeting on this item for informal discussion on June 15th and formal discussion on June 18th was carried by unanimous vote. It was noted that there is a new commissioner, Kevin Phelan, who was a production manager at Thomas and Betts and had lived in Iowa City for about four years. He was appointed Tuesday. The meeting adjourned. Prepared by�—�- oan Crowe, Minute Taker .e. Approved by Loren Horton, Secretary I t MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 11 I 7 '� /G� _ . • ;° "") �, Qom.-�.= MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 18, 1981 - 7:30 pm CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Dick Blum, Loren Horton, Jane Jakobsen, Horst Jordan, f John MacDonald, Kevin Phelan, and John Seward STAFF PRESENT: Doug Boothroy, Bruce Knight II RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL i iProposed amendment to the Definition Section (8.10.3) of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of a balcony/deck and proposed amendment to Section 8.10.23C.6 excepting a balcony/deck from the yard regulations were recommended for approval. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Zoning items regarding the Mobile Home Park Ordinance, and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Rooming Houses were deferred to another meeting. The new minute taker, Joan Crowe, was introduced to the commission by Doug Boothroy. The minutes of the last meeting will be on the next agenda for consideration. Jakobsen asked if the minutes for December 4th were not approved. Boothroy stated that they were found and were being sent around to the members. Jakobsen i stated that the concern was due to a court case involving something in those minutes. I ZONING ITEMS Public discussion of a proposed Mobile Home Park Ordinance. Jakobsen stated that she was under the impression that the commission agreed to defer this item to the next regular meeting. Knight pointed out that there was a new page one and page three with a new RMH zone which included some more uses. Page three included a purpose statement which was pertinent to the discussion Monday night. There are three parks currently non -conforming, since they are zoned non- commercial. About 6 mobile home parks are not in compliance with Chapter 22. Baculis, Thatcher, and Bon Aire mobile home parks are in compliance. There are nine mobile home parks total. The three smallest are Hawkeye, Larson's and Iowa City Trailer Park. As far as how many more would be made nonconforming, the three that are currently conforming would probably remain so. There was no further discussion so the item was deferred to the next regular meeting, the first week of July. Public discussion of the proposed amendment to the Definition Section (8.10.3) of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Rooming Houses and the proposed amendment to the Area Regulation of the Zoning Ordinance regarding Rooming Houses when located in a multi -family zone were deferred. Boothroy said that they were going to meet the following morning for further discussion on these amendments. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES RM .7, 1„_ Planning & Zoning Con;4 o June 18, 1981 Page 2 Public discussion of a proposed amendment to the Definition Section (8 10.3) the Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of a balcony/deck and of a proposed amendment to Section 8.10.23C.6 excepting a balcony/deck from the yard regulations. Boothroy explained t the balcony/deck defined ashat the amendment was to add a definition of extend above the level of the e platform without walls or roof and which does not yard, provided these projections ground (first floor) may project into a required be at least five (5) feet distant from the adjacent lot line. The commission looked at the material provided. Blum moved that they recommend both amendments to the City Council. Jordon seconded. The motion carried unanimously. ordinance was the other Public discussion of the possibility of a mandatory parkland dedication Showalter to the commissiobusinessef also Pointedgoutothatofor the metin. thenco missionenhad discussed parkland dedication several times in the past. Boothroy stated that the ordinance would be part of the subdivision code and would require a certain percentage of land area, if suitable to be dedicated to parkland. Otherwise a fee could be assessed if there was no suitable parkland in the subdivision to allow for acquisition of other parkland. This ordinance ! would be handled by submitting a draft ordinance for review after the mobile home park zoning item was finished and would be attached to the subdivision recommendation. It would require an additional step with the Parks and Recreation Division review. The commission staff has discussed this and would like to see what the commission thought of this matter. Dennis Showalter and Boothroy discussed the proposed ordinance, and requested an informal vote by the Commission to determine their feelings in pursuing the matter before Showalter took it to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Showalter stated that one of his concerns since he has worked here is that there is no way to acquire neighborhood parkland. There is only 25% of the parks that are needed according to the comprehensive plan, and there are 62 acres of parks as opposed to the 250 acres necessary. There are high quality park areas close by and there is open space. The major deficiency is that large parts of town have no neighborhood parks; Showalter expressed concern that large subdivisions will continue to be built with no provision for providing neighborhood parkland. In the past, the proposed mandatory parkland dedication ordinance has not received favorable comment from the City Council. However, Showalter again emphasized that mandatory parkland dedication is the best way to provide parks. There are two cities in which Showalter continued. These have not been achallengedrinacound rtdhowever,edicationland musforcet be assumed valid. Parkland dedication is in effect in many other states and has been very successful. Showalter offered facts and information which he would be glad to furnish on request. The park by the armory is up for sale, Showalter like indicated, and would be $142,000 per acres. With this as a starter fund he would to take Dodge Streets thatand dwell repbulaceshothahborod taparkland rkland.Obeingv soldakgroe . at One Paof the Problems of mandatory parkland dedication is big enough. that the land donated isn't usually MacDonald asked if Showalter was talking about donation or buying. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9°9 _1 Planning & Zoning Co, Ssion June 18, 1981 Page 3 Showalter said donation. There is a density formula which would be used to figure the amount. MacDonald asked how many parks Iowa City has right now. Showalter replied there are 29 parks; this is somewhat below the comprehensive plan though comparable to the national average. This is not the suitable neighborhood parkland which is needed, however. Dick Blum said that this was under consideration and discussion at one time and was received then with mixed reviews by both the Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission. Blum stated that he felt it to be an excellent concept but did not think that this was the appropriate time for it considering the costs of housing and land in Iowa City. It might be counter-productive, he felt, for the commission to tackle it right now, and it would be better to wait until the economy improved. Blum continued that people might perceive it as an insensitive ordinance due to the additional cost to the builder which will be passed on to the homeowner for this dedicated parkland. Showalter stated that he computed the additional cost per lot in 1978 and it was $378 per lot. When is the economy going to be right, he questioned. 'Will it ever be right. What the City should do is go out and buy parkland ahead of + development but, they have not been able to accomplish this.' Showalter explained that he felt that something should be established soon. Blum said that one of the things we might do is volunteer park donation in exchange for other consideration. Showalter said that this hadn't gotten many acres in exchange for density, as they knew. Blum replied it was a tough question. Jakobsen said that they would have to ask for staff assistance from the City Manager concerning this. Boothroy said this was appropriate for the record. Jakobsen said it was her feeling that the Parks and Recreation Commission should look through this ordinance before the Planning and Zoning Commission did, if the commission decided at this time to proceed with it. Then the Planning and Zoning Commission would look at it and there would be a joint meeting following that. However, it should be kept in mind that after the city attorney is hired, this commission is going to take off on the new zoning ordinance, and Jakobsen assumed it would take at least a year of the working time of the commission. Boothroy added that it was not known how long it would take to hire a city attorney. Jakobsen said it was reasonable to have the Parks and Recreation Commission look at it first. Showalter said that they had not anticipated meeting on it until August. He asked for a joint meeting in August. Jakobsen said that the second week in August would be her vacation and she thought that the commission would like to work at their own pace so it would probably be until September til they got to it. These are her personal considerations, but the feelings of the commission were not known to her at this point. Previously, she stated, they were quite anxious about it but they got little interest from Parks and Recreation. Showalter said he understood that to be true. Jakobsen said the impetus just hasn't been there. Boothroy said the comprehensive plan goes back to 1975. Showalter added that 1974 was the date of the neighborhood report. Jakobsen said that they have not been able to fit the pieces together, regardless. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 4� 09 Vi_ Planning & Zoning Cot ssion June 18, 1981 Page 4 Showalter asked for an informal consensus of opinion on the matter. Jakobsen stated that she wasn't sure they wanted to make a statement at the present meeting. Showalter explained that he just wanted some guide as to whether the proposed ordinance was worth spending staff time on. MacDonald stated that initially he would be opposed to it. Showalter asked if it was because of double taxation. MacDonald said that it was asking a developer to give up a percentage of that land. He reasserted the high cost of land was critical. He stated he personally thought there were some nice parks in Iowa City. He pointed out that what would happen now in any neighborhood may be changed entirely over a 15 or 20 year time period. It is therefore difficult to determine if these parks would be needed in the future. Horton was in favor of the investigation into mandatory parkland dedication. Horst was also in favor. Phelan spoke in favor. Jakobsen recapitulated the informal discussion, there were three for and three against and one abstention. Showalter said he would furnish as much information as they need. This has been. an informal presentation, he added, and he was just asking for an informal feeling. Jakobsen said that she thought if they were finished with the zoning ordinance and the economy were better, they would be more interested in pursuing it. Boothroy asked if the staff were going to be needed on this. Jakobsen said they were not going to require staff assistance. Dick Ziock spoke in favor of the ordinance. Things are bad now, he stated, interest rates are high but there hasn't been a time in the past 15 years when interest rates haven't been bad. Granted, he added, there are problems in the housing industry, but this industry is cyclical. He explained that the Commission shouldn't be unduly influenced by the cost of housing due to these facts. Mr. Ziock then pointed out that it seemed to him that the Commission was bending over backward to suit a developer by not requiring trees or parks. Jakobsen said it was primarily the workload she objected to. Ziock said that he thought they should preserve a few principles and the purpose of the zoning ordinance is to preserve the beauty and density that we already have. He pointed out that it would be a mistake not to consider mandatory parkland dedication just because a few builders are suffering. Bruce Glasgow appeared to state that he concurred with the Commission's decision to delay work on the mandatory parkland dedication ordinance. Jakobsen asked for other business. She then welcomed the new commission member Kevin Phelan. The meeting was adjourned. 4 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES M r, Planning & Zoning Commission June 18, 1981 Page 5 Prepared by�(ifar� J%oan Crowe, Minute Taker Approved by 1-zL4e, Loren Horton, Secretary j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB RAPIDS-DES MOINES t Oki MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION JUNE 22, 1981 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: McCartt, McGuire, Turner, Watson, Yates MEMBERS ABSENT: Barcelo (excused), Baumgartner (excused), Portman (excused), Reyes (excused) STAFF PRESENT: Helling, Williams, Woito RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF Williams to write procedure for monitoring conciliation agreements. The procedure will then be reviewed by the Commissioners for their input. Helling to provide the Commissioners with information dating back to 1977 regarding the City Council's position on amending the Fair Housing Law to include marital status and sexual orientation. Helling to provide the Commissioners with a copy of his draft on the City Council's Communication policy after the City Council receives their copies. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION 1. Meeting called to order by Vice -Chair Linda McGuire at 7:42 PM. 2. Turner moved and McCartt seconded that the minutes of May 27, 1981, be accepted as submitted. Passed unanimously. 3. Complaints Pending. A. E/R, 7-10-7906 and E/R, 7-10-7907. McGuire did not take over as chair. The entire conciliation team met on June 22, 1981, and are attempting to determine the strength of their case. Turner will write a summary of the case and give it to Woito for her review and input. The team will meet either Friday, June 26 or Monday, June 29 for the purpose of writing the format of the conciliation agreement. B. E/R, 9-18-7809. No report. McCartt will get the Complainant's phone number and address from Williams. C. E/S, 1-2-8101 and E/A&S, 1-2-8101. The Respondent has not yet signed the conciliation agreements. Signatures are expected soon. Watson wanted to know the usefulness of letters of apologies from insincere Respondents. The general concensus was letters of apology are requested because they make the Complainants feel better and furthermore the Commission through the enforcement of the non - MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES �1_ L 7/0 a E . � 2 ^ discrimination ordinance cannot change a persons feelings but can only control and monitor their conduct. 0. H/N0, 1-20-8101. The Complainant signed the conciliation agreement with Williams as a witness. The Respondent's attorney called the week of June 15 and asked a question regarding the conciliation agreement. The question was answered and signatures from the Respondent are expected soon. 4. Cases Opened. One case has been opened thus far in June. 5. Cases closed. A. PA/S, 4-3-8101. Closed by Civil Rights Specialist because Complainant did not respond to certified letter requesting her cooperation which was needed to continue the investigation. 6. Cases in Legal. � A. E/S, 7-2-8005. Woito indicated this case will be returned shortly. , B. PA/R, 11-4-8007. This case will be in Legal by July 1. Z C. PA/R, 12-31-8008. This case will be in Legal by July 1. i 1 7. Public Service Announcements. McGuire, McCartt and Yates have yet to tape j their their PSA's, but will do so prior to the July Commission meeting. 8. Iowa City Public Forum. No Committee report. I i 9. Non-discrimination ordinance - Housing. Helling indicated the City Council was still against amending the housing section to include marital status and sexual orientation. McGuire voiced her concern regarding the City Council's response to this issue prior to the Commission presenting j them with a proposal. Turner emphasized the Commission at this point is only concerned with keeping statistics on complaints outside the Commission's jurisdiction and passing that information along to the City iCouncil for the purpose of making them aware of potential problems. 10. HUD Equivalency. The City Council approved the Commission's application for HUD Equivalency. A resolution was adopted and the City Manager sent a cover letter along with the application and its attachments. 11. Monitoring Conciliation Agreements. Williams talked to the Director of the Cedar Rapids Human Rights Department about the way they monitor their conciliation agreements. It was decided Williams would write a procedure for Iowa City and the Commission would then review it and make whatever changes they deemed appropriate. I 12. Communication Policy. Copies of the_ draft Helling wrote on this policy will be made available to the Commissioner's once the City Council receives their copies. Wo MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB , CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i 3 13. Staff Report. The previous month's activities were reviewed by Williams. 14. Hawkeye CableVision - "Free Forum". Turner will watch this program and give a report at the next Commission meeting. 15. Commission Vacancy. The July meeting will be Yates last meeting. Yates will write a letter of resignation by June 24, 1981. 16. Yates moved and Watson seconded that the meeting adjourn. Passed unanimously at 8:45 PM. 17. Next Commission Meeting: July 27, 1981, 7:30 PM, City Manager's Conference Room. Agenda setting: July 20, 1981. j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 9,100 _i Members Present Member Absent: Staff Present: Guest Present: IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION June 11, 1981 Iowa City Civic Center Redick, Phipps, George, Sauegling Dieterle Zehr, Brown, Wright Norval[ Clemons Chairperson Redick opened the meeting at 7:40 p.m. The minutes of the May 14th meeting were considered and approved. Manager Zehr presented the bills for the month and explained them briefly.. They included final bills, less 10$, for construction of the corporate hangar. He asked for instruction as to how to formalize final approval of the new Hangar. The commissioners decided to inspect the hangar individually and contact Zehr with their comments and/or approval. Phipps moved to approve the bills for payment; second by Sauegling; all voted aye. Zehr presented an example of the statements that are currently being sent to renters and also showed some pictures of the airport. Zehr introduced Norvall Clemons, who showed drawings and explained his proposal for building T -hangars on the airport property. These could be built for less than $5000 per hangar space, and would be built, maintained, managed, and insured by the owners. They would ask the airport to furnish taxiways and ramps, and would request a 20 -year lease for the land. Possible locations for the hangars were discussed. The commissioners asked Zehr to meet with Clemons and work out a package to be presented to the next meeting. Zehr distributed copies of a resolution which will be presented to the City Council, requesting $35,000 from the General Fund, to be added to $40,000 which the Air10% match in overlay of Rurt ission nway 17135. currently will providee90% of the estimated local funds the total cost of $755,000. Zehr explained plans which are being made to hold a Fall Fly -In Breakfast at the airport on Sunday, August 30, and asked the Commission's agreement to the plan. He has met with the Sertoma Club, the Iowa City Aviation Association, and the Iowa City Flying Service, who will help with the project. There should be little expense to the Airport Commission. The members were enthusiastic about the project. Zehr then asked for permission to extend the fence on the south side of the terminal building to enclose the runways and prevent cars from driving out onto the runway. Sauegling moved to authorize Zehr to extend the fence; second by Phipps, all voted aye. Zehr presented a proposal to buy a used Sony phone answering device for $165 plus the trade in of the present device. The unit would provide much better service than the present one, and the commissioners agreed to the purchase. V/ MICROFILMED BY �JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES V_ Iowa City Municipal Airport Commission June 11, 1981 Page 2 Zehr reported he and Attorney Brown are working on the updating of the Minimum Operating Standards and will attempt to finalize them and the new lease development by October of'1981. Zehr asked for volunteers to take urgent calls during the last week in July while he -is on vacation. Phipps and Redick agreed to do so. Chairman Redick reported she and Dieterle have Inspected the new corporate hangar and were highly impressed with the building. She urged the other commissioners to go and see it also. Redick also reported she and Zehr have received several calls from the public during the past month about noise from the airport. Zehr related that he has met with one of the concerned citizens and explained the plans for dealing with the problem. That party is now ready to help In some way, and Is. willing to organize a support group. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Recorder: Priscilla Wright 9i/ MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I J f% -3oard of. Directors :�retiw; ;:nnd+ry, wrll ?7, !'i%%'• 7:00 .mr 9oard ::embers ?resent: Judy :'P.11y, Jan Loran, Jeff ':c:::':i�ion, heal :iurris, :Ince 9raverman, :lap "ohanan, John Nurray, an:'. 'aul ::cJuc, aoaru :lembors absent: .,elms Connors, '!oberta 7atrick, Dennis ?:edCe s, L'nry Larew, Nina ^.nail ton, and Jessie ?ienry. Guests: Varz;aret :._rray, 1,31eanor Murray, David Hurray, 2ric Pauls, and Rod Blair, Staff Present: Jia Swaim, Peg UcElroy, Craig 'lunderlich, ?at :ligate, and Bill Neurbern. The Neetino was called to order by Paul :McCue, Tile minutes from tile "arch 30, 19£31 meetin„ were unanimously approved, upon Judy's motion, and Janrs'second. The staff ,resented the Quarterly Report and the Directors report, both of which highlighted: 1. A very active role in family conflict resolution, ^_. Increased activity in peer counseling groups in Solon. and Lone Tree, j. Use of Sabin for volleyball and basketball. 't, .1 503 increase in rase loads, due to more intensive wort. wit'a groups and increased referrals, which has made it more difficult for the staff to '_•eep up. 5. Synthesis has many projects going on, and has had regular cablecasts. Me ;uarterly Service report was approved, upon a motion by Jan, and a second by 11. Old .^,usiness Ji_n reported u)on fund raising efforts, using a corporate report tLat will ,resent info_-7ation in a format understandable to private business. Jim retorted that letters from various prominent members of the community expressing both widespread community support and the impact U1Y and Synthesis Lave on the community have been recieved and will be used. There are about M _proposals for projects to be funded, and each proposal will be tailored to each target funding source, :.'ace moved, Al Seconded, that the President anpoint a subcommittee to help prepare and approve the corporate report in order to timely have it published; notion approved. Guest Rod Blair reported that he was involved in putting on a United 'lay telethon, using Synthesis, :dost of the talent has alrerdy been lined up. Bill reported that the Synthesis move had gone well, and that the present location has better sound proofing than the old location, and no noise ;uoblem seemed evident. Peg reported on the :inance Report, She stated that it was a typical MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB _.CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F 1 $T" ;porter. Inarrased interoot .vas cnrnnd due to !re^ir.� r_one i oo:rrlb7.o, C,on mo';iby J on _.osi„ ,n3 n , rover!, To:ul, ane. srcon � _.. ,y ..eal, the re ort "ew 1179 iP.e93 The G.:rats at thn meeting er_ressca their strong interest in increasing t!:e services provided by Synthesis, including having a sound studio coordinator to not only provire technical assistance, but to counsel as well, :•!embers of the board requester! the o ests ;resent to meet with the staff prior to the nest meeting to discuss their needs, as well as the constraints of UiY, and for both the nests and the staff to re_ort at the nest meeting, Jan Lown and Jolua 2•.urray are to meet with the guests and staff, as board representatives, ?se to the npcoming board elections, 'Iaca moved, seconded by 'deal, the ?resident appmmt at a,,)--j; a subcommittee of not more than two board members to develop a. slate of candidates, ""ic'• -vas ap2roved, "ace j volunteered his hone for the location of the 20t-lucic meeting to be 'held at 6:00 ,-•m on the 18th o:" ;•lay, ap zovedlimoved to adjourn, ui=ich ..as seconded by ;_l, which uas unanimously � j :after the official meeting the new Synthesis studio was available for inspection, I Submitted by Alan Bohanan I r MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES