Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2003-09-04 Info Packet
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET ~ September 4, 2003 CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org 8 WORK SESSION ITEMS I SEPTEMBER IP1 Letter from Beth Shields (JC DogPAC) to Parks and Recreation Department Director: Ist Annual Iowa City Dog Paddle IP2 Memorandum from City Clerk: Review of Police Citizens Review Board IP3 Memorandum from City Clerk: Proposed Meeting Schedule through December M,SCE..^.EOUS,TEMS IP4 Memorandum from Assistant City Attorney Matthews: Municipal Power Feasibility Study - Release of University Electric Power Records IP5 Memorandum from Airport Manager to Mayor: United Hangar IP6 Memorandum from Parking and Transit Director to City Manager: Overview of Transit Operations IP7 Memorandum from Development Regulations Specialist to City Manager, Housing and Inspection Services Director and Senior Building Inspector: Woodland Provisions in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance - Enforcement IP8 Letter from Darwin Bunger to Police Chief: University of Iowa Football Game Traffic Control Assistance IP9 Memorandum from City Clerk: Laptop Volume Change IP10 Iowa City Housing and Inspection Services Customer Service Survey - August 2003 HOW ARE WE DOING? IPll Phone Rate Hikes May Force Some to Drop Service (Daytona Beach News) [Pfab] PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES I IP12 Planning and Zoning Commission: August 7 Board of Directors ]~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ I1"~1 ~ Misha Goodman, President Send correspondence to: Beth Shields, Vice-President 618 Ronalds St. Anne Burnside, Secretary Iowa City, IA 52240 Fred Boehmke D o g P a r k www.jcdogpac.org David Bright Action Committee Beth Fisher Barb Meredith September 3, 2003 Terry Trueblood Manager, Department of Parks and Recreation City of Iowa City 220 S. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Terry: On behalf of JC DogPAC and all the dogs who attended the 1st Annual Iowa City Dog Paddle, I want to thank you for everything that you and your staff did to make this event a reality! As you may have seen in this morning's newpapers, we had 356 dogs at the swim! That's amazing for a first time event! We had dogs of all breeds, sizes, and colors, and everyone had a great time. We had so many positive comments as happy but tired pooches led their owners out the gate. The only complaint was that we can only do it once a year! This event was a great opportunity for dogs and dog-loving people to socialize, and it gave people just a taste of what an off-leash recreation area could be like. There were a few barkers, but not a single fight, and only one "accident" in the pool--which was promptly cleaned up by the dog's owner. This Dog Paddle was a perfect example of how much fun dogs (and their owners!) can have when allowed to socialize and play off-leash. Again, a big thanks to you and your staff for helping us to make the event so successful! Sincerely, Beth Shields cc: Mayor Emie Lehman and City Council Members A non-profit citizens group committed to the development and maintenance of Off-Leash Recreation Areas in and around Iowa City. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: September 3, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk l%~.Yt'- RE: Review of Police Citizens Review Board in July 2001 the City Council initiated a Council review of the Police Citizens Review Board by including the following language in Ordinance 01-3976: "On or before August 1, 2003, and every two (2) years thereafter the city council shall evaluate the effectiveness of the board in light of goals and principals set forth in section 8-8-2 of this chapter." A copy of City Code Section 8-8-2 is attached for reference. In addition the Board Annual Report was included in your August 21 Information Packet as IPS, on page 48 (page 25 of the Annual Repod of City Boards and Commissions). 8-8-2: INTENT, GOALS AND GUID1NG PRINCIPLES: Page 1 of 1 8-8-2: INTENT, GOALS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES: A. Investigations into claims of inappropriate conduct by sworn police officers will be conducted in a manner which is fair, thorough, and accurate. B. An annual reporting system regarding complaints against sworn police officers will be established to give the city council sufficient information to assess the overall performance of the Iowa City police department in these matters. C. Citizens may make a formal written complaint to either the board or the Iowa City police department. In accordance with this chapter the board shall process only those complaints filed with the board but will receive reports from the police chief briefly describing the nature of the allegations made in formal written complaints filed with the police department and the disposition of the same. D. The board will: 1. Oversee a monitoring system for tracking receipt of formal complaints lodged against sworn police officers with either the board or the Iowa City police department; 2. Provide oversight of police investigations through review of such investigations; 3. Provide the opportunity for a hearing to the police officer if the board's findings on the complaint to the board are critical of the police officer, as required by constitutional law, and give the police officer the opportunity to present testimony and evidence; 4. Issue a final public report to the city council on each complaint to the board which sets forth factual findings and a written conclusion which explains why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained". E. The board shall have no authority over police disciplinary matters because only the police chief or city manager may impose discipline under iowa law. F. No findings in the board's report shall be used in any other legal proceeding. G. The board shall only review the conduct of sworn police officers and shall only act in a civil, not criminal, capacity. The board is not intended to be a court of law, a tort claim process or other litigation process. No action of the board shall be deemed to diminish or limit the right of any person to file a claim or a lawsuit against the city. H. A complaint to the board may be filed by any person with personal knowledge of an incident. "Personal knowledge" means the complainant was directly involved in the incident or witnessed the incident. If the person with personal knowledge is underage or otherwise unable to complete a complaint form, the complaint may be filed by such person's designated representative. The city manager, the police chief, the city council, or the board may file a complaint to the board based upon a reasonable belief that police misconduct has occurred regardless of personal knowledge. http://66.113.195.234/IA/Iowa%20City/11008000000002000.htm 9/3/2003 8-8-2: INTENT, GOALS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES: Page 1 of 1 I. In order to assure that people feel confident in the complaint process, nonpolice city staff shall be available at a public location other than the police department to receive complaints, although complaints may also be filed at the police department. Formal mediation shall be available to the complainant(s) and the police officer(s) at any time during the process. J. The board shall not interfere with or diminish the legal rights of sworn police officers, including those rights protected under the union contract, civil service commission, and state and federal law. Similarly, the board shall respect the rights of privacy and freedom from defamation shared by complainants and witnesses, as well as those same rights enjoyed by police officers under the law. K. The city council finds that internal accountability within the police department is a valid legislative purpose, and one method of accomplishing such internal accountability is to have the police do their own investigations into claims of inappropriate police conduct. If a complaint is asserted against the police chief, the city manager will investigate the claim and report to the board and the city council. L. Investigation of all formal complaints to the board is a mandatory duty of the police chief, and a report of each complaint investigation shall be given to the board. Such reports to the board shall include the factual findings of the police chief as well as a written conclusion explaining why and the extent to which a complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained". However, such reports shall not include discipline or other personnel matters. If the police chief and the city manager find the police officer's actions constitute misconduct and discipline is imposed by the police chief or city manager, the internal affairs investigation may become a public record to be released by the city attorney to the extent provided by law. M. In order to assure external accountability of the actions of the police department, the police chief shall provide the board with a report at least quarterly of all formal complaints filed directly with the police department, which report shall state the date and location of the incident and a brief description of the nature of the allegation and the disposition of the complaint. N. External accountability will further be provided by the board's maintenance of a central registry of all formal complaints. In addition to the central registry, the board shall provide an annual report to the city council, which report shall be public and shall set forth the general types and numbers of complaints, how they were resolved, demographic information, and recommendations as to how the police department may improve its community relations or be more responsive to community needs. O. The board shall review police practices, procedures, and written policies as those practices and procedures relate to the police department's performance as a whole, and shall report their recommendations, if any, to the city council, city manager and police chief. (Ord. 01- 3976, 7-10-2001 ) http://66.113.195.234/IAJlowa%20City/11008000000002000.htm 9/3/2003 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: September 3, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council ,,x~ FROM: Marian K. Kan', City Clerk \'~" RE: Proposed Meeting schedule through December At your April 7 work session a meeting schedule was agreed upon through the month of October. The schedule for the remainder of the 2003 year should now be finalized. The Mayor asked that I submit a proposed schedule for your consideration. November 3 - Regular Work Session November 4 - ELECTION DAY Special Formal (5:30-7:30 PM) November 17 - Regular Work Session November 18 - Regular Formal December 1 - Regular Work Session December 2 - Regular Formal December 15 - Regular Work Session December 16 - Regular Formal Although the proposed schedule schedules a meeting on election night, he does avoid Veteran's Day on November 11. Packets for the December 1 and 2 meeting would be distributed Thanksgiving week. National League meeting the second week in December does not provide for a Council meeting that week. In the past Council has also considered dropping one meeting in December. We can accommodate any schedule Council decides, and special meetings may be called as necessary. U/03revision City of Iowa City IP4 MEMORANDUM Date: September 4, 2003 To: City Council From: Andy Matthews, Assistant City Attorney,~/~/ Re: Municipal Power Feasibility Study - Release of University Electric Power Records As you may know, the City requested certain electric power consumption records from the University of Iowa and the University of Iowa Hospital. Subsequently, MidAmerican Energy Company filed an Application for Temporary Injunction and Petition for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief to preclude its release, asserting such records were confidential. The matter was set for hearing on September 23, 2003. The information was requested to aid Latham & Associates in the preparation of the feasibility study per an agreement with the Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities. The feasibility study was expected to be released within the next few weeks, making the data request a time critical matter. MidAmerican, Latham & Associates, and the University have reached an agreement which will permit Latham & Associates to obtain sufficient information for its purposes for use in the feasibility study. By agreement, the City has withdrawn its record request of the University, the needed information will be provided to Latham & Associates, and MidAmdmerican will dismiss its suit without prejudice, permitting the feasibility study to be completed in a timely manner. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call me. cc: Steve Atkins, City Manager Dale Hailing, Assistant City Maanger Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Marian Karr, City Clerk Rick Fosse, Public Works Director IP5 IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT 1801 South Riverside Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52246 Office Phone (319) 356-5045 September 2, 2003 The Honorable Mayor Mr. Ernest Lehman 410 East Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Re: United hangar Dear Ernie: At the last three Commission meetings, the Commission has discussed the disposition of the building known as the United hangar, at 1701 South Riverside Drive. Boeing Air Transport Company constructed it around 1929. Boeing Air later became United Airlines. Because of its age, the building has some historic significance. It has been determined to be eligible to be a histodc structure, but it has not been designated as a historic building. Because of its location in relation to the end of Runway 25, it is considered an obstruction. The building can not remain in the current location. Disposition of the building would be included with the second phase of the Runway 07/25 project. The Commission hopes to receive funding for phase two next year. There are at least three options. All three options include the required histodc documentation of the building. One option is to demolish the building. Another option is to move the building and rehabilitate it. A third option is to move the building and restore it. The FAA will pay 90% of the cost to move the building. This would include moving costs, new footings and floor and constructing the utilities to the new site. They will not pay to rehab or restore the building. The Commission has known for some time that the building is considered an obstruction. Very little money has been spent on it and it would need considerable work to rehab or restore it. Because of the economic climate, the consensus of Commission is that the structure will be demolished. The Histodc Preservation Commission was invited to the August Commission meeting to discuss the building, but the Commission did not receive any response from them. The Commission does not know of any other group that might have an interest in preserving the building. The Airport Commission has started the process of selecting an engineering firm for the Runway 07/25 project. In defining the final Scope of Services for the project, the Commission will need to decide the fate of the United hangar. The main objective of this letter is to notify the Council that the Commission has spent a considerable amount of time on this issue and, using the available information, has decided to demolish the building. Them was some sentiment to save the building, but them am no funds to allow that to occur. Sincerely, Ron O'Neil Airport Manager Cc: City Council Airport Commission Steve Atkins, City Manager Sue Dulek, Assistant City Attorney City of Iowa City IP6 MEMORANDUM Date: August 21,2003 To: Steve Atkins, City Manager From: Joe Fowler, Director Parking & Transit Re: Overview of Transit Operations City of iowa City Transit, a division of the Department of Parking & Transit, is made up of various service components. Although the bus fleet and the drivers who directly serve the public have the highest profile, behind the scenes there are vital services which support the daily operation of mass transit. This memo will address ridership data but will also touch on the other support areas and services the division provides. Transit Ridership Transit ridership for FY03 was 1,481,467 passenger boardings. This is an increase of 99,972 riders, or a seven-percent rise over FY02. From FY98 until FY03 we have experienced a steady increase in ridership except for FY00. Overall system usage has increased to 232,653 between FY98 and FY03. This represents an increase in ridership of nineteen percent in six years. Enclosed is a graph showing yearly ridership from FY98 until FY03. To give a better understanding of usage of the public transit system, ridership has been separated by time of day: a.m. peak, mid-day, p.m. peak, in addition to night and Saturday service. A graph is enclosed with the service breakdown. Ninety-one percent of transit ridership occurs between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. This can be broken down further, separating the Downtown Shuttle from the fixed route fare system. One bus travels on the Downtown Shuttle route and it carries fourteen percent of Iowa City Transit riders. This bus operates from late August until mid- June. The number of daytime fixed-route buses varies by time of year. Seventeen buses operate during the school year; fourteen buses provide service during the summer. These buses carry seventy-seven percent of transit users. Twenty-six percent of all passengers ride between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., twenty-nine percent between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., and twenty-two percent between 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Transit ridership is spread evenly throughout this period. Evening service operates from 7:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. During this time period five buses operate. Five percent of the transit ridership occurs during this time. Saturday service is operated between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Six buses are in service during this time. Four percent of transit ridership occurs during this time. Overview of Transit Operations August21,2003 Page 2 In addition to providing fixed route service Iowa City Transit provides complementary paratransit service through a contract with Johnson County SEATS. This service is required to operate the same hours as the fixed route buses. Iowa City provides this coverage and in addition provides service on Sundays. Sunday service is from 7:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. During FY03 there were 63,531 Iowa City rides provided by SEATS. This is a decrease of 4,103 rides or a six- percent decrease. This decrease is attributed to Johnson County entering into a separate contract with Pathways for service. Pathways had 8,220 rides last year. Many of these had previously been counted as Iowa City rides. Support Services Our on-street bus service operations are supported by three additional division activities. The Transit Division operates its own maintenance facility. Four mechanics and a parts clerk provide the required mechanical support for the fleet of twenty-one large buses and one mid size bus. The work preformed ranges from routine maintenance, such as oil and filter changes, to rebuilding air conditioners, wheelchair lifts and transmissions. In addition this staff has recently begun performing transmission rebuilds for CAMBUS. It is anticipated that they will begin performing some maintenance function for Johnson County SEATS in the near future. The shop work hours are charged back and pads are supplied by the agency for which the work is performed. The Transit Division operates the auto/truck body shop for the City. In addition to performing body work on buses, one full time employee maintains the City's fleet of vehicles. Work encompasses passenger vehicles, light trucks and Fire Department vehicles. In addition to vehicle repair the auto body mechanic has rebuilt several of the amusement rides at City Park. One of the most important and often overlooked areas at Transit is the night crew. Four individuals work six nights per week to dean and fuel all the vehicles that have been in service. At the end of the service day, every bus is fueled, all fluid levels are checked, the exterior is washed, and the interior is vacuumed and wiped down. The work of these individuals in these support areas is very important in how the public views Iowa City Transit equipment and its operations. An additional activity performed by Transit shop personnel is operation of the City's sign shop. The combined efforts of personnel assigned to equipment maintenance and body work areas produce the majority of the street markers, parking regulation, traffic control, and City park signs used by the City. This is an overview of Iowa City Transit operations. If you would like any additional information on the divisions and their operations please contact me. Enclosure Transit\memos\overview.doc Overview of Transit Operations August21,2003 Page 3 Transit Ridership FY98 to FY03 145000, 1400000 1350000 1300000 1250000 1200000 1150000 1100000 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 Iowa City Transit Service South Shuttle North Shuttle 0% 14% A.M. Peak Saturday Service 26% 4% Night Service 5% P.M. Peak 22% Mid Day 29% Lisa Mollenhauer ~ From: Julie Tallman Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 5:36 PM To: Steve Atkins; Doug Boothroy; Tim Henries Cc: Lisa Mollenhauer CITY OF I0 WA CITY MEMO TO: Steve Atkins; Doug Boothroy; Tim Hennes FROM: Julie Tallman DATE: 3 September 2003 RE: Woodland Provisions in the Sensitive Areas Ordinance - Enforcement Enforcement begins with plan review, where the area of woodland is assessed. The retained woodland is described on the plan. From the edge of the trunks of trees within the preserved woodland, a 50' buffer is delineated on the plan. The preserved woodland, plus the 50' buffer, is now illustrated on the plan. Methods of protecting the woodland and the buffer are specified on the plan. If the minimum required percentage of trees within the woodland cannot be preserved, replacement trees can be planted. We negotiate locations for replacement trees during plan review. Some may be planted within the buffer, some may be planted in a location relatively removed from the woodland. Enforcement of this language is carried out primarily through plan design, and inspections early in the project's progress. I require that fencing or colored lathe be used on-site to call out the edges of development activity. And then I require an on-site inspection with the developer and grading contractor. At Hickory Heights, for example, (where trees weren't the issue but the same enforcement strategy applies) Gene Kroeger and Gary Watts and their grading contractors met with me one morning, along with staff from MMS. We walked the site and identified where lathe would be placed to call out development limits. Unfortunately, vandalism at this site meant the lathe wasn't there for very long. But at least I knew the grading contractor was aware of the limits on development activity. This isn't a perfect strategy: I don't always get called out for pre-construction meetings, even when the site/grading plan includes a note stating that "No development activity can occur before a pre-construction meeting is help with the Development Regulations Specialist. Call 356-5132 to schedule the pre-construction meeting." Sometimes, like with First & Rochester Part IV, where the stream corridor buffer wasn't properly identified and erosion control was insufficient, I have to use the Notice to File Environmental Infraction or other formal notification to get the erosion control installed, or visible buffer limits implemented on-site. Additionally, construction limits get translated on to individual plans that are submitted for building permits. Construction limits are shown on final plats, OPDH plans, and site plans. When plans are checked in for building permits, we make sure that construction limits are shown on individual plot plans for development. I hope this information is helpful. Let me know if you have questions or need more information. StevenJ. gr0wley CROWLEY & BUNGER DarwinBfinger ATTOR_I~IEYS & COUNSELORS AT LAW ~ August 27, 2003 Chief of Police Iowa City Police Department 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 P.O. Box 945 Dear Chief: It is my understanding that the Iowa City Police Department will not be assisting with traffic control either before or after the home University of Iowa football games. 320 North Third St Apparently the reason given is a budget crunch. My further information is that neither the County law enforcement nor the Iowa Suite ~00 Highway Patrol are cutting back on the traffic control assistance they have given over the years. It is hard to imagine that they have any less budget crunch than Iowa City has. More importantly, the businesses of Iowa City and the City of Ioxva City both Burlington, lA52601 directly and indirectly are the benefactors of the influx of fans to Iowa City for the football games. 319-753-1330 I surmase that if someone wanted to do some calculating and make some projections they could come up with a rather accurate portrayal of the comparative pittance it costs the City versus the amount which the community, businesses and even City itself take in revenues from the presence of the Division I football games. FAX 319-7524934 As a person who frequents Iowa City at least 40 to 50 times per year, 85°,/0 of the time to some University related event, and who always spends some amount of money when there, I request that you revisit ~fis decision. A reversal of the decision would be in the best interests of the vast majority of people involved in this situation. Darwin Bringer CROWLEY & BONGER DB/asm cc: Mayor of Iowa City City of Iowa City IP9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk DATE: September 4, 2003 RE: Laptop Volume Change It is time for Council laptops to be programmed for a new volume. Please note that our last volume changeover was in April due to increased images on CD. I need ALL laptops left after your September 9 formal meeting. Laptops can be picked up on Thursday, September 11 with your next information packet. You will be unable to load the September 11 CD without the reprogramming. Please call with any questions. Thank you. Iowa City Housing and Inspection Services Customer Service Survey ~ August 2003 FlOW DOIHGP "Great" "Appreciate your time and guidance. Thanks." "Your inspector is great! Very easy to work with." "It is a pleasure to work with your inspectors. They do a great job." "Very well - you are coudeous, kind. You give us time to meet the requirements and you sent us the rental permit! Hurrah!" "You are doing fine! Your organization is prompt, informative, and very user friendly. Thanks." "Norm Cate did an excellent job. He was thorough and made good suggestions. He respected the tenants and responded to a complaint by one regarding smoke detector always beeping when cooking. He was friendly and affable to everyone. A follow-up by proprietor reflected everyone was impressed by his services. Thank you." "John Bovey is an excellent inspector. He discovered what could have been a serious problem and advised us on the repair of an illegal door lock on the rear exist of our house. Thanks." "Pat MacKay is pleasant to work with - looks for the right things and ts trusting on small items done and proof of performance." "Just fine. As long as the inspectors cite us only on code and not their personal preference, all is well. Thanks." "Great - very excellent and very fair. Inspector was Pat MacKay." "I really enjoy working with Patricia MacKay. I think she is very nice and easy to get along with. I am very satisfied with Iowa City Housing." "Norm was very pleasant to work with. He was flexible in setting up the inspection appointment and follow-up visit, which helped me a 10t. Thanks?' "Mr. Bovey was a very pleasant and efficient inspector - thanks for the good service." "Norm Cate did a great job! He was very informative and professional about his work. We purchased another property and were very busy at this time. Norm is welcome any time at our properties." "Patricia MacKay was very helpful for me to bring my four-plex into compliance for City Code. Our encounters, either in person or via phone, have been pleasant. Iowa City should be proud to have such a caring and thoughtful employee. "Your people are doing their work in a very professional manner. Thanks." h~sadmtcomments-aug03 doc 1 Iowa City Housing and Inspection Services Customer Service Survey - August 2003 Page 2 "Fine. Bob Shaver was friendly, efficient, non-invasive, and had useful information." "Ad is always pleasant to work with. He's thorough without being obnoxious." "Mr. Bovey was punctual and had some helpful suggestions regarding the weathering to the front door, both of which I appreciated." "Much better." "Bob was courteous and helpful. Several suggestions saved me time and money." "Pat MacKay was the inspector. She was very thorough in her inspection, was very pleasant and polite to work with. She did a great job. Keep up the good work." "I really liked dealing with Pat. She is very nice and easy to get along with. The inspections go smoothly and quickly. Keep up the good work!" "I've had a good experience with Art and the staff. Thanks." Ad Anderson did just fine on one of our new rental property purchases. Thanks." Professional and knowledgeable." Patricia inspector our rental. She was very helpful and fun to talk with as well." It is always a pleasure to work with John Bovey. He is punctual, courteous, professional, knowledgeable, helpful, pleasant - a very positive representative of the City Housing and Inspection Services." Bob Shaver is good at explaining defects and why so. You're doing OK but don't push yourselves in further on property rights. We're looking at $1.8 million shortfall in state money the next two years - how dare you plead for another inspector we don't need. Assign one per day to the Dept. Head. That'll help." "This was a very good experience, dealing with Mr. Cate. I would hope that the entire staff could develop his attitude." "It was a pleasure working with Art on the inspection of our rental. He was helpful when I called to inquire about the new format for the rental permits. I recommend that the word "handicapped" be added to where the permit says "accessible." "Very thorough yet fair in his inspection. Very friendly, does his job well for everyone's benefit, safety for tenants and the homeowner. Great job!" hisadnVcomments-aug03.doc 2 Marian Karr r~ From: Irvin Pfab [ipfab@avalon.net] Sent: Friday, Aug ust 29, 2003 6:48 AM To: Iowa City City Council Subject: 82903fw..Phone rate hikes may force some to drop service: Daytona Beach News-Journal, by Jim Haugh and Jim Saunders Phone rate hikes may force some to drop service By JIM HAUG and JIM SAUNDERS Staff Writers Last update: 29 August 2003 DAYTONA BEACH -- Residential rates, residents of the Maley and Windsor towers may be taking more elevator rides to the lobby. The apartment complexes on Beach Street provide government-subsidized housing for senior citizens and the disabled. Those who can't afford telephones make their calls from the lobby pay phone. It is not a pleasant experience, said Jeffery Barnes, a Maley resident. "People are always talking so much, you can hardly hear," Barnes said. A controversial law allows telephone companies to raise their monthly rates by $3 to $7 over the next two years if their requests are granted by the state Public Service Commission. This week, the state's three largest local phone companies have submitted requests for rate increases. The extra couple of bucks would be a lot of money for Viola Pless, 66, who lives on a fixed income of $668 a month. "I've already had one heart attack," Pless said. "Thank God, I have a phone. It's a necessity." Michael Twomey, president of the consumer group Florida Utility Watch, said the rate increases would be the largest in state history and would force many Iow-income people to cut off telephone service. "These telephone people and a lot of their legislative supporters thought it was a big joke that another $5 or $6 a month could impact anybody," said Twomey, who lobbied against the bill during the legislative session. Sprint, which serves a portion of Southwest Volusia County, would like to increase its basic service rate by $3.23 a month in the first year and $3.63 in the second year. BellSouth, which serves most of Volusia and Flagler counties, is asking for an increase of $1.75 a month in both the first and second year. Verizon would like to increase its basic residential rate by $2.25 the first year and $2.36 the second. The Florida Public Service Commission has three months to act on the proposals. If approved, the proposals would go into effect immediately. Rates for Iow-income customers who qualify for the state's Lifeline phone-bill subsidy would be frozen at current levels for the next two years. Telephone companies, which flooded the Capitol with dozens of lobbyists during this spring's legislative session, have pushed the rate-restructuring idea for years. Lawmakers passed a similar bill last year, but Gov. Jeb Bush vetoed it. This year, Verizon, BellSouth, Sprint and AT&T each contributed $10,000 to the governor's inauguration ball. Bush signed the bill in May, arguing that lawmakers had made improvements such as giving more rate-approval authority to the Public Service Commission. The governor appoints the five members of the commission. 8/29/03 Page 2 of 2 BellSouth issued a statement Thursday that said the company would not benefit financially from the changes because the law has to be carried out in a "revenue neutral manner." The telephone industry has argued that the rate increases would be offset by reductions in charges for in-state long distance calls. This offset is meaningless to Pless and customers who use cell phones or discount calling cards for long distance calls. "1 really don't make that many (long distance) calls," she said. Bentley Lipscomb, state director of the senior-advocacy group AARP, is considering hiring an attorney and trying to intervene in the rate case. The Public Service Commission is set to meet Tuesday and discuss how to review the proposals. Lipscomb said AARP is also looking at ways to fight back politically, including considering the possibility of trying to pass a constitutional amendment next year to overturn the increases. He said AARP will make sure its members know which lawmakers voted for the law. "We're going to suggest who they (seniors) might call up and thank for it," Lipscomb said. House Minority Leader Doug Wiles, D-St. Augustine, said he opposed the bill, in part, because he worried that it would hurt people with Iow incomes. Wiles said it was "disingenuous" for the Legislature to support higher phone rates while also boasting about holding down taxes. Tina Kayat, a New Smyrna Beach resident, predicts the rate increase will only backfire for the telephone companies. "1 know a lot of people who use cell phones," Kayat said. "They've given up on the residential (phone.)" ji~.h~ug@n~ws~jrnl.com jim. saunders@news-jrnl.com -- The Associated Press contributed to this story. © 2002 News-Journal Corporation. ® www,news-journalonline~com.. Do not republish or distribute without permission. 8/29/03 MINUTES Preliminary PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 7, 2003 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Benjamin Chair, Don Anciaux, Beth Koppes, Ann Bovbjerg, Jerry Hansen, Dean Shannon, Ann Freerks STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Lensing, Joel Fagan, Steve Holland, Winifred Holland, Cortland Burwold, John Roffman RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, VAC03-00001, the vacation of an alley right-of-way located south of Kirkwood Avenue and west of Diana Street subject to the retention of any necessary utility easements, the conveyance of the right-of-way being approved concurrently with the approval of the ordinance vacating the alley and the inclusion of a curb along the east-west graveled alley to prevent vehicular access from the commercial property to Diana Street. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, SUB03-00031, a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 17B, a 3.49- acre, l-lot residential subdivision located at the intersection of York Place and Broadmoor Lane. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, SUB03-00032, a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 18B, a 1.09- acre, 2-lot residential subdivision located west of Broadmoor Lane and north of Camden Road. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, SUB03-00033, a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 19A, a .82- acre, l-lot residential subdivision located west of Broadmoor Lane and south of York Place. CALL TO ORDER: Bovbjerg called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Bovbjerg said a listing of the current vacancies on the various boards and commissions was posted in the outer lobby. The City always appreciated the help of its citizen's who volunteered to serve on a board or commission. VACATION ITEM: VAC03-00031: discussion of an application submitted by Michael Lensing for the vacation of an alley right-of-way located south of Kirkwood Avenue and west of Diana Street. McCafferty said Staff had no additional information to add to their report given at the 7/17/03 Commission meeting. Bovbjerg asked Behr to summarize what the Commission should consider and what their responsibilities were with respect to reviewing this particular application for a vacation. Behr said the question the Commission should consider was if they felt that the City needed this property to be maintained for public use and/or as a public right of way. The criteria they should use in their decision making process was the criteria set forth in the Staff Report prepared by Jessica Hlubek, dated July 17, 2003. Behr said their decision would be a discretionary act. If the Commission recommended the vacation, only when offers to purchase all of the vacated property had been received, would the proposed vacation and subsequent conveyances go before the Council. Both the vacation and the conveyance would be done at the same meeting. Behr reiterated that the Commission's only consideration be if there was a public need for this property to be retained for public use. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August7,2003 Page 2 Public discussion was opened. Michael Lensing, Lensing Funeral Home, said he it was his understanding that if the Commission recommended that the vacation occur, that would mean that the alley could be vacated. The next step would be to work out a land agreement with the adjacent land owners and then he probably would go back before the Commission for zoning issues. Lensing asked when his application would go before the City Council. Behr said Lensing could go before the Council with offers to purchase the vacated land, but it was also possible that he would come back before the Commission with rezoning issues before he wished to appear before the Council to request that the vacation actually occur. Lensing said he had really wanted to find out if the City was willing to vacate the properly. His next step would be to see if he could work out agreements with the adjacent property owners to purchase part of their backyards and at that point he would decide if he wanted to purchase the land from the City. Behr said it was possible that Lensing would be back before the Commission for rezoning issues before he approached the City Council about purchasing the vacated land. He might wish to get answers about rezonings before actually purchasing the land. Lensing agreed. Chait said it was very confusing. Behr said he could see where Lensing would not want to go straight to Council to purchase a good deal of this property until he knew if he would be able to get the zoning he would need. Lensing might wish to make his offers to purchase contingent upon receiving the needed zoning. Bovbjerg said those issues were down the road and not the issue at hand. Chair said he thought they were muddying the waters, the issue was simply the vacation of this parcel. He felt it was best not to talk about rezonings before the Commission had voted. Lensing said he did not wish to mislead anyone so he was sharing his anticipated future plans. Freerks asked if there was a time constraint involved. Behr said there was no specific limitation. Recently a vacation request had sat for almost one year at Council level before it was acted upon. Anciaux asked if they made a recommendation for vacation of this property, would it be appropriate to include wording indicating that Diana Court would be closed to traffic from the business property or would that be negotiated at City Council level. Behr said it would be appropriate but there was wording in the Staff Report to that effect. Chait said it was in Staff's report and in the public record as well. Joel Fac~an, 741 Chestnut Court, said he did not have a direct personal interest in this application. It had caught his interest when he had accidentally attended the previous Commission meeting. He said by the City deciding to vacate this property in essence they were saying that they did not have any interest in owning the property anymore and the property would be disposed in an orderly way. Fagan said when the City gave up its possession of a parcel of property, there was no turning back, someone else owned it. He said there were a number of adjacent property owners to the Lensing property, one of them had a long term interest in the parcel and had an idea about what he wanted to do with it. Other adjacent property owners might not have a serious long term interest in the property or have the time and energy to pursue it. Since the City was currently the owner of the parcel, someone needed to represent the general public's interest and think what the right thing to do for that property was. Properly owners could be transient. In order to make sure that the public's long term interests were attended to, Fagan said it seemed that the City in some form be it the Commission or the Planning Department under the direction of the Commission should stop and think if there was something useful that should be done with the parcel with the public interest in mind. After considering it seriously, a consideration done by more than just the members of the Commission, the City Planning department could be directed to think of a creative use for the parcel or they could talk to the neighborhood to think of a creative use for the property. At least one property owner in the neighborhood had an idea about what to do with the property. Fagan said before deciding to vacate the parcel, it seemed wise for the Commission and the City Planning department to think about if there was something useful to be done with it. Chait said what Fagan said was insightful. The fact was, what Fagan was thinking should happen was exactly what did happen. Planning Staff had evaluated it and the Commission was the body that looked out for the public's concerns. It was not just a slam dunk that the Commission automatically did things. The Commission evaluated and analyzed vacations of properties in the way that Fagan had just spoken of. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 3 Steve Holland, son of Winifred Holland, said he had prepared slides to acquaint the Commission with the area and to illustrate his concerns with the proposed vacation. His main concerns for rejecting the project which he had expressed at the previous Commission meeting were: · A line already exited between commercial & residential which had been there for a long time · The Commission was not ready to make a decision. Project Green or some similar organization should be consulted or brought in · There were better uses than a parking lot · The discussion of the trees that were already there should be reconsidered · A TARP Plan program, which provides funds to repair houses, was currently underway. His mother's neighborhood qualified for the TARP plan. The proposed vacation was an infringement on that. · He had an interest in the neighborhood and would like to know more about Lensing's plans for his business for the future. Slides shown included pictures of his Winifred Holland's backyard fence looking south; the size of an area encompassed by removing 40-feet of a backyard space; the walnut trees being discussed and surrounding trees which would be removed; the rear view of the funeral home; the fence that separated Vesely's yard from the business area which was a fence that demarcated residential from business interests in the Plum Grove area. It ran all the way down past Burger King to Hwy 6. This fence did not go up to Kirkwood Avenue but stopped at Vesely's. The businesses had been required to install the fence. Freerks said the fence was a way to make a transition from commercial to residential, the fence started where the alley stopped and followed all the commercial property all the way to Hwy 6. Holland said there currently was no fence behind the McCormick property, the next property which was for sale, a third property but it eventually connected with the alley which led back to Kirkwood Avenue. Holland said his point was there currently was no fence there and according to code there should be a fence there. Holland said if it went to the next step to rezoning, Lensing would have to install another fence to demarcate that area. He and his mother had gone through this years ago with the commercial properties in their neighborhood. Freerks asked McCafferty if that was also her understanding of when a commercial area abutted a residential area in such a way. McCafferty said she didn't know. Behr said he was not aware that it was an automatic requirement, there might be special exceptions or CZA's that came into play or it might have been voluntary. Holland said there was already precedent for doing so in the neighborhood. Holland said another concern was that if the property were vacated and conveyed, some of the purchased land would not be used but would still need to be maintained by the owner. He showed a slide of an area with tall grass and weeds that had not been mowed or maintained currently located behind the auto shop and plumbing business. Holland said he wished that the Commission would visit the site to become more familiar with it. Holland said it was his understanding that the funeral home was an exception to the rule of businesses in that area. It was a fine business and Mr. Lensing should be very proud of it. The crematorium was also a special exception. Now that they were moving toward a rezoning it would be another exception to the rule, he wondered where it was all headed. He thought there were better uses for the area than a parking lot and they had not yet begun to explore them. Chait asked if the walnut trees were to the east of the alley that would be vacated. Holland asked Lensing to address the question. Lensing said the trees were on the right-of-way. Lensing asked to make a clarification about the fence. An agreement twenty years ago stipulated that he would put arborvitae trees in. They had all died because of the walnut trees. When the crematory addition was added, they had been asked to install a border of some type to give some separation, but nothing really about a fence. He had gone to the nurseries, who had said dogwood trees would grow there. There was one left, all the others had died because of the walnut trees. He was willing to keep some of the walnut trees but wanted everyone to understand that nothing grew under the walnut trees which left sap on the ground and the cars. Lensing said if the City could determine what, he wourd rather put in something growing that would look beautiful within the neighborhood rather than a fence which was cold and harsh. Chair said he wished to address comments to Holland. The concerns that the Holland's had were valid concerns. However in terms of the technical kinds of things that the Commission was currently considering, the Holland's concerns really did not have anything to do with what was being considered by the Commission. Bovbjerg suggested it would be helpful if Chair shared his comments during the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 4 Commissioner's comments. Chair said what was being discussed was not regarding what grew or did not grow nor what had or had not been committed to by Lensing in the past. His concerns had to do with that in the United States there was a bigger value which had to do with being innocent until proven guilty, which was a basic part of the system. The reason he brought that point up was because the Commission was not talking about a rezoning or what Lensing might do. They were discussing what was the best use of the alley and if they recommended a vacation or not. Ultimately the land might not even be disposed of. For the discussion to become "woulda, shoulda, coulda" in the future was over the line, as Chair saw it. The Commission had demonstrated that it had a distaste for an applicant who came in and asked for something which the Commission gave them. Then they came back and asked for something more but they also had an agenda for which the Commission had a suspicion about, but never fully disclosed their plans. The fact was that the Commission was not presuming anything about what might or might not happen in the future. Lensing had disclosed an intention because the Commission had an aversion to not having a sense of that. Chait said those things were very close to a line and they were completely different. The issue had to do with vacating the alley not and what might or might not happen in the future. The concerns that Holland had raised were not what the Commission was looking at right now. If the Commission determined that the alley was not beneficial to the City and it could be vacated, items such as who bought parcels of land had to happen before a conveyance took place. Chair said it was not fair to start talking about the future when the issue was very specifically related to if the alley was or was not needed as public property. Freerks said she thought it was legitimate to talk about other public uses for a piece of public land before it was made not public. The consideration of the property as open space, as mentioned by one of the neighbors, was legitimate, but she did not think having an island park in the middle of something that could not be accessed was an easy thing to do. Freerks said she did not know if there was a major deficit of green space in that area but that was something for later consideration. Holland said he believed that Lensing had opened the door by indicating that he did not wish to purchase the property unless it was rezoned. He appreciated that the Commission was talking about only one item but he had a problem with it as it had been presented. If there was no rezoning, then there would be no need for Lensing to ask for a vacation of the property. Holland said he did not think the issue was as simple as the Commission presented it to be. It was a very complicated issue. Winifred Holland, 1105 Diana Street, said the City had fencing regulations. It had taken her two years to get the fence repaired a few years back. Holland said they had discussed the environmental regulations at the last Commission meeting. Section 8, Item 2, said "Permit and define the reasonable uses of properties which contain environmentally sensitive features and natural resources while recognizing the importance of environmental resources and protecting such resources from destruction." Holland said she thought it fell under that because the row of trees were not 12 inches around so they did not fall under the definition of a grove of trees. The parcel of land was not an acre in size, so it did not qualify as a prairie remnant. Holland said when she first received the letter she was not concerned. However when she walked out and looked at the taped off area she had been shocked to see the tape stretching across the two adjoining properties. She felt there was more there than met the eye. Even though the Commission was only making a decision about the right-of-way, she suggested that they consider other concerns that had also been brought up that evening. Holland said if they voted yes on the application, they would be laying the groundwork for a rezoning request that threatened the stability of the neighborhood. Cortland Burwold, 1035 Diana Street, an adjoining property owner to the Lensing property. Burwold said he personally did not have an issue with the vacation. He had purchased the property from his grandparents and had lived there approximately three years. He currenfiy maintained and mowed 20-feet of the alleyway. Burwold said the only issue he had with it being vacated was if the property to the west at 424 Highland Court were to purchase their parcel. They had not maintained their portion of the hill for years. Slides shown by Holland had shown the brush and overgrowth behind that building. Burwold said since the time that the telephone company had sold the building that land parcel had not seen a lawnmower so he was forced to look directly out over a weed patch. If the owner of that building were to purchase his parcel, that would mean an additional 10-feet of weed patch would ensue. The current owner did not maintain what he had now on the backside of his building because he didn't look out over it. As far as the alley itself was concerned, at present it only served foot traffic from Grisley's Bar and on Sunday mornings Burwold had to go out and pick up beer cans. Burwold said he might have accidentally planted asparagus on the proposed vacation portion, but he would either move his asparagus or purchase his 10-feet himself. Pranning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 5 Burwold said he felt the neighborhood itself, thanks to John Roffman fixing up the house to the north of Burwold's property, was already on the way to improvement. During the previous summer the lawn had only been mowed two times during the whole summer. Improvements that were being made within the neighborhood would hopefully raise the property value of his home and the homes that currently surrounded him were much more decent than what they previously had been. As an adjacent property owner, he had no problem with the vacation. Chait and Anciaux suggested that Burwold talk to the City Inspector as there were City regulations regarding such. Burwold said it was just grass and junk trees that had overtaken the area. Even if the building owner opted to purchase his parcel of land, Burwold could still take action to have the area maintained. Anciaux asked when a parcel with two adjoining neighbors was vacated did the City get an appraised value on the properties. Behr said the practice had been to solicit offers from each adjacent owner. Anciaux asked if it ever became a bidding war or did it go just up to the appraised price. Behr said there was not an automatic appraisal. The City liked it when the property owners obtained an appraisal, but sometimes it just did not pay to get one so they went with the assessed value. Behr said everyone with alley adjacent to their property got the chance to purchase their property at fair market value. Chair said the property needed to be 100% acquired before the City would vacate it. He asked if the adjoining property owners didn't want to purchase their parcels could a third party not connected to land being vacated purchase it? This related to an earlier conversation regarding if Lensing could purchase additional parcels of land and give them back to the property owners. Behr said it would be possible but highly unlikely that the City would sell to someone who did not own any property adjacent to the vacated portion. Staff would not recommend to Council that only a portion of the parcel be conveyed. Chair asked if it would become a big dollar sale or more of just an accommodation to erase the alley. Behr said it depended on the assessed and appraised values, but they were not talking about a lot of property. John Roffmaq, 1314 Burry Drive, said he had talked to Lensing in terms of acquiring part of his parcel to expand the funeral home parking lot. It seemed to make sense because at times there was not enough space to accommodate parking and Lensing was landlocked in. Roffman said physically looking at the alley now one would not have any idea that there ever was an alley there. Obviously it was public property that had never been used so it made sense to vacate it, generate more dollars out of it and have the best use of it. Freerks asked Roffman if he lived on the property. He did not. He had acquired the property, fixed up the house and had spent two days with three men cutting brush down and clearing the property which had been neglected for a long time. Lensing said he wanted everyone to know that if the property were vacated and if he were to purchase all the land, he and Burwold had already reached a verbal agreement. There was nothing that he could do with the lower piece of the vacated parcel. All he wanted to do was square off his lot for parking. Even some of the land he might purchase from Roffman would not be touched because there was nothing he could do on it, it would be left just as it was now. Anciaux asked who owned the nonconforming lot? Lensing said it was owned by Peter Weinstein. Roffman said he had spoken to Weinstein who was planning to be around for only one more year then moving on. Roffman was anticipating combining the two properties at that time. There were no written agreements, but they would work things out. Chair and Bovbjerg discussed that the Weinstein lot was a non conforming lot but it could still be used for a single family home because any lot, even though it was technically non conforming, could have a single family home on it. Holland said it was an odd area but a unique opportunity to use it in a different way. He urged the Commission to consult with Project Green or other neighbors. He would like to join a panel discussion to determine a different future than what the property was headed for now. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Chair made a motion that the City vacate the 6680-square foot portion of right-of-way located to the southeast of 605 Kirkwood Avenue subject to: 1) the retention of any necessary utility easements, 2) Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 6 the conveyance of the right-of-way being approved concurrently with the approval of the ordinance vacating the alley, 3) the inclusion of a curb along the east-west graveled alley to prevent vehicular access from the commerciar property to Diana Street. Shannon seconded the motion. Chait said they had discussed a lot of items specifically related to the vacation and a lot of concerns around the ramifications of the vacation. He felt that there were adequate protections in the codes and ordinances to provide for screening, etc. With respect to all of the concerns that had been expressed regarding a parking lot being put in and the property developed, based on ordinances that were currently in place there was no way that it was going to happen to the neighborhood without going through the proper procedures and protocols. The Commission was simply looking at a recommendation to vacate the alley. There had been a lot of discussion about private party interests but again the ordinances on the books regulated that as well as the best use of the properties involved. When things came to fruition there were ample safeguards in place. He felt the request was a reasonable one. Shannon said they had heard a lot of things which he was trying to simplify it in his mind. To him an alleyway was basically access to a properly. He had heard other good ideas mentioned, but the adjacent property owners did not have a problem with the vacation. The Commission was also being asked to make a decision on and speculate on a rezoning, but it was not their business to speculate on it. Chair said a valid point made by Roffman was that it was a public right-of-way, but there was no visible evidence that a usable alley had ever existed. Shannon said in keeping with all that, since it was an alley that was not being used and wasn't meant for park land, the Commission should vote it up or down on the merits of the neighbors input, what was originally asked for and was it a good thing. It was more of a political issue and it was City Council's job to make decisions about what could and what should be. Freerks said for her the question put to them was did the City need the property maintained in a public way. She didn't see that there was great benefit in that and it was probably fine to vacate that property. However further meetings about other issues courd become much messier. Those would be things for a later discussion when it came to encroachment and rezoning, those were things that the Commission would take into consideration. As far as this issue, she was comfortable with the vacation. Freerks said if the property changed hands, she urged Lensing to take into consideration the desires and concerns of the neighbors who lived in the area when trees and buffers were considered. Hansen said he agreed with Freerks. The question was: was it viable for the City to keep the property or not. He could not see anything good the City would be doing with the property as it had sat vacant. The vacation did not guarantee that there would be any type of sale on the property if agreements could not be reached. Anciaux said it was only 6680-square feet which was not a very big parcel. The City was reserving the utility easements and was protecting the City in doing so. He did not see any other need to keep the property as City property. Koppes said she had walked down the alley and would not have known that it was an alley if she had not seen it on a plat. The City was not using it as an alley so there was no reason in her mind not to vacate it. Bovbjerg said she agreed with the previous comments made. The protections on the property were good, especially the restrictions on the east-west portion accessing to Diana Street. Those houses used the alley and it had been an accessible right-of-way for years. Keeping traffic from the commercial area from accessing onto Diana Street was a very impodant restriction that was pad of the motion for the vacation. She would vote in favor of the vacation. The whole process had been a neighborly work and she felt certain that it would continue to be so. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Chair said if a rezoning came back before the Commission, it would be a very different playing field in terms of who owned what, who was proposing what and it would be a very different conversation in a whole different context. For the Commission to speculate about alriances or the outcome was premature. It would be a very different landscape in terms of title. ZONING / DEVELOPMENT ITEMS: SUB03-00031, discussion of an application from Arlington L.C. for a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 17B, a 3.49-acre, l-lot residential subdivision located at the intersection of York Place and Broadmoor Lane. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 7 McCafferty said the memo dated August 7, 2003 was a correction. The fees for the improvement of West Branch Road for these three particular plats would go into an escrow account for when West Branch Road was upgraded. Behr said it was detailed in the legal papers and did not have to be noted separately. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve SUB03-00031, subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to Council consideration. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. SUB03-00032, discussion of an application from Arlington L.C. for a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 18B, a 1.09-acre, 2-lot residential subdivision located west of Broadmoor Lane and north of Camden Road. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Anciaux made a motion to approve SUB03-00032, subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to Council consideration. Hansen seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. SUB03-00033, discussion of an application from Arlington L.C. for a final plat of Windsor Ridge Part 19A, an .82-acre, l-lot residential subdivision located west of Broadmoor Lane and south of York Place. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve SUB03-00033, subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to Council consideration. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. OTHER: It was decided that a Code Review meeting would take place at 6:30 pm on Monday, August 11, 2003, at the Recreation Center in Meeting Room B. Chair said what concerned him about the Code review on Monday was that it seemed to him that the Commission was totally missing the opportunity of context. The Commission was looking at the Code review in such a level of minutia and micro-detail that they were missing the forest and the context of what kind of process and development that they wanted to have happen in the community. They were dealing with skinny branch details that were way out there. What had set him off was the mention of incentives as if they had always offered incentives to tighten regulations, such as if there was a carrot and a stick and a way to make it more voluntary. Chair said the kinds of things that they talked about at the Code review meetings were so in the box that they were missing the big picture. In terms of guidance, leadership and direction for the Commission, there was a huge opportunity. Freerks said she thought they should look at it in detail to see if they were missing something that might be very important. Chair said his point was that they looked at it in detail and only in detail. They didn't look at the context where they had the opportunity to set the course. Context was the whole way of being in this world, in this City and they were not doing it. Bovbjerg suggested they address Chait's issues Monday evening. Everyone should look over the Code prior to Monday evening. She said if they needed to pull back and look at the whole thing that was a good reaction which meant that they were trying to look at the whole thing. Looking at the whole city and all the ordinances and how they worked together was very important. Bovbjerg said Chait very possibly was not alone in his feeling and it should be discussed next Monday evening. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 7, 2003 Page 8 Freerks said it was hard to get from point A to B to C to D when they received B then D then received A later. It was difficult to fit all the pieces together. Hansen said he agreed that the overall look of the ordinance needed to be addressed. Then how everything fit together would make more sense to him. McCafferty said from what little she had been working on the Code, it was a very complicated process. To try to pull it all together all at once was very difficult. Howard and Miklo continually cross-referenced other sections which the Commission had not yet addressed. One way to deal with it at this point was to write a memo to Staff or make a note that they were concerned with how something related to other issues so it could be earmarked. When they got to that issue, they could cross-reference back to the original concern. McCafferty said it was a very daunting process because there was so much coordination between the different sections, and other codes came into play. Behr said from a Staff meeting perspective, they looked at A, got a consensus on what they wanted out of A, then looked at B, decided what they wanted out of B, then someone would notice that the two didn't fit. That was why it was being done that way. They would study various things then at the end they would look at it all together and if things didn't fit then they had to make revisions or change choices. It was a frustrating process so that was why it was being done in informal meetings so that at the end they could look at the whole thing. CONSIDERATION OF 7/17/03 MEETING MINUTES' Anciaux made a motion to approve the minutes as written and corrected. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. ADJOURNMENT.: Chair made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:54 pm. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7-0. Jerry Hansen, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill