Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-10 Bd Comm minutes COUNCIL MINUTES (LISA, SINGLE SIDED) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 19f~ ........... CIVIC' CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS bject to/'. prcval MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Susan Bender, Lowell Brandt, T.J. Brandt, Bill Haigh None Melody Rockwell, Sara Holecek, Traci Howard Jong Koo Lee, Ralph Neuzil, Jeff Clark, Osha Hochstedler. Bill Haigh called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Bender, L. Brandt, Corcoran and Haigh were present for roll call. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON: MOTION: Bender moved to nominate Haigh for Chairperson. L. motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. (T.J. Brandt arrived at 4:35 p.m.) Kate Corcoran, Davidson, Kevin Brandt seconded the SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: 1. EXC95-0022. Public hearing on an application submitted by the All Nations Baptist Church for a two-year extension of an October 11, 1995, Board of Adjustment decision allowing use of a temporary structure on property located in the Low Density, Single- Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 1715 Mormon Trek Boulevard. Rockwell said that on October 11, 1995, the Board approved a special exception to expand a religious institution use to allow installation of a 15-foot by 76-foot modular building attached on the northwest side of the existing All Nations Baptist Church. One of the conditions for granting the special exception was that the use of the modular building addition should not exceed a period of 24 months. The 24-month period will expire in mid-February 1998. Reverend Jong Koo Lee is requesting that the church be MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve the minutes as written. Bender seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER 10, 1997, MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: L. Brandt moved to nominate Bender as Vice Chair. Corcoran seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 2 allowed to continue using the temporary building until February 2.000 for the church to have additional time to raise funds to construct a permanent addition. Rockwell said when the Board made the decision to approve the temporary structure, it was with the express understanding that the situation would be temporary; that in two years the temporary structure would be removed. Although nothing was explicitly stated, there was an understanding that when the temporary building was moved in, it would be made compatible with the existing church, such as painting or siding it to blend with the existing building. It appears that the temporary building was moved in and attached to the church structure with no change to its exterior appearance. Rockwell said staff is not unsympathetic to the church's need for more time to raise funds to be able to construct a new addition, and views the large size of the site and the ample setback distances of the temporary building from neighboring residential properties as ameliorating factors in considering the applicant's request. However, staff does advise the Board that no more extensions should be given beyond February 2000, and that the applicant should renovate the exterior of the temporary structure at least to the extent of painting it the same color of gray as the church so that it blends in. She said there are some minor code violations that need to be corrected. Rockwell said staff recommends that the request to extend EXC95-0022 for two more years to March 1, 2000, be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1) the applicant's understanding that no more extensions for use of the temporary building will be allowed by the Board of Adjustment, 2) the modular building will be removed from the site by no later than March 1, 2000, and 3) the applicant will paint the exterior of the temporary structure a color that matches the principal church structure and will correct outstanding code violations by May 15, 1998. L Brandt asked when the code violations were cited. Rockwell said the minor violations were cited during the final inspection before an occupancy permit was issued m February or March of 1996, and they were never followed up on. 'She said they involved a hand rail, exterior lighting and there were some questions raised about a fire alarm. Bender asked if staff had heard from any neighboring property owners. Rockwell said staff had not heard anything for or against the application when the issue was hrst raised in 1995, nor during this round. Haigh opened the public hearing, Jong Koo Lee, pastor of the All Nations Baptist Church said they were originally allowed to use the temporary building because of their growing congregation and need for more space. He said they have tried to raise funds for the past two years, but they have yet to reach their goal. He said the church is an international church, and the congregation has tried to make contributions to the community. He noted that they had taken care of the minor violations of the exit lights and hand rails. He said they are willing to paint the temporary structure if they are required to do so, but they will only be using the structure for two more years and would rather save the money for the new construction. He also said that he did not think there was much difference between the colors of the church and the temporary building, and they were not originally asked to match the color. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 3 Haigh asked about the progress the church had made with their fundraising efforts. Lee said they needed financing, so their goal is to raise 25-30 percent of the total cost required to build the next building. So far, the church has raised a little more than 10 percent, so he felt the next two years would be enough time for them to raise the rest of the money needed for financing. Haigh said it was his impression when the Board first allowed the temporary building that the church did not plan to have to use the temporary building for the full two years, because they expected to achieve their fundraising goal before then. Lee said the church membership is continuing to grow, which will increase the potential for fundraising. L. Brandt said he recalled that Lee said at the meeting two years ago, he expected construction to begin soon, and today the church is still over 15-20 percent away from its fundraising goal. Lee said when the church applied for the special exception for the temporary building two years ago, they could have started construction next to the current building, but they wanted to lower the financial burden for the church members to pay off the debt on the existing church structure, and be riscally on the safe side. Haigh closed the public hearing. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve an extension of EXC95-0022, to allow the use of a 15-foot by 76-foot modular building attached on the northwest side of the existing All Nations Baptist Church for two more years to March 1, 2000, on property located in the RS-5 zone at 1715 Mormon Trek Boulevard, subject to the following conditions: 1) the applicant's understanding that no more extensions for use of the temporary building will be allowed by the Board of Adjustment, 2) the modular building will be removed from the site by no later than March 1, 2000, and 3) the applicant will paint the exterior of the temporary structure a color that matches the principal church structure and will correct outstanding code violations by May 15, 1998. Bender seconded the motion. L. Brandt said that he had some concerns, because during the brief discussion held at the meeting two years ago, the Board was given a lot of assurances that the building would only be there for two years. He said he was not sure an additional extension was warranted, and Board approval of continued extensions was not a message that he wanted to send. He said if the congregation is growing that quickly, he was surprised that the church is still in the fundraising mode and not the construction mode. He said he was content to stay with the original deadline. Corcoran said given the nature of the undertaking and with the conditions of approval, she felt there were enough protections to meet the standards for granting an extension. She said she would be in favor of the motion. She said she was also in favor of painting the temporary structure gray because the church is gray and the modular building is tan, and painting it to make it more compatible is a reasonable condition for granting the extension. She said she felt a two-year extension was appropriate, but there should be no further extensions. Bender said she was on the Board that granted the original special exception and had the same issues as L. Brandt, but she knows that fundraising for nonprofit organizations does not always go as planned. She said given the nature of the property and that no neighbors have objected either time, the church should be given the benefit of the doubt. She noted that since the property to the north has been developed for BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 4 residential uses, she thought it was important that the modular building be painted to match the church to look more like part of the original construction. T.J. Brandt said he did not think the church was a major eyesore, because of the lot size. He said he had no problem granting the extension as long as all the conditions of the motion are followed, and as long as the church realizes that this is it, there will be no more continuances for the use of the temporary structure. Haigh said he agreed with L. Brandt. He said he would not have a problem granting a one-year extension, but had a problem granting a two-year extension. He said he was surprised that the construction and fundraising had not progressed faster. Rockwell called the roll, with Bender, Corcoran and T.J. Brandt voting yes, and L. Brandt and Haigh voting no. The motion carried by a vote of 3-2. EXC97-0022. Public hearing on a request submitted by Moose Lodge #1096 to amend an October 8, 1997, Board of Adjustment decision to permit a side yard reduction, to revise the condition requiring the phased installation of parking and to correct the address for property located in the Medium Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-20) zone at 3151 Highway 6 East. Rockwell said that the Moose Lodge requests that the Board consider amending its October 8, 1997, decision concerning this item to allow them to construct 146 parking spaces all at once, to allow parking to be constructed within the 30-foot wide side yard and to correct the address for the property. Rockwell said the Board approved the decision with the condition that the parking be phased in as needed so there was not an undue amount of paving installed in a developing residential neighborhood. She said in subsequent discussions with Lodge representatives, it became clear that the types of events proposed by the club will require up to 130 parking spaces to be available when the club opens its doors for business. The Moose Lodge is requesting that they be allowed to install 146 parking spaces initially, all at one time. She said staff suggests that condition b. of the conditions of approval for EXC97-0022 be amended accordingly. Rockwell said concerning the side yard modification, the club building must be 30 feet away from the side lot line, and the parking must be at least 20 feet away from the side lot line. She said another Zoning Chapter regulation provides that there be no parking permitted in that portion of the required side yard which is contiguous, or parallel to, the principal building on a lot. She said the most stringent requirement applies, so the Lodge is not permitted to have parking within the 30-foot wide side yard unless there is a side yard modification granted as the Lodge is requesting. Rockwell said the peculiarity of the situation lies in part in the extensive setback dimensions that are proposed for the Moose Lodge property. She said that staff also looked at the practical difficulty, and noted that the area of encroachment on the east side of the building would be about four percent and on the west side would be five percent, which are modest reductions in the side yard requirement. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 5 Rockwell said in essence, the requested yard modification is minimal in nature and effect, and will not contravene the intent of the ordinance to provide a sufficient buffer between parking for a club and adjacent residential properties. She said requiring strict compliance with the Code in this case may result in insufficient parking on the site for no justifiable purpose. She said staff views the requested yard modification as appropriate and reasonable. Rockwell said correcting the address is self-evident, and staff recommends that that change be made with an amendment to the former decision. She said staff recommends that the October 8, 1997, decision concerning EXC97- 0022 be amended as follows: That condition b. of the October 8, 1997, Board of Adjustment decision for EXC97-0022 be deleted in its entirety and replaced with a new condition b. as follows: The applicant will be permitted to install up to 146 parking spaces on the site. The 146 parking spaces do not need to be phased in over time, but may all be installed during the initial construction of the required parking area. That a side yard modification be approved to allow the parking area to be located within the 30-foot wide side yard setback area that is parallel to the building, but in no case shall the parking area be located closer than 20 feet to the side lot lines. That the address for EXC97-0022, a five-acre property located south of Highway 6 and east of Heinz Road, be corrected to read as follows: 3151 Highway 6 East. Rockwell noted that the City Council approved the annexation and rezoning of the Moose Lodge property the night before, which was one of the conditions of the original special exception approval. L. Brandt asked if the timing for the screening conditions was connected to the phased- in parking. Rockwell said they were separate conditions. L. Brandt said that the Board is being asked to approve a total of 146 parking spaces instead of the 105 plus the 49 landbanked spaces, so a smaller total number of parking spaces is being requested. He said he had a problem with the way staff calculates the percentage of encroachment, because it is really 33 percent of the affected area that the Board and staff are talking about. Haigh opened the public hearing on EXC97-0022. Ralph Neuzil, attorney for the Moose Lodge said he hoped the Board would consider the staff recommendations and approve the request. Haigh closed the public hearing. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 6 MOTION: L. Brandt moved to amend the October 8, 1997 decision concerning EXC97- 0022 as follows: a) that condition b. of the October 8, 1997 decision for EXC97-0022 be deleted in its entirety and replaced with a new condition b. as follows: b. The applicant will be permitted to install up to 146 parking spaces on the site. The 146 parking spaces do not need to be phased in over time, but may all be installed during the initial construction of the required parking area. That a side yard modification be approved to allow the parking area to be located within the 30-foot wide yard setback area that is parallel to the building, but in no case shall the parking area be located closer that 20 feet to the side lot lines. 3. That the address for EXC97-0022, a five-acre property located south of Highway 6 and east of Heinz Road, be corrected to read as follows: 3151 Highway 6 East. Bender seconded the motion. L. Brandt said he would support the motion in its entirety. He said the original discussion about parking was whether or not there was a need for all the parking spaces at that particular time, and if the spaces were not necessary, the Board should not be approving more pavement than necessary in a residential area. He noted that the side yard modification will not make that much difference from what the Board originally approved. Bender said the amendments would not result in an increase in density of the area, public health or safety issues or a substantial change to the neighborhood. She noted that the adjacent properties had not been developed yet. She said the parking request is reasonable, and she would rather have adequate parking spaces than not enough, especially when the only recourse for overflow parking would be along the highway, which is not an acceptable solution. Corcoran said she would also vote in favor of the motion. She said she thought it made sense to construct all the parking at once, and noted that the Lodge is installing fewer spaces than the Board initially approved. She said the side yard modification is relatively small when one considers the overall lot size, and the address change is a procedural matter. T.J. Brandt said he would also be in favor of the amendment for the reasons already stated, and he said he would be looking forward to the addition of this club facility to the community. Haigh said the nice thing about this special exception is that the changes will not be affecting anyone nearby. Rockwell called the roll, and all five members voted yes. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 7 E_X-C97-0028. Public hearing on an application submitted by Jeff Clark, Uptown Properties, for a special exception to permit parking to be located on a separate lot at 518 S. Van Buren Street for a residential use on property located at 521 S. Johnson Street in the High Density, Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) zone. Holecek said that Board member T.J. Brandt had a conflict of interest with this item because he has business relationships with Mr. Clark, and he would like to recuse himself from voting on this item. (T.J. Brandt recused himself from the Board at 5:15 p.m.) Rockwell said Jeff Clark is proposing to convert a storage room into a bedroom in the 11-unit apartment building located at 521 S. Johnson Street,' and incorporate the additional bedroom into an existing apartment. Because there is not space on the 521 S. Johnson Street property to provide the one parking space required for the proposed additional bedroom, Mr. Clark is requesting a special exception to provide the required parking space off the alley on the rear portion of a separate property. This property is located across the alley from the 11-unit apartment house at 518 S. Van Buren Street, and contains a duplex residence, for which no on-site parking is currently legally provided. Rockwell said in this case, there is about 80 feet between the proposed parking and the apartment building, which is less than the 300 foot maximum distance allowed between off-site parking and the residence. She said there also needs to be a written agreement or affidavit that assures the retention of the parking space on the duplex property for use by the apartment tenants. If the Board approves the special exception, the affidavit should be submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the additional bedroom. Rockwell said the Board also needs to consider the desirability of the location of the off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety. She said staff has noted that there does not appear to be sufficient lighting available in the alley, but there does appear to be adequate sight distance. Rockwell said what concerns staff the most is that the amount of parking being provided is insufficient. She said at the time the apartment building was constructed, 16 parking spaces were required and a parking plan was approved for the site before parking area design standards were codified in the Zoning Chapter. She said over time, the parking area has been modified so that it is more functional; two parking spaces in front of the building are virtually unusable, are not striped and appear to be rarely, if ever, used, and there is no parking on the three spaces on the northwest corner of the lot that are marked "exit" and function as an access drive. Rockwell said currently only 11 of the 16 required parking spaces are usable, so only one space is provided for each apartment. Rockwell said four parking spaces are required for the duplex property, and none are legally provided. She said Mr. Clark is proposing four spaces on the duplex lot, and has stated that only one parking space .is needed per duplex unit, because each unit has only one bedroom. She said staff questions whether the spaces proposed for the duplex lot will be very functional, because they would be tandem spaces, and residents BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 8 in. three different dwelling units would be required to share the spaces and to move their vehicles as needed. Rockwell said it is clear to staff that the applicant cannot achieve technical compliance with regard to the number of parking spaces required to be provided for the existing and proposed residential use of the Johnson Street property even by providing parking on a separate lot as he has proposed. Staff questions the merit of increasing the density even minimally in an area that the applicant states is a location "where the parking congestion is great," and where the minimum parking requirements for the two residential properties are not met. She said staff feels it is not advisable to approve this exception. Rockwell said one other factor to consider is that the duplex use itself is nonconforming in an RM-44 zone where high density multi-family residential uses are permitted by right. The duplex lot size is also nonconforming. She said the possibility for combining properties and mitigating a nonconforming situation in the future could be jeopardized by having a required parking space for the Johnson Street property encumbering the Van Buren Street property in perpetuity. Rockwell said staff recommends the Board deny EXC97-0026, a special exception to permit one off-site parking space, which is required for an additional bedroom for property located in the RM-44 zone at 521 S. Johnson Street, to be provided on property located at 518 S. Van Buren Street. Haigh opened the public hearing. Jeff Clark, 414 East Market Street said Uptown Properties owns both lots. He said 518 S. Van Buren is a duplex with two one-bedroom apartments inside, and has no provided parking. He said he would like to put four hard-surfaced parking spaces in behind the building, and use one of the spaces for the conversion of a room at 521 S. Johnson Street. Clark said the stacked parking does not seem like that big of a problem. He noted that at 521 S. Johnson Street, the apartment he would be adding the bedroom to is now a four-bedroom, three-bathroom apartment. He said the storage room next to the apartment already exists, it has an egress window and all that needs to be done is put in a door for the conversion. He said at the time the apartment building was built, a five-bedroom apartment could have been placed in there because only one-and-a-half parking spaces was required per unit. He said that the unit can already accommodate five people by City code, and most of the time five people are living there, so he would not be adding density to the area, just parking spaces. Clark said he and his brother bought the duplex, and are trying to make it work, even though it is nonconforming. He said adding the parking is a win-win situation, because he is not adding density to the area, and he is adding more parking spaces. L. Brandt asked if Clark could add the fifth bedroom without the parking. Clark said no, but he is currently allowed five people in that unit. He said the bedroom would actually open the space up for the occupants, because then each of them would have their own bedroom. Bender asked if Clark will stack two spaces for the duplex tenants on S. Van Buren Street, and stack the other two for the S. Johnson Street apartment. Clark said he could do it that way. Haigh asked about the parking in front of the building not being marked off, and if Clark had a problem marking those spaces off. Clark said no. He said BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 9 the reason they are left open is for visitor parking, tenant accessibility and maintenance parking spots, but he had no problem marking them off if the Board wanted him to. Haigh closed the public hearing. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve EXC97-0026, a special exception to permit one off-site parking space, which is required for an additional bedroom for property located in the RM-44 zone at 521 S. Johnson Street, to be provided on property located at 518 S. Van Buren Street. L. Brandt seconded the motion. Holecek noted that part of the staff report recommended that a written agreement or affidavit that assures the retention of one parking space on the other property for the use at the Johnson Street address be submitted by the applicant for approval by the City Attorney's office. L. Brandt said he had some real problems with this item. He noted that the parking situation on S. Johnson Street is appalling, and being in the alley was an eye-opener. He said that this area of town was developed when there were not many regulations regarding property and density. He said he appreciated Mr. Clark's comments, but he was afraid that approving this special exception would lead to more nonconformance. He thought it would be great to add more parking without adding a bedroom, and he could not in good conscience vote to approve anything that would look like it is increasing that problem. Bender said she disagreed. She agreed that the area and neighborhood is more densely inhabited and there are more cars on the street than they would like, but that is the reality of the situation. She said it seemed that the applicant is trying to make an effort to take care of some of that. She said she had a question about how the tenants in separate properties are going to make the tandem parking situation work, but given that they currently have no parking spaces, it would be an improvement. She said that the Board is not looking at increasing density, and the applicant is looking for a way to make the apartment more livable for the current number of tenants and providing some off-street parking for the duplex. She said that the Board would have to put a stipulation on the special exception that would call for the written agreement to be recorded. She said it is a messy situation and a difficult neighborhood, and she did not think that this would make the situation worse and it could make it better. Haigh said he thought it was a messy situation, but this item would not increase density in the area and will minimally improve the parking situation. He said he was also concerned about the written agreement being on record. Holecek explained how the agreement would be recorded between the City and both properties. Corcoran said that she respected L. Brandt's concerns about the congested area, but the density of the area will not be increased. She said she is prepared to vote in favor of the special exception. MOTION: Corcoran moved to amend the original motion to include a condition that the applicant submit a shared perpetual parking agreement to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the additional bedroom. Bender seconded the motion. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 10 L~ Brandt asked Rockwell if the addition of another bedroom changed the limit on the number of inhabitants that can legally occupy the building. Rockwell said that the initial parking requirements were 1.5 spaces for every apartment over 900 square feet in size, so there could have been any number of bedrooms. She said they are still allowed to have a family, which is two unrelated people plus three roomers in each unit, so five people are allowed per apartment and that has not changed. L. Brandt asked how that is monitored. Rockwell said it is monitored through City rental inspections. The amendment carried by a vote of 4-0-1, with T. J. Brandt abstaining. Rockwell called the roll with Bender, Corcoran and Haigh voting yes, L. Brandt voting no and T.J. Brandt abstaining. The motion as amended carried by a vote of 3-1-1. EXC97-0027. Public hearing on an application submitted by Jeff Clark, on behalf of property owners James Clark and Loretta Clark, for a special exception to permit parking to be located on a separate lot at 922 E. Washington Street for a residential use on property located at 924 E. Washington Street in the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-20) zone and the Low Density, Multi-Family Residential (RM-1 2) zone. Holecek said that T.J. Brandt would remain recused for this item for the same conflict of interest reasons as the prior application. Rockwell said Jeff Clark is proposing to construct four bedrooms in the lower level of an existing eight-unit apartment building located at 924 E. Washington Street. She said the bedrooms would be connected to three apartments above to create an inverted townhouse arrangement. Because there is not room on the 924 E. Washington Street property to provide the four off-street parking spaces that would be required for four additional bedrooms, Mr. Clark is requesting a special exception to provide the four spaces on a separate lot, the adjacent property to the east, 922 E. Washington Street. This property contains a rooming house with 13 rooming units, and is located in the RNC-20 zone. She said the Board may grant a special exception for off-street parking to be located on a separate lot when an increase in the number of spaces is required by a conversion or an enlargement of a use. She said the distance between the parking area and the building to be accessed cannot be more than 300 feet, and in this case the distance is about 55 feet. Rockwell said a written agreement or affidavit should be submitted by the applicant assuring the retention of the four parking spaces in perpetuity on the rooming house property. In addition there is an access drive shared by properties on 922 E. Washington, 924 E. Washington (which are the two properties in question) and 923 Iowa Avenue. The only access to the parking on the rear of the Iowa Avenue property is via the shared drive off Washington Street. She said staff recommends that the applicant submit a perpetual, shared access easement agreement that is entered into by the owners of all three properties and makes the City a party to the agreement. This agreement should be reviewed. and approved by the City Attorney's Office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the four additional bedrooms. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 11 Rockwell said the Board needs to consider the desirability of the location of the off- street parking on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety and any detrimental effects such off-street parking may have on an adjacent property. Rockwell said there needs to be a direct, well-lighted pedestrian connection between the parking area and the eight-plex, so staff is suggesting a condition requiring security lighting for the 92.2 E. Washington Street parking area. Rockwell said when the existing eight-plex structure and the accessory parking area were constructed in 1980, 12_ parking spaces were required, and 12 parking spaces have been provided. The rooming house has 13 units, and there are eight existing spaces that would count as meeting the legal, non-conforming "grandfathered" parking requirement for the rooming house. She said the applicant is proposing to provide those eight spaces and seven additional spaces, including four new garages, on a newly paved parking area on the rooming house property. Four of those spaces could count toward meeting the requirement for the four additional bedrooms in the eight-plex. Rockwell said the applicant would be providing three more spaces than technically required. Because'there are additional spaces available, staff suggests that the most northeasterly space on the 922 E. Washington Street property be tapered and converted into a parking island to assure a sufficiently wide access drive for the parking on the property to the north at 932 Iowa Avenue. She said it would create a very constricted situation to have parking on both sides of a ten foot aisle that slopes to the north. She said a more gradual tapering of the drive would provide a more functional parking access design. Bender asked what parking space number Rockwell was recommending to taper. Rockwell said space number seven. Corcoran asked what "tapered" meant. Rockwell said it would be angled-off to allow more aisle space, and it would remove that parking space from legal use. Rockwell said the advantage of granting this special exception would be the improvement of parking for the two properties, because the parking lot at 922 E. Washington would be hard-surfaced and additional parking would be provided. She said with the appropriate conditions, the proposed parking plan is actually likely to improve the character of the neighborhood. She noted that most of the surrounding properties have multi-family residential uses, but because the property immediately west of the rooming house property has a single-family residential use, evergreen screening is required by Code to be planted and maintained between the proposed parking area and the family residence on the west. She said the applicant will also need to be mindful of drainage and erosion control considerations and Code requirements for paving the. parking area. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC97-0027, a special exception to permit four off-site parking spaces, which are required for four additional bedrooms within an eight- plex for property located in the RNC-20/RM-12 zone at 924 E. Washington Street, to be provided on property located at 922 E. Washington Street, be approved, subject to: 1) a written agreement or affidavit between the owners of the 922 E. Washington Street and 924 E. Washington Street properties to assure the retention of the four parking spaces in perpetuity on the 922 E. Washington Street property for use by the tenants residing at 924 E. Washington Street, being submitted by the applicant BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 12 for review and approval by the City Attorney's office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the four additional bedrooms at 924 E. Washington Street; 2) a perpetual, shared access easement agreement for the drive that is used for vehicular access to the parking areas on three properties; with said agreement being entered into by the owners of the 922 E. Washington Street, 924 E. Washington Street and 932 Iowa Avenue properties and with the City of Iowa City as a party to the agreement, being submitted by the applicant for review and approval by the City Attorney's office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the four additional bedrooms at 924 E. Washington Street; 3) the applicant installing downcast, security lighting for the newly-paved parking area at 922 E. Washington Street; 4) the applicant tapering the most northeasterly parking space shown on the site plan for the 922 E. Washington Street property and converting it into a parking area island to assure a sufficiently wide access drive for the parking on the property to the north at 932 Iowa Avenue, and 5) the applicant planting and maintaining evergreen screening of the parking area on the 922 E. Washington Street property to provide a softening buffer between the garages/parked vehicles and the single-family residential use to the west. At a minimum, the evergreen screening should be installed immediately south of the four proposed garages and extend continuously from the west lot line east to the existing garage on the property, and west of and along the 22-foot length of the most westerly proposed garage. Rockwell said it may be felt that the evergreen screening between the two garages is not needed because there is adequate screening by the structure on the property to the west. She suggested that if the Board chooses to delete that condition, they replace it with a condition that would require the evergreen screening to be installed if the accessory structure on the adjoining property was ever removed or destroyed. Brandt asked if there was a specific number of footcandles recommended for the security lighting so the lighting would not be intrusive to neighbors. Rockwell said that is already covered in the City Code. Bender said the last time the Board got specific w~th the number of footcandles was when a large number of lights were being proposed for a church parking lot. Haigh opened the public hearing. Jeff Clark, 414 E. Market Street said the current parking lot at 922 E. Washington Street is gravel and he would be adding six additional spaces to the area. He said he had no problem putting in the downcast lighting and screening. Corcoran asked if Uptown Properties owns all of the properties. Clark said he is part-owner of the rooming house and his parents own the apartment next door and John Roffman owns the Iowa Avenue property. L. Brandt noted that when he visited the proposed parking area, there were two parked cars without license plates that had snow on them and looked like they were being stored. Clark said they should be checked on. Haigh asked if Clark had trouble tapering the one parking spot. Clark said he would like to keep the spot, but he will taper it if necessary. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 13 Osha Gray Davidson, 14 S. Governor Street said he was concerned from a safety standpoint about the increased number of cars coming in and out of a crowded parking area. He said he has a three-year-old child, and has spoken to other neighbors with children, and they are all concerned with how fast people drive in and out of the parking area. He said this special exception would increase density in the area and because of that would not be decreasing the parking density or congestion on the street. He said he was against the special exception, because he was concerned about the increase in pedestrian danger. He asked that the Board consider adding speed bumps to the driveway entrances to slow cars down more if they approve the special exception. Haigh closed the public hearing. MOTION: Bender moved to approve EXC97-0027, a special exception to permit four off-site parking spaces, which are required for four additional bedrooms within an eight- plex for property located in the RNC-20/RM-12 zone at 924 E. Washington Street, to be provided on property located at 922 E. Washington Street, subject to the following conditions: a written agreement or affidavit between the owners of the 922 E. Washington Street and 924 E. Washington Street properties to assure the retention of the four parking spaces in perpetuity on the 922 E. Washington Street property for use by the tenants residing at 924 E. Washington Street, being submitted by the applicant for review and approval by the City Attorney's office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the four additional bedrooms at 924 E. Washington Street; bo a perpetual, shared access easement agreement for the drive that is used for vehicular access to the parking areas on three properties; with said agreement being entered into by the owners of the 92.2 E. Washington Street, 924 E. Washington Street and 932 Iowa Avenue properties and with the City of Iowa City as a party to the agreement, being submitted by the applicant for review and approval by the City Attorney's office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the four additional bedrooms at 924 E. Washington Street; c. the applicant installing downcast, security lighting for the newly-paved parking area at 922 E. Washington Street; the applicant tapering the most northeasterly parking space shown on the site plan for the 922 E. Washington Street property and converting it into a parking area island to assure a sufficiently wide access drive for the parking on the property to the north at 932 Iowa Avenue, and the applicant planting and maintaining evergreen screening of the parking area on the 922 E. Washington Street property to provide a softening buffer between the garages/parked vehicles and the single-family residential use to the west. At a minimum, the evergreen screening should be installed immediately south of the four proposed garages and extend continuously from the west lot line east to the existing garage on the property, and west of and along the 22-foot length of the most westerly proposed garage. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 14 Corcoran seconded the motion. L. Brandt noted that this special exception would actually increase the density for the building, and asked if that was allowed for the zoning area. Rockwell said the applicant could argue that up to five people are allowed to live in each apartment, and adding the extra bedroom creates a more livable and rentable space. Bender noted that the RM-12 and RNC-20 zones were intended for medium to high density residential development, and redevelopment for multi-family use is encouraged in those zones. Brandt said that he would support the motion. He said the intent of the zoning for these properties accommodates the proposal, and technically it meets the concerns that the Board has to have with regard to parking situations. Haigh said it was nice to see the increase in the parking for the two properties, and there would be nothing added onto the actual building. He said he appreciated the neighbors' concerns with the increase in traffic, but the increase would be minimal. He said he liked increasing the width of the connecting drive to the Iowa Avenue property. He felt it would make the parking lot more compatible and functional for all three properties. He said he would support the motion. Corcoran said she would support the motion, and while she shares Mr. Davidsoh's concerns with health and safety, she does feel this application would improve the parking situation in that area by adding off-street spaces. She said the tapering condition improves the tricky area for the drive access to the Iowa Avenue property. She said she felt the standards have been met. Bender said she agreed, but she was concerned about cars speeding in and out of the driveway. She said maybe the applicants could make the tenants aware that young children are in the area, but she did not think that speed bumps or other forms of speed control were under the Board's purview. She said she felt the application had met the standards for granting a special exception, and it will improve the parking situation. She said she felt strongly that the conditions for security lighting and evergreen screening around the parking area should be met. Rockwell called the roll, with L. Brandt, Bender, Corcoran and Haigh voting yes, and T.J. Brandt abstaining. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0-1. EXC97-0028. Public hearing on an application submitted by Frantz Construction Co., on behalf of property owner East Hill Development, Ltd., for a special exception to permit a front yard modification for property located in the Medium Density, Single- Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 2300 Catskill Court. Holecek said that T.J. Brandt would remain recused for this special exception because he is currently under a subcontract with Frantz Construction Co. Rockwell said the applicant is requesting a front yard modification to allow a newly- constructed duplex to remain in its current location on the lot. Due to an error made BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 15 when the contractor applied for the building permit (no street was shown on the plans), it was assumed that there could be five-foot setbacks from each side lot line for the residence. She said subsequent City inspections did not catch that the building on this corner lot was not 20 feet off the right-of-way as it should be. Only after the building was built, did the City inspectors realize that it was too close to the Catskill Court right-of-way. She said the requested exception would allow the building to remain in its current location despite its encroachment. Rockwell said the subject property is a corner lot with street frontage along its west and north sides. The newly constructed building meets the front yard requirements along the west side, but is set back only 13 feet from the north property line rather than the required 20 feet. She said the only thing that appears to be unique about the lot is the location of a drainage swale along the south property line, which is designed to accommodate the overland flow of water from an adjacent storm water detention facility in times of heavy rains or if storm sewer intakes ever become plugged. In trying to achieve a greater separation from the drainage swale on the south, the applicant inadvertently ignored setback requirements along Catskill Court to the north, an error that was not discovered until after the building was constructed. Rockwell said with regard to the practical difficulty, the encroachment represents a 7.3 percent encroachment into the front yard which staff feels is not substantial. She said the structure on the lot sits well behind the required sight triangle for this intersection. She said there may be a slightly narrowed perception of openness at the entrance to the residential subdivision, but in staff's opinion this will have minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. She said the alternative would be to move the building seven feet to the south. However, this would result in the building encroaching into the storm sewer and drainage easement by 1.5 feet, and the projection at one end of the building would likely have to be removed from the building in order for it to comply. Rockwell said staff feels justice would be served by granting the special exception, which appears to be the result of an honest mistake made by the applicant in the submittal of incomplete plans to the City staff for review. She said the amount of encroachment and the effects on the surrounding neighborhood are minimal, and the cost of relocating the structure in compliance with the setback requirements does not appear to be justified given the circumstances of the case. Rockwell said staff recommends that the Board approve EXC97-0028, a request for a special exception to modify the front yard requirements to allow a seven foot encroachment into the front yard along Catskill Court at the north end of the property for a length of 10 feet, and to allow a five foot encroachment for a length of 31 feet to allow an existing building to remain as built in its current location on property located within the Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 2300 Catskill Court. Rockwell said staff member Scott Kugler had received a call from a neighbor, Dave Hossey, who was concerned about drainage issues. Hossey was pleased that the error in this case was in favor of allowing more space for the drainage swale. Corcoran asked where the drainage swale was. Rockwell said it was south of the building. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY !4, 1998 PAGE ! 6 Haigh noted that this also seemed to be an error on the part of the City, and asked if anything was being done to make sure that this type of situation did not happen again. Holecek said that human error was a factor with one event compounding another. She noted that the plans submitted were not complete, and errors were made in the field in that it was not caught during subsequent inspections. She said people involved with field inspections have been advised to be more aware of corner lot setback requirements in the future. Haigh noted that he thought there had been numerous cases where a corner lot had been a problem, so he thought the property being on a corner lot should automatically ring a bell on the part of City staff. Rockwell noted that because of this case,. there will be more staff vigilance when looking at corner lots in the future both when the building permit is applied for and during subsequent field inspections. Haigh opened the public hearing. Kevin Hochstedler, 325 3'd Street, said a grave mistake was committed on their part in the planning and layout of the building on this lot, and it was not noticed by city inspectors, so they went ahead and built the building. He said that he and Frantz Construction strive to build quality homes for their customers. He said the current location of the residence helps with the detention area issue. He said they would not make this type of mistake again. Haigh closed the public hearing. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve EXC97-0028, a special exception to modify the front yard requirements to allow a seven-foot encroachment into the front yard along Catskill Court at the north end of the property for a length of 10 feet, and to allow a five foot encroachment for a length of 31 feet to allow an existing residence to remain in its current location on property located in the Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) zone at 2300 Catskill Court. L. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said he would support the motion. He said the basic standards were spelled out well by staff. He said while it is unfortunate that the mistakes were made. ~! sounds like there were partial benefits made in terms of the building location. He said ,t did not appear that the building would be a substantial problem to the neighborhood. Corcoran said she would support the motion. She said she appreciated the applicant's frankness about the error. She said having viewed the site she felt the standards to grant the special exception are met. She said the encroachment was minimal and would not pose safety or health issues. Bender said the encroachment is a relatively small percentage of the required front yard, and it would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. She said the lot did not appear much different than other corner lots she had seen. She said the mistakes were human error and the applicant should not be penalized. She said she would support the motion. Haigh agreed, saying that he thought there was only a minor decrease in overall vision going into the subdivision. He said he hoped that there would be some procedure so that this does not happen again. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY !4, 1998 PAGE 17 Rockwell called the roll, with L. Brandt, Bender, Corcoran and Haigh voting yes and T.J. Brandt abstaining. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0-1. OTHER: Rockwell passed out updated versions of the Zoning Chapter, and said she will pass along updated versions each January, but would do so more often upon request. She also passed out the updated City financial plan. All members said they would be able to attend the February meeting. Rockwell said if there are issues or questions that members would like to discuss among themselves at the end of a short agenda meeting to let her know. L. Brandt said that the Board meeting notice signs have not been up on certain sites or located on the site such that the public can see them. He said he was not sure whether they were not appropriately secured or not posted for long enough. Rockwell asked members to consider meeting at a different, later time to make the hearing more accessible to members of the public. She said it has been difficult to get potential Board members, or for some applicants and members of the public to attend the 4:30 pm meetings, because they could not leave work early. Bender asked how the agenda items were prioritized on the agenda, and asked if the agenda order could be changed to accommodate people who could not make the start of the meeting. Corcoran noted that the members did that at a meeting last spring to accommodate an applicant who had two items to present. Rockwell said some people cannot take the time off from work month after month to be a Board member. L. Brandt said that 4:30 p.m. is not a convenient time for many members of the public to attend the meeting, and he would support meeting later to make the meeting more accessible to the public. He said that the Ames, Iowa Board meeting started at 7 p.m. Rockwell suggested starting at 5:30 p.m. Holecek said the agenda order can be changed on the floor, but the Board needs to be sensitive to the public. She said if a lot of people are attending the meeting for the last agenda item, the Board could move that item up to accommodate those people. Likewise, the Board needs to consider a person who has seen an agenda and thinks the item they wish to speak on will be decided later in the meeting. If they do not show up right at the start of the meeting, and if their item is shifted, they could miss their opportunity to speak. Haigh noted that the applicant who is originally first on the agenda and whose item gets shifted around may not want to sit through the rest of the meeting to take their turn. Rockwell suggested that this item be decided by the Board at a later date. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Corcoran moved to adjourn the meeting. Bender seconded the motion. The motion was carried by a vote of 5-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. William Haigh, Board Chairperson BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 14, 1998 PAGE 18 Melody Rockwell, Board Secretary Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. 131:)d adn'~n'tn', n .,\bo - 1 - 1 4.doc IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1997 - 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS SIGN IN SHEET Name Z & Address ~ ~-~' - 5 MINUTES HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION DECEMBER 18, 1997 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Cilek, Rick House, Sandy Kuhlmann, David Purdy, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch MEMBERS ABSENT: Denita Gadson, Jayne Moraski STAFF PRESENT: Maurice Head, Steve Long, Steve Nasby, Traci Howard CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Schmuch called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. (Cilek arrived at 6:33 p.m.) CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 20, 1997, MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Purdy moved to approve the November 20, 1997, meeting minutes as submitted. House seconded the motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 7-0. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REVIEW DRAFT OF FY99 APPLICATION PACKETS: Long noted the revised timeline. Stewart said he would be gone the first and probably the second week of March, but he could get his ranking sheets done before he left. Schmuch said she thought it was important to have members who have gone through the previous allocation process to be present at the meetings to help our newer members. Long told Stewart to call him when he knew the exact dates of his travel plans. Head said the meeting on the March 12th is the most critical because that is when the allocations and justifications are done. Long showed members the application packets. Nasby said staff did not have the exact CDBG and HOME allocation figures, but had a good idea of how much money was going to be available. Schmuch asked if staff would hold an informational workshop for applicants. Nasby said yes. Long noted the following changes to the non-housing application: page 3 - added another income category of over 100 percent median income for tracking purposes; page 4, question 14 - any project over $300,000 required an audit; page 14, question 15 - added the anticipated funding or award dates; and on the back page - clarifying the application criteria. Schmuch noted that the ranking sheet now says, "principal and interest". Kuhlmann asked about requesting full budgets from applicants. Long said staff is planning to use information from the United Way book. Schmuch asked how they would get budget information from applicants who were not affiliated with the United Way. Long said staff Housing & Community Development Commission December 18, 1997 Page 2 would ask for more details if necessary. Stewart said something could be stated in the application saying that the Commission may ask for a full agency budget, and the applicant should be prepared to provide the information. Long explained the United Way book and its contents. Nasby noted the following changes on the Housing application: bottom of page 1 - a column for years was added to help with loan terms, and "other" was put on the last line to include all possible projects; in the table on page 2 - the fiscal year dates for the last three years were inserted; page 2, question 8 - was modified to ask how the project will benefit a targeted group and describe their goal for the project; page 3, question 9 - was changed to ask the total number of units and the number of units assisted with public funds; page 3, question 10 - requested that applicants use a separate page to list a detailed budget; page 3, question 11 - added a description for the table and added "number of units" and "the total cost per unit" to the table to give more information; bottom of page 3 - now include a formatted proforma to get uniform information from all applicants so it could be easily compared; on page 4, question 12 - highlighted the breakdown between local and state HOME match requirements; page 4, question 13 - added a question about "maintaining long-term permanent affordability" which will tell the Commission how long the project will be affordable and show "how the project will provide rent rates lower than the existing market"; page 4, question 14 - modified the question to ask for the inclusion of other project factors, such as rezoning, construction schedule or application for other funding; page 5, question 1 5 - ask for "other evidence of financial commitment including the terms"; page 5, question 16 - added a request to include information of market studies or other supporting documentation; page 5, question 18 - change to note that the new City Comprehensive plan is promoting diverse housing developments. Nasby said the proforma sheet contains pertinent financial information and adds some information the Commission has not asked for in the past, like equity investment and cash return on investment. On the back of the proforma sheet, the project's tax information is also being requested. Nasby said he added line numbers, and created an instruction page for the applicants to using the proforma. Stewart said one form he has seen has the debt service below the operating income, where usually the interest is a part of the operating expense, and interest is included in net operating income. Nasby said staff had gotten the form from the National Development Council and has the proforma set up on a computer, and will be willing to help applicants with various scenarios and the overall process. Long said that staff updated the Subrecipient Guide to reflect the application changes. Nasby noted that HUD is interested in finding out how much private money and in-kind resources are going into these projects, and they have set a national goal of 3-1, even though that is not a program requirement. Purdy asked if staff would be helping the agencies break down the outcome data. He suggested breaking that into two questions; 'What will be your outcome data?" and "How will this indicate how the project objectives will be met?" He said that most of last year's projects skipped over the outcome data section. Renquist suggested asking them to tell what key elements would be for outcome because sometimes it is difficult to predict outcome. Long said they would put something together for that. Housing & Community Development Commission December 18, 1997 Page 3 PRACTICE SESSION FOR FY99 ALLOCATION AND RANKING PROCESS: Members went over the housing application first. Stewart noted that it was difficult to do some of the rankings without being able to ask questions of the applicant. Cilek asked how long each applicant had to speak and answer Commission questions. Stewart said they would have five minutes to present and 10 minutes to answer questions. Long said they could also answer questions at the first meeting in March. Cilek asked if since this applicant indicated that they are at 100 percent low income they would get the highest points. Long said yes. Cilek asked if the applicants see the ranking sheet. Nasby said yes; they know what the ranking criteria are at the time of application. Long said staff is also offering the application on computer disk this year. He told Commission members to think about how the ranking sheet fits with the application. Stewart said staff would tell Commission members an applicant's past .project history, and many of the questions he had could be answered during the presentation and question period. Cilek said he would like to get more of a feel for the applicant and why the project is important to them. Schmuch said the presentation answers most of those questions, and the ranking sheets have been used more as guidelines in the past. Stewart explained the allocation process to the new members. Head asked if members needed more information in the application. Schmuch said no. Head asked members if they wanted to approve projects using more of the Commission's allocated money or do they want projects to use more private funds, and the Commission's money fills the gap. Cilek said he considered whether or not the project needs to exist in Iowa City, not where the money is coming from. Head said maybe the Commission could still fill the need, but not use as much of their money to do it. He noted that more overall projects can be funded that way. Nasby said that question is to make sure that the project has leveraged the maximum possible private funds. Kuhlmann asked if there was a certain guideline that the Commission should be considering. Head said HUD is suggested a 3-1 private-public funds leveraging ratio. Long noted that it is still an investment in the community. Head said that if members notice more public funds invested in a project than private funds, they should look at it closer. Cilek said maybe the projects should be ranked on maximizing private funds. Schmuch said she thought they got to that indirectly under feasibility with the necessity of the level of public subsidy. Cilek said he was not sure if he wanted to know how much money the applicant would make off the project if he felt the project was worthwhile to fund. Head said they feel that if the applicant can still provide the project benefits to the community at a lower cost, the Commission could use the remaining money for other needy projects in the community, and be as efficient as possible. House said it is also a way to compare competing, similar projects. Housing & Community Development Commission December 18, 1997 Page 4 MONITORING REPORTS: Cilek said he would report on the Habitat for Humanity Land Acquisition at the January meeting. Renquist said she had not been able to get a hold of the people from MECCA, so her report would be postponed until the January meeting. Moraski was absent, so the Housing Authority-TBRA was also postponed to the January meeting. Crisis Center - Acquisition and Rehab - Kuhlmann Kuhlmann passed out a page outlining her discussion with Ellen McCabe and her findings with the project. She said they really don't want to sell the old building yet because they are not ready to move in, they don't want to miss a day of service and they are really in no hurry. She said they need some tenants to lease their space, but Hills Bank has agreed to renew their loan if they don't sell the building in time. In their United Way hearing, Kuhlmann said they only had $34,000 left to raise. Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship - Schmuch Schmuch said she spoke with Mary Ann Dennis, and the money is going toward 12 units of affordable rental housing. She said that the Commission allocated $25,000 in CDBG and $171,490 of Iowa City HOME funds. GICHF received over $256,902 in State HOME funds, and $60,000 from the Federal HOME loan bank affordable housing program and almost a half million dollars in private mortgage from First National Bank. She said they purchased the rental properties in six different school neighborhoods. She said all tenants fit into the low income category. Ten tenants are Section 8 and a few are housed through Youth Homes rental subsidies. All the tenants pay about 30% of their total income, ranging from $0 to $480, and are working, except for the Youth Homes kids. Dennis said overall, 37 people are being housed and 25 are children. Stewart asked the leveraging for that project. Head said about 1-1. City of Iowa City - Housing Rehab - Schmuch She said Dave Powers gave her some information. Twenty families have been served at this point with the money allocated. OLD BUSINESS: Community Housing Forum Head said the Community Housing Forum report would be sent out the first week of January, and he would give a formal presentation at the January meeting. He said participants of the Forum would present the report to the City Council on Jan. 26. Housing Market Analysis Update Head said the consultant for the Housing Market Analysis has surveyed about 5,000 properties, and are wrapping things up. He thought they would have a report in the end of December or first of January. Stewart asked how much money had been spent on the analysis so far. Head said around $20,000+. Cilek asked if the CDBG/HOME fund applications were publicized. Long said an announcement was placed in the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce newsletter, and press releases were given to local radio, newspapers and cable TV stations. Nasby said they get good word-of-mouth from local businesses and agencies. Housing & Community Development Commission December 18, 1997 Page 5 Stewart said that Nasby, Long, Gadson and himself attended the graduation ceremony for the First Step program. He said there was a good diversity of students in the program. Nasby said they had some good business ideas in the group. Heartland Candleworks Audit Head said the accountants are still working on the Heartland Candleworks balance sheet audit. He said the accountants said they would try to finish the audit by the end of December the last time he talked to them, but they need to have all the information and documents together before they can complete it. If they are not done by December, they will not be able to complete the audit until April or May due to their busy tax season. He said that Heartland will not get the equipment until the audit is completed and the Commission is still holding on to the allocated money. Long noted that some costs have increased during the audit. Head said that every document in the audit has to be third party verified, so that takes longer to pull everything together. He said when the balance sheet audit is done, the Commission can decide if they want to see a full audit or if they want to release the allocated funds. Long passed out brochures regarding Housing Assistance programs from Maggie Grosvenor. On page 3, criteria for family income limits and federal preferences are listed. She will be attending HCDC meetings on a regular basis after allocations are complete. NEW BUSINESS: Head announced that Commission members are invited to meet with the City Council on Jan. 5 if they have questions or concerns about the upcoming budget, but members are not required to attend. Purdy announced that Elderly Services would be submitting an application for the allocation cycle, so he would be resigning from the Commission. Long said the position requires a 30-day notice starting Jan. 13. Head said he and staff would discuss Purdy's options with him regarding the Commission. Purdy said he would meet and discuss those with staff. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Stewart moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:12 p.m. Kuhlmann seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. I~l~dcdbg\min\hcdc 12-18.doc MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 1998 - 6:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Daniel Cilek, Denira Gadson, Rick House, Sandy Kuhlmann, Jayne Moraski, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch, Bill Stewart STAFF PRESENT: Maurice Head, Steve Long, Traci Howard CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: Schmuch called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF THE DECEMBER !$. 1997. MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Gadson moved to approve the December 18, 1997, meeting minutes as submitted. Moraski seconded the motion. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Long said staff has had a request to play the fire safety video that the Commission helped to fund. He said it is 13 minutes long, and can be watched after a meeting. (Stewart arrived at 6:33 p.m.) IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY UPDATE: Grosvenor passed out some newsletters and information about the Housing Authority. She said that she attended a partnership conference in Kansas City sponsored by the University of Missouri-Kansas City. She said they received a HUD grant for a community outreach partnership center to provide examples of partnerships that are happening across the country. She detailed three partnership programs that were presented at the conference. The first was from the University of Missouri-St. Louis that did a program called "Neighbor to Neighbor" where they partnered with a public housing development tenant organization and part of the city to do a rehab project in that neighborhood. The second was the University of Nebraska-Omaha that partnered with the U.S. Attorney's office to get rid of the drug houses in the community. The third was the University of Missouri-Kansas City, who were the original grant recipients, who partnered with community-based and church- based organizations to turn around different neighborhoods. She said the common theme was trust, perseverance and finding what the community needs. Schmuch asked if anyone knew what parts of the University of Iowa would work on this type of project. Grosvenor said that there were five different departments working on the project at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and they said that pooling the funding for the different departments and organizations was a major obstacle to overcome because it was difficult to obtain requisitions divided for the different departments. Grosvenor said that the Housing Authority has 96 percent occupancy in Section 8 certificates and vouchers, and 97 percent occupancy in Public Housing (which means they have three vacant units that will be leased up by February 1). She praised the Public Housing manager for her work. She said the Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 2 funding is really helping the Authority because of the HUD restrictions on vouchers. She said they also attached the TBRA to Family Self-Sufficiency participation and offered it to 100 applicants on the waiting list. Eleven contracts were secured from this. Four vouchers have been issued with TBRA funding. (House arrived at 6:42 p.m.) Grosvenor said they are proceeding along well with the Tenant To Ownership (TOP) program for public housing. She said there were nine applicants that passed preliminary approval, and their acceptance into the program will be dependent on financing. All the appraisals will be done by Jan. 16, and HUD is requiring them to sell the homes at the appraised value. Then they can develop the purchase agreements. Stewart asked if all nine properties were occupied by the people who are applying for the program. Grosvenor said yes. Stewart asked who was doing the appraisals. Moraski said Downs and Associates. Stewart asked who did the purchase agreements. Grosvenor said Mary Lee Dixon drafts the document. Grosvenor said that there are five financial institutions willing to participate, and nine applicants. She asked the Commission if the applicants should be given the option of which institution they wanted to use. Stewart said they should be able to go where they can get the best deal. Grosvenor said all the deals are the same because the way the Housing Authority secured them. Stewart said the original idea was that the tenant was going to decide where they wanted to go, and things could average out. Cilek asked why all the banks agreed to participate together. Grosvenor said the Housing Authority sent a letter to all the area financial institutions asking them to participate, and five accepted. She said the deal is a 10-year balloon with a fixed rate of 7.5 percent. Stewart said that is below market financing for an in-house type of loan. Cilek said he would like to give the tenants the option to go to any lender they wanted to. Grosvenor said they are also trying to be fair to the financial institutions because if all nine families chose one institution, it would be up to that institution to decide how much they wanted to help. She noted that most participating institutions have said they will provide a limited amount of funding, so not all nine applicants would be able to use the same institution. In response to a question, Grosvenor said there would be no negotiation on the selling prices. Grosvenor said that one thing that she would like the Commission to think about is federal and local preferences because the Iowa City Housing Authority is reviewing their administrative plan this spring. She said the three federal preferences are living in substandard housing, paying more than 50 percent of income toward rent and being voluntarily displaced, but the federal government left it up to each Housing Authority to prioritize those preferences. She said Iowa City does not prioritize one over the other. She said that HUD recently told them that federal preferences are no longer required, and some Housing Authorities across the nation have created their own local preferences. She said she thought federal preferences could be misused and abused, and situations could be created so people can 'be put on the list. She said that Iowa City could have a preference for homeless people, and that certification or verification would only be taken from an area agency, like the Emergency Housing Project. She said there could be a working preference, so the recipients would have to be working to get any funding. She noted that this would not exclude people on social security, SSl or disability. Moraski said that she had mixed feelings about local preferences because they can also be manipulated. Grosvenor said that she would not recommend a complex local preference. MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 3 She said another local preference she heard about was Iowa City residents would get precedence over applicants from surrounding communities. Cilek asked who determines who has priority for the housing funds if the preferences are eliminated. Grosvenor said the funds would be distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis, with elderly persons, disabled persons and families still being priority due to HUD mandates. She said that any local preferences would have to be part of the administrative plan, so the Housing Authority will have some procedures to go through before anything particular can be adopted. Stewart said he liked simple, local preferences. Schmuch asked how many of the "homeless" people that receive the current preferences actually have no place to go or are doubled up. Grosvenor said that HUD defines homeless as "no permanent residence," so if a person is in transitional housing, living with family or living under a bridge they are all considered the same, and there is no way to break down that statistic. Grosvenor asked that the Commission give some thought to this area, and some thought to the issue of family composition. She said the current description of a family excludes single-sex relationships, unmarried persons and a parent living with another person who did not father or mother their children. She said that she would bring some samples of how other Housing Authorities have defined families. Cilek asked if the City had a definitign of a family. Schmuch asked what Grosvenor's time frame was for these issues. Grosvenor said they are hoping to have the administrative plan updated by spring, and these two issues need to be updated for that. Cilek asked Grosvenor if she needed the Commisson's help defining a family, or if she could come up with something and present it to them. Grosvenor said she could create something for the Commission to look at. Renquist asked if there was a specific length of time that a same-sex relationship or unmarried persons would have to be together to qualify. Grosvenor said that length of relationship could be a criteria, or the couple would have to provide substantial proof of relationship, such as a joint checking account, property owned together, registered domestic partners, etc. Cilek said he thought the Commission should be consistent with how the City defines a family. Gadson said in the manual for Housing Rehab programs the family is defined as, "Usually two or more persons who constitute a legal family relationship, blood, marriage, adoption or operational law. The term also includes an individual between the ages of 18 and 62, who is disabled or handicapped as defined herein; two or more unrelated individuals who are at least 62 years of age or disabled; or two, but not more than two persons not related by blood, marriage or adoption." Grosvenor said that last part would be the category that is missing from the current definition. Renquist said that there is no time length criteria, and that description sounded like roommates. Long suggested consulting the City Attorney's Office for a definition. Commission members suggested Grosvenor create a family definition and an idea for a local preference. Renquist and Cilek said that Grosvenor's definition should be consistent with any City definition or documentation. COMMUNITY HOUSING FORUM REPORT PRESENTATION: Head said on October 26, 1996, the first Community Housing Forum met. A panel of people from the housing industry gave an update of the housing trends in Iowa City. He said they broke the 75 people who attended the meeting down into smaller work groups that had to answer the two questions of what the housing issues are in Iowa City, and what are the solutions. MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 4 He said that staff took all the information and grouped them into the following three categories: target population, funding mechanisms and regulatory measures. From that, staff developed three subcommittees, the Funding Mechanism Subcommittee, the Development and Regulatory Measures Subcommittee and the Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee. He said the Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee completed their report first, and they identified four target groups to assist: those at 30 percent of the median income, those at 50 percent of the median income, those at 80 percent of the median income and those at 100 percent of median income. He said that there are 4,226 households at 30 percent, 3,190 at 50 percent, 3,279 at 80 percent and 1,883 at 100 percent. The next thing they wanted to define was what people in this four target groups could afford to pay for housing. They found that people in the 30 percent of median income category could afford to pay $266 per month for rent or purchase a house for $32,000. He said obviously their options to buy a house in Iowa City are nonexistent, and generally people in these group are on Section 8 assistance. They found that people in the 50 percent of median income can afford to pay $443 per month for rent or purchase a house for $53,250. He said people in this category could probably find something to rent, but may have some problems finding a home to purchase. The group at 80 percent could afford to pay $710 per month for rent and $86,200 to purchase. Head said that there are more options open to people in this category. Those in 100 percent of the median income have the broadest options by being able to pay $887 a month for rent or $106,500 to purchase a home. He said the Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee developed four goals that they wanted to address, which were: (1) Provide opportunities for low-income households to obtain decent, safe and sanitary rental housing; (2) Increase the availability of home ownership for low and moderate income households; (3) Create/enhance public-private partnerships and coordination between various community entities such as non-profits, developers, neighborhoods, etc.; and (4) Increase public awareness of existing services and housing options through counseling and access to public resources and information. The Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee also developed the following pohcy statements for target groups I and I1: (1) Improve access to rental housing through financial assistance with security deposits, utility deposits and creating an emergency fund to prevent eviction with stipulations of automatic loan payments and require mandatory counseling, such as household budgeting, (2) Identify current regulations/codes that may hinder quality, safety and household accessibility for persons with disabilities and explore the use of Universal Design accessibility standards, (3) Increase the amount of CDBG/HOME funding for housing by applying for State HOME funds and encouraging the reuse of local CDBG and HOME dollars, (4) Identify new funding sources for the construction and/or rehabilitation of affordable housing projects, (5) Preserve existing affordable housing through supporting housing rehabilitation programs and developing a public/private rehabilitation loan pool, (6) Develop a partnership with the University of Iowa to study the impact of students on housing costs, and (7) Achieve lower rents or mortgage payments through incentives such as CDBG and HOME funds, density bonuses, General Obligation Bonds or other governmental incentives. Their objective for these two groups was to provide affordable housing for renters. MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 5 The Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee developed the following policy statements for target groups II, III and IV: (1) Establish a program to improve access to home ownership with funds for counseling, homebuyer education, credit enhancement and foreclosure prevention, (2) Create moderately-priced housing through direct acquisition and/or disposition of land with the stipulation of long-term or permanent affordability, (3) Encourage moderately-priced housing by creating incentives for developers to provide diverse housing types and price ranges through using density bonuses, modifying development regulations and streamlining the development review process, and (4) Identify private funding sources for moderately-priced housing. Their objective for these three groups was to provide affordable housing ($53,000 to $106,000) for homebuyers and homeowners. The Goal Setting and Target Group Subcommittee developed the following policy statements for all the target groups: (1) Create or enhance partnerships between the City, County, University, local businesses and surrounding communities to promote countywide housing policies, (2) Provide incentives, such as reducing infrastructure costs and relaxing development regulation for developments that propose acceptable higher densities and mixed uses, (3) Create housing that is well-designed and affordable to those relocating to Iowa City by encouraging a mix of housing size, price and type, and (4) Increase public awareness of existing housing options and resources by creating a one-stop service to provide access to housing information. Their objective for all four groups was to promote/provide a diversity of housing options for all residents of Iowa City. Head said the second group was the Funding Mechanism Subcommittee, and they developed seven programs that they feel will assist with housing issues in Iowa City if the programs are implemented. The first is expansion of the Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation program. The goal of this program is to preserve the existing housing stock. The City would apply for $200,000-$250,000 of State HOME funds to expand the program without straining the existing CDBG/HOME funds. The second program is the First Home Program, where $50,000 of HOME funds would be applied for this year, and apply for future State HOME funds to continu~ the program. Head said the existing program would be sl,ghtly revised so that assistance could be made in the form of low or no-interest loans w~th a monthly payment schedule or a shared-equity proportional to City assistance when repayment is not possible. He said they want the money in this program to be revolving. Head said the third program is Financial Institution - Combination Mortgage and Rehabilitation Program. He said that staff spoke with Hills Bank and First National Bank about the program. Basically, the program would help repair existing housing in Iowa City by wrapping the repair costs into the first mortgage. He said that they hoped banks would dedicate a minimum of $1 million for the program. The fourth program in the Linked Deposit Program. Head said they are calling this program a Housing CD. He said they want to approach major employers and businesses in Iowa City to sell the CDs. The fifth program is the Low Interest General Obligation Bond. Head said the City issues these bonds all the time, and has the option of taking 10 percent to use for other activities such as affordable housing. This would be permanent financing, and would be 2-2.5 percent less than the private market lending rate. Cilek asked if the taxpayers would be paying for that. Head said no. He said that this program would probably be used for a rental property that would have its own stream of income that could pay back and MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 6 retire that portion of the bond. He said that all the envisioned to pay themselves back. proposed programs have been The sixth program is the Affordable Housing Funding Pool. This program was developed because the CDBG/HOME funding cycle runs from December to May and there is no money' available to fund projects that come up outside that cycle. He said the proposal calls for $150,000 of HOME funds and $150,000 of general funds be applied for and used. He said that this would be geared toward housing projects that could pay back the money, with interest. The program is being proposed for three years, and can be evaluated during those years and afterward. The seventh program is the Housing Fund Program that would use interest from rent deposits for rental repairs. This would require a commitment from landlords and a change in state law. He noted that the Iowa Coalition of Housing and Homeless has this on their state lobbying agenda to get some money for housing the homeless. The third group was the Development and Regulatory Measures Subcommittee, and they created seven strategies for affordable housing. The first is Small Lot Zoning. Head noted that land costs can constitute about 25 percent of housing costs, and building on small lots could make housing more affordable. He said that this would require amending the Zoning Ordinance to permit a lot size in the range of 4,000-4,500 square feet. Head said the second strategy is the Reduction of Lot Widths. He said that this could encourage townhouse units and zero-lot lines, and would address the issue of infill lots in existing neighborhoods. He said that this strategy would require an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow lot widths between 25-45 feet. The third strategy is to Reduce Infrastructure Costs. He said this subcommittee discussed that paving costs are one of the highest that a developer incurs, so the idea is to reduce pavement widths from the required 28 feet to 26 feet, and consider 22 foot or short no-through streets. This strategy would allow for garages to be placed in the back of homes off an asphalt or gravel alley or driveway, which may also provide access to utility easements and allow for decreased setback requirements, and consider new street design like roll over curbs. He said the combination of these things should reduce the developer's costs, and those savings should be passed along to the homeowner. Head said the fourth strategy is Fast Track for Affordable Housing. This would make pre- development meeting mandatory for staff and the developer. Staff would create a checklist to use as a guide during the development process, and the entire development process would be streamlined by submitting the final plats only to the City Council. Cilek said he thought it was very important for the City Departments to talk to each other and have clear communication with the developer. Head said the fifth strategy is to fund a Study to Analyze the Development Code. He said that the regulations would be reviewed to look for opportunities to consolidate procedures, simplify the process and clarify ambiguous language in the Development Code. He said that staff would get a consultant to come in and review the Code and make recommendations. This could make building easier for the developers. Head said the sixth strategy is Density Bonuses for Affordable Developments and Infill Projects that Match Neighborhood Standards. Head said this is an incentive for developers to build affordable housing, The developer would get some density bonus for each MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 7 affordable unit built. He said this would require amending the Zoning Ordinance and PDH Ordinance. The seventh strategy is Neo-traditional Development, which is proposed for the peninsula property. Head said staff will be using a consultant to help develop neotraditional concepts and parameters for the site. He said a "Request for Proposal" would be developed with the elements of neotraditionalism to solicit developer proposals. He said that staff would propose regulatory language to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow flexibility to develop the peninsula site with the essential components of a neo-traditional development. Head said that these proposals and strategies will be presented to the City Council on January 26 for their consideration. He said that this could be a beginning step to developing a housing strategy for the City. Moraski asked if the direct incentives and reduction of lot width and streets would be city-wide for developers or just tied to a particular development. Head said it is generally city-wide for small projects, and the peninsula project will be a larger example of things that the CHF would like to see implemented throughout the City. Cilek asked if the peninsula project was City land. Head said yes. Cilek said in essence, the City is telling the developer that they will bend the rules for development on their land, but the developer can't invest their money elsewhere and get the same benefits. He said he also had a problem with #6, because he was not sure that building affordable housing should be tied to developer incentives. He said that the developer should get the same incentives to keeping some greenspace and building 50 units instead of building 51 units and leaving no greenspace. Head said the key issue is that they want to have diverse housing opportunities throughout the City, and they want to have some incentives for developers to do that. Cilek said he did not like the idea of changing the requirements for the developer for different areas of the City, that entire City should be under the same developing requirements. Head said that the neo-traditional development can be done under existing City regulations and there may not be an changes needed, but in case a change needs to be made it would be applicable to the whole City. Stewart said it is kind of a pilot program, and the idea on #6 is to give the developer a financial incentive would be one way to them to build affordable housing. Head said this report is the first step of the process. He said that Appendix A showed a Cost Impact to the City, which there is none, and Appendix B shows the Implementation Schedule. He said they are being very aggressive and ambitious about trying to get things done. He said that staff would simply apply for the proposed CBDG/HOME funding during the regular cycle. DISCUSSION OF HCDC AGENDA ITEM/PRESENTATION REQUEST POLICY: Schmuch asked if everyone had been contacted by Jason Friedman of ISED. She said that he called her and wanted to have an educational presentation about ISED at a Commission meeting, and she told him that since they were close to the funding cycle the Commission would be hearing from him soon and that the Commission does monitoring reports throughout the year. Friedman said that the Commission did not have a policy regarding this issue. She said that former Commission member David Purdy was contacted by ISED about an educational meeting/breakfast, called them and told them that he would not be voting on the issue and did that matter. They told him that it did and he was not invited to the breakfast anymore. She said she was concerned about other applicants for funding trying to get time at meetings before the funding cycle to get extra presentation time. Renquist said she thought ISED's attempt was lobbying. Schmuch asked if the Commission MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 8 should create a policy regarding applicant requesting money and when the Commission would like to hear from them. Stewart said that during the normal funding process, that presentations should not be allowed, except for emergency funding requests. Long asked what they should say if the applicant requests to be on the agenda for educational purposes. Stewart said to tell them to send the Commission some material, and the Commission could request them to present it. Kuhlmann asked if that was fair to the applicants that don't think of that. Cilek said to tell them that the Commission is not interested in hearing from them until their presentation. Moraski said that ISED would be presented in a monitoring report to the Commission. Schmuch said that Friedman was concerned because ISED's monitoring report was not scheduled until April. Kuhlmann asked if other organizations had been asked to present at meetings. $chmuch said that while they were not requested, Housing Rehab had presented during this timeframe in the past. Kuhlmann said that many Commission members also went on tours. Stewart said he thought that a staff member should talk to Friedman and tell him that his actions displeased the Commission. Renquist said she was trying hard not to let this incident affect how she views ISED's proposal. Schmuch asked if the Commission wanted to have black-out period around funding hearings where no one could present, and let them know that they can contact members of the Commission on an individual basis. She said that she did not want the applicants to be on the agenda. Stewart said that they could come and talk during the Public Discussion. He said that they should say that unless there is an emergency that cannot be handled in the normal course of the events, it not appropriate for applicants to make a separate presentation at any time. Cilek said that he thought they should tell applicants that they are more than welcome to contact Commission members individually, but not during the meeting times. Schmuch said that monitoring reports are very important. Kuhlmann noted that all Commission members can go visit or talk to any applicant at any time. Schmuch and Long said that they would try to draft a policy and present it at the next meeting. MONITORING REPORTS: City of Iowa City - Ant-backflow Valves and Habitat for Humanity Cilek said that he had not completed his reports, and would do them for the Commission meeting. April Aid to Agencies Renquist said there is some CDBG money set aside and divided between different agencies, and M.E.C.C.A. received some of that money. Head said that is the City's Aid to Agencies program, and $400,000 is divided between 14 agencies. Long said that the Commission kicks in $105,000 of that total. He said the three agencies that receive the most money will be reported on. Renquist passed out a sheet with the Director's and Assistant Director's names and phone numbers. She said the building is located near the Hollywood Hy-Vee store. She said that M.E.C.C.A. received around $23,000, and it was used to support the salaries for their Medical and Clinical Director for a treatment program to treat low income clients suffering from chemical abuse. She said they send a quarterly report to Long regarding their clientele. She said from July to September, 1997, there were 1,361 admissions. She said MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 9 that 646 of those people went on to other facilities so they would be eligible for CDBG funding. Only 47 percent of the remaining 715 provided income information, and of those, 30 percent were below the median income. Fifty-two of them were female heads of households. Schmuch said that M.E.C.C.A is pretty good about targeting and trying to reach pregnant substance abusers, and providing programs that the state does not provide. Long said the they have received past CDBG funding for rehab work. Schmuch said they get a variety of funds, and they are willing to accept patients that do not have insurance, and charge much less that the Oakdale University facility. Schmuch said she knew that M.E.C.C.A. provided social detox, but not medical detox, so that would explain the large number of clients that are not treated at the facility. Housing Authority - TBRA Moraski did not present because Grosvenor provided all the relevant information earlier in the meeting. ECIETC - Job Training Kuhlmann said she talked to Dave Jacoby about the program. She said that one important thing is that all of the CDBG funding they received goes directly to clients. Jacoby told her that it is difficult for their clients to plan their education knowing that they can only received funding for child care and transportation for one year. He told her that those clients cannot even go on the waiting list for JTPA or Promised Jobs because there is a federal law stating that one cannot receive childcare funding from more than one source. She said that two people that CDBG has funded have already graduated. She said that Jacoby told her the welfare to work program is not a mandated program without funding, but a mandated program with some of the funding under local control (CDBG). Kuhlmann said the state wiped out their waiting list, and when that happens the JTPA and Promised Jobs dollars will be more available. Jacoby told her that he would like to do more short- term work with teen parents through the Mayors Youth Program, or something similar. UAY Facility Improvements Gadson said she was not done with her report, and would present her report at the next meeting. Heartland Candleworks - Business Expansion House said that he spoke with Mike and Lynette, and has scheduled a tour at the facility in the next few weeks. He said they make about 200 varieties of fragrance candles, and 80 percent of their distribution goes through three chain stores consisting of about 200-300 stores. He said they have started some expansion in that they have individual agreements with some Hy-Vee stores, and some other Iowa City stores. He said they are signing an agreement with Hy-Vee to distribute through their central store, which would be more efficient for Heartland and provide more distribution of their product. House said some of the private labels they currently distribute under are Candleworks and The Body Shop. He said Heartland attended a national products expo and were approved with Wild Oats, a chain store in Denver, CO, and their product is going through about three or four Wild Oats stores in Kansas City, St. Louis, Boulder, CO, and Longmount, CO. He said that Heartland is planning to attend another national trade show in California in February to try to sell their product to other chain stores. MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 1998 PAGE 10 He said all this leads up to their need to expand machinery to handle the extra volume. He said they have delivered all the documentation for the audit, but it will be another 6-8 weeks before they see it. He said getting the new machine would save payroll costs by 12 percent, and everyone would keep their jobs. Kuhlmann asked how many employees Heartland currently had. Long said around 30 employees, and those numbers have been steadier than in years past. Cilek said that they should be able to get a short-term loan due to their increased volume since they can't get the CDBG loan until the audit goes through. Stewart said they have not been able to get a private loan. OLD BUSINESS: Head said that staff received a copy of the Housing Market Analysis last week, and they will talk with the consultants about some of the points in the report. He said that he hoped that staff would get a final copy of the report. He said from there, they will be looking for a date to present the report to the Commission. Long said that they needed to schedule some new meeting dates for the funding process since some members will be gone. They set February 26 and March 12 as the new meeting dates, and canceled the March 19 meeting. Long said he would send a new schedule out to members. NEW BUSINESS: Long said that he had a request from a potential applicant on how the Commission wants to approach terms of affordability for a project. He asked if members wanted to have a consistent term, or be flexible. He said currently, they work on an individual basis to see how the financing works and then the terms are defined. Stewart said he would like to stay flexible, and look at things individually. Long said the applicant suggested adding something to the ranking sheet in the future that would give bonus points for longer proposed terms of affordability. Schmuch said it is always a good idea to relook how they rank projects. Long said that 34 applications have been given out. He said they have had four public service agencies, four housing agencies and one economic development agencies attend the staff workshops. Renquist asked if Purdy was officially no longer a member of the Commission. Schmuch said yes. Long said his position was being advertised. He passed out an article from the Cedar Rapids Gazette. Members decided to watch the video at the April meeting. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Stewart moved to adjoum the meeting. Renquist seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 8-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. i~pdcdbg\mins\hcdc 1 - 15.doc MINUTES IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CIVIC CENTER, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM JANUARY 29, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lyra Dickerson, Michael Kennedy, Lon Moeller STAFF PRESENT: Sylvia Mejia, Machele Wiebel, Sarah Holecek, Andy Rocca GUESTS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Commissioners instructed staff to conduct promotional testing for the positions of Fire Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: Chairperson Kennedy called the meeting to order at 8:30AM. First item for discussion was the legal opinion regarding the expiration date for Fire promotional lists. Kennedy asked if the commission had ever certified a list for three years. Mejia answered that they had not but at one time there had been a request made and subsequently denied. Kennedy asked for the philosophy behind the decision and Mejia responded that the City wants the freshest, most talented candidates for promotions. As anniversary dates go by more people meet the minimum qualifications and are eligible to test. A two year basis allows the opportunity for the best list, while three years delays the ability to test. Dickerson commented that a two year list doesn't harm anyone, people don't cease to be eligible. Mejia answered that there can be a perceived harm. The last person on a three year list would have a chance for an opening during the third year, whereas the same person on a two year list would have to re-test. She also stated that the employees have been given the legal opinion and have had the opportunity to attend this meeting and there have been no challenges. Dickerson added that there is a better opportunity to open up affirmative action possibilities with a two year list. Kennedy moved, and Dickerson seconded, that the Commission adopt the opinion of the City Attorney's office as being consistent with continued prior practice and Iowa law, and that the commission declines to exercise its option to approve the certified eligible list for three years as provided by Iowa law, but approves the certified eligible list for two years. Motion carried unanimously. Mejia explained that the promotional process for Fire Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant will be the same process that has been used in the past and asked for some flexibility with timing, looking at approximately May to complete the testing. Dickerson moved and Moeller seconded to approve the promotional testing procedure for Fire Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant. Motion carried unanimously. O/d Bus/hess: None. New Business: Dickerson asked when the recommendations for appointment to the Civil Service Commission will go to the City Council. Mejia responded that it will be February 24 and all of the commissioners will be notified. Rocca distributed a memo comparing the current requirements for Fire Battalion Chief, Captain and Lieutenant with the proposed expanded educational requirements. Rocca explained that he intends to phase in the new requirements gradually and added that the requirements have been discussed with employees at all levels. He added that the department recognizes that it is lagging behind in educational requirements and they want to keep in line with other departments across the state. Mejia stated that discussion of the new educational requirements could be put on the next agenda for further discussion. While the decision is ultimately the City's, input from the Commissioners is valued. Kennedy commented that no staff was present to offer input and he questioned whether that was fair. Rocca agreed that it might be better if this is an agenda item with the opportunity for input by any interested party. Mejia added that they don't want to jeopardize the relationship with the Firefighters by not providing the opportunity for discussion. Kennedy suggested that it be put on the next agenda. He added that he would be more comfortable if staff knows the Commission is looking at this. Moeller asked Rocca how the Iowa City Fire Department compares to other departments. Rocca responded that Cedar Rapids, Sioux City and other career departments have degree requirements and the expanded educational requirements will put Iowa City more in line with this. Moeller requested that the Commission be provided information and some of the rationale used for increasing the requirements for the next meeting. Rocca will prepare for next meeting. Dickerson questioned if Rocca had heard about a course used in lieu of testing. Rocca stated that he had heard of it as a method to qualify a pool of applicants to take the entrance test, not in lieu of testing. Cedar Rapids is close to doing this. They want people who are genuinely interested so they won't invest time and money in someone who isn't serious about being a Firefighter. Dickerson asked if Rocca could check into this and he answered that he will be going to a meeting of Chiefs next week and will get more information. Mejia asked if the Commission wanted the issue of educational requirements added to the next agenda and Kennedy said yes. Kennedy moved and Dickerson seconded the motion to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 AM, IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES (Amended) January 26, 1998 Meeting COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey, Joan Jehle, Major, Diane Martin, Ann Shires, Thomopulos, Art Vincent, Jan Warren Charles Mettie STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank, Kaci Carolan, Sarah Holecek CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes fi'om the December meeting were approved. Shires/Jehle. All in favor; no opposed. INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSIONER: Chairperson Harvey welcomed new Commissioner member Mettie Thomopulos (who will be serving out Mary Theisen's unexpired term). ART VINCENT MEMBERSH/P: Warren moved that the Commission request the resignation of Art Vincent on the grounds that the deferred judgment on the harassment charge reflects poorly on the Commission and is antithetical to the Commission's goals. Dickerson seconded. Vincent called for a point of order, asking where in the by-laws there was authority for such a request. Harvey responded that this was not a recommendation to Council, it was a request of the Commission as moved. Holecek advised Vincent that he had the right to request a closed meeting at this point if he desired. Vincent said that media inaccuracies about this issue had already irreparably and needlessly damaged his reputation. Therefore, he felt a closed session was unnecessary and would not serve the public interest or perception. Dickerson said he felt that Vincent's presence on the Commission at this point in time was contradictory to the Commission's efforts and would invalidate the Commission as a whole. Vincent indicated that the media coverage has been highly inaccurate. He has not been convicted of anything, and had he been guilty of anything, he never would have sought appointment. Vincent also questioned the timing of the media disclosures. His understanding was that Council became aware of this information in mid-November, but it was only after his January 4 opinion piece in the Cedar Rapids Gazette (which was critical of Councilor Dean Thomberry) did any of this information appear in the media. Harvey stated that the editorial was a separate issue. If the Commission was concerned with the public's perception, then Vincent asked that the Commission wait until the public had been given accurate information. There will be an article in an upcoming issue of Icon which sets out the situation accurately. The coverage in the Press Citizen (including quotes fi'om the Mayor and the City Attorney's Office) has been inaccurate, while the Gazette's coverage has been accurate but incomplete. Also, the Press Citizen has offered to give Vincent space to clear up any confusion resulting fi'om the editorial which appeared this morning (1/26). Vincent said he didn't see how the Commission could say they were concemed about public perception when the public hadn't had an oppommity to assess accurate information. Dickerson asked Vincent to correct these inaccuracies as part of the current discussion. Vincent said he was reluctant to do so, that he was tired of going into specifics and it served no Human Rights Commission January 26, 1998 Minutes Page 2 good purpose. Also, because of the short interval between the issuance of the revised agenda and the meeting, he had not had an oppommity to speak with his attorney about how [Vincent's] interests might be served or not served by disclosures made in the Commission meeting. Jehle indicated she felt that this was the time to correct any inaccuracies. Shires said it wasn't just the public's perception she was concerned about. Shires set out what she understood to be Vincent's circumstances, based on the coverage in the Gazette. Vincent reiterated that he had not pied guilty to anything. On November 6 in open court he changed his plea from not guilty to no contest. His attorney led him to believe that a plea of no contest was acceptable. Harvey stated that she felt the purpose of the discussion was not to examine the details of Vincent's situation. She reiterated that the matter under discussion was whether the Commission wished to request Vincent's resignation based on how this matter reflects on the Commission as a whole, whether the Commission would be able to work together as a body, and whether it impacted on Vincent's ability and responsibility as a Commissioner. Holecek made a few points of law, clarifying that Iowa courts do not recognize a no contest plea. She also explained a deferred judgment and sentence. Successful fulfillment of probation for a period of one year results in a deferml of the actual conviction being entered on the record. Holecek indicated that there are still records of the prior events, but they're more difficult to locate. The records are not necessarily expunged. Vincent pointed out that he understood he could request this be expunged. The charge was a simple misdemeanor, with no fine, no jail time requested, and the extent of his probation is that he must write a letter once a month to an individual Vincent designated as a "probation officer." Vincent noted that if a City staffer had not alerted the media, none of this information would have become public and there would be nothing for the public to perceive or misperceive. Thomopulos asked if Vincent felt, given all the publicity, he could effectively carry out his duties as a Commissioner--taking into account the perspective of people who might wish to bring a complaint to the Commission. Vincent said he had experience in the area of human relations (in the military) and was no stronger to dealing with complaints of the kind the Commission takes. He stated he is dispassionate and deliberative in his approach, and his personal life does not enter into any professional decision-making he engages in as a part of the Commission. Commission decisions are based on the law. Vincent said he didn't see how something in his personal life could get in the way when he conducts himself professionally. Vincent said that there was no way he could predict how potential complainants might feel about him reviewing their case. Thomopulos asked if he felt it would be right for the Commission to leave itself vulnerable to the possible opinion of complainants that they weren't given a fair review solely because of Vincent's presence. Vincent asked if complainants were told which Team was reviewing their complaint. Shank indicated that when attorneys have inquired, she has disclosed which Commissioners comprised the Team doing the review. Vincent asked whether the team decisions must be unanimous; he was told that there just needed to be a majority. Vincent said therefore his presence would be a moot issue, because if a complainant felt that Vincent reached an unfair decision (which he could not see himself doing), the other two team members would be able to overrule it with a fair decision. Martin indicated she had concerns that some people might not even bring their complaints Human Rights Commission January 26, 1998 Minutes Page 3 to the Commission if the Commission's name in the community had been damaged by the media exposure (be it fair or unfair). Vincent said that Thurgood Marshall didn't become concerned with the public perception of Southern whites before arguing Brown v. Board of Education. Nor did Abe Fortas worry about public perception when he successfully argued Gideon v. Wainwright for the right of counsel at trial. Vincent said they were only concerned with what was right and fair. The publicity has harmed him because of its inaccuracies and due to the City Attomey and Mayor's misuse of the word "conviction." Vincent urged the Commission to do the courageous thing, to stand up for what's right and not ask for his resignation. Jehle said if she was in Vincent's position, she would be angry, but the first thing she would do would be resign from the Commission. Vincent said he would have seriously considered resigning if a Council member had come to him privately back in November and said "you know what this is going to look like if it ever gets out in the media?" Based on how everything played out, however, and the spurious timing of everything, he would not resign now. Major said he felt the publicity surrounding this has placed the Commission in a bad light, and that if it were him he would resign. Vincent said he agreed [it placed the Commission in a bad light], and that if the Commission felt it had suffered, then everyone could start to imagine how much he had suffered from his portrayal in the media. Jehle asked Vincent to really re-think his decision and consider resigning. Vincent said that in that case he would ask the Commission to table the vote until the February meeting. Dickerson said that he thought Vincent probably could handle the responsibilities of the appointment, but that the credibility of the Commission was lost if Vincent remained on it. Dickerson suggested Vincent resign now, and after the accurate information about his situation comes out, he m-apply for the next Commission vacancy. Vincent disagreed, saying that having written the article critical of Councilor Thomberry and with a conservative majority on the City Council, he wouldn't be re- appointed. Dickerson pointed out that he has publicly chastised specific Councilors for their views on disability issues and it hasn't impacted on his role with the Commission, so that was a separate issue. Vincent felt it was not a separate issue. The motion was called to vote. Vincent asked the individual Commissioners be polled. Thomopulos and Vincent abstained. The other seven Commissioners voted in favor of the motion. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Pat Harvey was nominated as Chair. Shires/Warren. All in favor: no opposed. Diane Martin was nominated as Vice Chair. Shires/Dickerson. All in favor; no opposed. Harvey suggested that the Commission go ahead and designate the team leaders for each team. Each team leader is responsible for instituting the buddy system for the new Commissioners in reviewing their first case. MOVIE SERIES: The next movie is My Left Foot. After discussion of the two possible dates, it was scheduled for March 7, 1998, at either 1:00 or 1:30 p.m. (depending on how early the room is available). Warren inquired whether the Commission wished to organize a panel or discussion of disability issues after the movie, as had previously been suggested. There was some discussion Human Rights Commission January 26, 1998 Minutes Page 4 about whether this would make too long a program, or whether we might lose some of our potential audience (those folks who normally don't attend lectures or forums). Harvey suggested a more direct either pre- or post- introduction/summary, for this and future films. Dickerson agreed to prepare a 5-10 minute introduction for My Left Foot. Harvey offered that in scheduling the rest of the movie series, she'd like to see a calendar for the year and try to tie in with specific events (the Breakfast) or months (Black History Month). Shank & Carolan will arrange for the popcom cart. Martin agreed to buy the pop. Harvey stressed that the Commissioners need to take responsibility for posting the flyers for these sorts of events. Martin asked if Shank could prepare a list of possible places to post flyers (places that have agreed to do so in the past) that the Commissioners could then split among themselves. Shank agreed. Martin will split the list and hand it out. TOWN MEETING: RACE RELATIONS - is scheduled for 7 p.m. in the Public Library on February 17, 1998. It is being co-sponsored by Diverse-Cities. Warren reviewed who's on the panel, and the idea behind the foram--to provide an opportunity for community members of Iowa City, Coralville, and the University to discuss racial issues. For the most part, the panel members are not "official" representatives of organized bodies (with the exception of Marian Coleman from the school system). There was discussion about how best to get the posters up everywhere and make sure everyone knows about the meeting. The Commission thanked Warren for organizing the foram, especially over the holiday period. ICRC TRAINING: April 30 and May 1 in Des Moines. ICRC pays all costs for local commissioners to attend, including overnight lodging. Shank hasn't gotten the form yet, but she will have to give ICRC a finn number of attendees fairly soon. Jehle, Major, and Vincent committed to go. Other Commissioners will check schedules and let Shank know. OLD BUSINESS: Keynote Spe~er for '98 Breakfast: It had previously been suggested that the speaker have some sort of intemational human rights connection (in light of the UN 50th anniversary). Vincent suggested Kate Schuetz, who is nmning from Iowa to Washington D.C. to call attention to hutnan rights violations in China. Warren suggested Brian Thomas (due to his work with Habitat for Humanity in Nicaragua). Dorothy Paul was also proposed. Harvey suggested that everyone think about these candidates and other possible speakers. The matter will be placed back on the agenda for February. Cultural Diversity Day: is Sunday, February 22, 1998, fi'om noon to 5. Martin and Vincent will staff the table in the morning, Harvey and Major in the afternoon. Upcoming Panels: The Commission still plans to do an informational/educational panel on the Commission itself in May at the Senior Center. This will be during the day, and will function as a "trial rim" for a longer and larger panel to be held at the library in the evening (maybe sometime during June). The latter may be combined with or separate from some sort of panel/celebration of past Commissioners and the history/development of the Commission. Harvey asked the Commissioners to think about whether they'd be available for an afternoon panel. This matter will Human Rights Commission January 26, 1998 Minutes Page 5 be placed back on the agenda in February. Accessible Caucus Sites: Warren brought this issue back to the table. It was agreed that the Caucus Site subcommittee (Harvey, Martin, and Warren) will meet immediately prior to the February meeting. NEW BUSINESS: Revision of By-laws: Shank asked whether the Commission wanted to revise the by-laws to include the new administrative closure provisions. The ordinance is currently at the codifiers, and should be ready fairly soon. Harvey suggested waiting until the ordinance is received, and then a subcommittee can draft the new by-laws language. Shank agreed to include the new ordinance with the February packets if it's ready in time. Column Writing for Commissioners: Harvey indicated that this item was on the agenda so there could be discussion as to whether the Commission had a preference regarding by-lines in Commissioner columns. This has come up in the past, and certainly will arise in the future. Did the Commission have a preference as to whether they wanted to suggest that when Commissioners wrote articles/opinion pieces as individuals, that they not include their Commission membership as part of the byline? Right or wrong, the assumption is made that the opinion is somehow the opinion of the full Commission when membership is listed. Jehle said her preference would be that such identification be omitted, unless the piece was something that the full Commission had requested the individual write on some human rights-related topic. Warren noted that she had brought this topic up a year ago, at which time no decision was really reached. Her position is that membership should not be included if the person is writing as a private citizen. Vincent inquired how this would reflect in terms of First Amendment rights. Harvey clarified again that this would not be a requirement, but only a suggestion or indication of the preference of the Commission as a whole. Individual Commissioners would be free to acquiesce or ignore that suggestion. Shires expressed her opinion that many people will not or cannot separate in their minds a person writing on their own behalf and writing on behalf of the Commission (if membership is in the byline). Several Commissioners indicated that they didn't see what purpose including membership in the byline would serve, other than to lend credibility to the personal opinion of the writer. Vincent said membership was a part of people's lives, and that he felt it was great publicity for the Commission. Several Commissioners disagreed with that assessment. Vincent said that although he understood some people might have trouble differentiating (between individuals and the Commission) he'd like to give the public more credit and think most don't have lxouble with this. Harvey indicated that there had already been confi~ion on this point, and that several Commissioners had been approached (on the street, by phone, etc.) because that assumption had been made. Vincent called for a vote to see whether the majority of the Commission would prefer membership be excluded from bylines unless the piece was being written at the direction of the Commission. Jehle seconded. 7 in favor; one opposed. (Dickerson had to leave early and was therefore absent for this vote). Subcommittee membership: Harvey asked the Commissioners to think about whether they Human Rights Commission January 26, 1998 Minutes Page 6 wanted to continue to staff projects by simply soliciting people as events arose or whether they wanted to create a more formal subcommittee rotation. Her concern is that the workload be evenly distributed among the commissioners, and to keep the workload off of Shank and Carolan as much as possible. Harvey asked everyone to think about it so they can discuss it at the February meeting. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Shires: Has been representing the Commission on the Council for Disability Rights and Education (CDRE), an organization formed about 3 years ago. She can no longer do so, and she asked Dale Helling (who is the Secretary of the CDRE) if she should get a replacement. Helling indicated there's going to be a reorganization of the group, and until that's completed, a replacement is not needed. Helling will keep the Commission posted. Shires: pointed out that Senator Robert Dvorsky is co-sponsoring a bill to add sexual orientation to the protected categories under Chapter 216, the state anti-discrimination law. In response to a question from Warren, Shank indicated that the initiatives in both Des Moines and Cedar Rapids seem to have stalled. Davenport had already decided to table the issue. Maior: Received a letter from Senator Grassley on the Senate land mine bill. It's a little stricter than the Ottawa treaty. Major also related a radio report he'd heard about how all the reasons the US didn't sign the Ottawa treaty were erroneous and incorrect. Major: reported that the VA is re-vamping their EEO office and procedures. He'll supply more information at coming meetings, but said it sounds really interesting. Shank: reported on HUD substantial equivalency (in response to a question from Martin). HUD is doing a lot of downsizing nationwide, closing a lot of offices, combining others, etc. It sounds like the Kansas City office will soon have only one lawyer. So it doesn't sound like we're going to be granted substantial equivalency any time soon. STATUS OF CASES: We had four cases settle through mediation. There is one pending predetermination settlement (awaiting final paperwork). There are two cases in legal. There is one investigative summary pending. The EEOC asserted jurisdiction in one case. There's a case ready for Team C. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: The February meeting will be February 23, 1998 in the Civic Center Lobby Conference Room. Jehle will not be able to attend; Shires will try to be there, but may have a conflict. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Vincent/Jehle. 02/24/98 transcribed by kkc 02/24/98 amended per Commission IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES February 23, 1998 Meeting COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey, Charles Major, Diane Martin, Ann Shires, Mettle Thomopulos, Art .Vincent, Jan Warren COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Joan Jehle STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank, Kaci Carolan PUBLIC PRESENT: James Damell; Susan Phillips; Adam Gillespie CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINLrrES: Several corrections to the minutes from the January meeting were noted (by Shires, Vincent, and Dickerson). The minutes from the January meeting were approved as amended. Shires/Martin. All in favor; no opposed. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNSEL: None. GUEST SPEAKER: Susan Phillips works at Kenwood Park Presbyterian Church (Cedar Rapids) and St. Mark's United Methodist (Iowa City). She addressed the Commission regarding the upcoming Governor's Town Hall Meeting with Teenagers, scheduled for June 30, 1998. There will be ICN sites around the state, and it will be broadcast live on IPT. It is being organized by Creative Visions (directed by Akao Abdul-Samad) in Des Moines. She is hoping to make contacts and gather support to ensure the success of the project. Ms. Phillips relayed some of the projects she has put together in the past, as well as some planned for the future. Additionally, she noted that she thought a panel of teenagers addressing the community would be an interesting and valuable set up for a future town meeting. Ms. Phillips encouraged any Commission member to contact her about the June meeting. She can be reached at her office at 337-7201 or godpots~aol.com OLD BUSINESS: Town Meeting: Warren reported on the Race Relations Town Meeting. There were approximately 200 people in attendance, and there was extensive press coverage. There was a problem in some of the pre-event publicity, because in several places the University was incorrectly listed as a co-sponsor of the event due to some confusion between the Human Rights Commission and Human Rights '98 (Bums Weston's organization). Shank noted that she subsequently spoke to Dorothy Paul about this, and Paul has agreed to let Shank review press releases for HR 98 in the future so this doesn't happen again. Warren received numerous e-malls and phone calls from people after the event, saying it was great and urging ICHRC to follow up. Discussion was held about options for follow-up meetings. It was decided that another large meeting was probably the best approach, perhaps with the moderator taking a more active role in then steering people into smaller sub-groups for study circles. Another possibility (also suggested by Warren) was Human Rights Commission February 23, 1998 Minutes Page 2 something more along the lines of Fireside Chats (one "official"--council person, police officer, etc.) speaking with interested parties. Major suggested Ross Wilbum as a potential panel member for next time; Warren indicated he's also been suggested as a person to spearhead the Diverse- Cities initiative. Warren noted that thank you notes should be sent to all the panelists, and probably a few of the press people who were particularly interested/helpful. Commissioners who were unable to attend the Town Meeting are encouraged to watch it on the government channel. All Commissioners were asked to think about possible panel members, possible dates, formats, focus questions, etc. for the next Town Meeting. This item will go back on the agenda for March. ICRC Training: The final list of Commissioners attending the ICRC training is: Martin, Major, Jehle, and Vincent. Keynote Speaker for '98 Breakfast: Vincent reiterated his support for Kate Schuetz, the woman running to Washington DC to highlight human rights violations in China. Warren brought up Brian Thomas again, for his work in Nicaragua. She also pointed out that he is not affiliated with the University in any way (since many of the past speakers have been, and there had been some suggestion we try to get a non-University person this year). Warren suggested the possibility of having both individuals as co-speakers. Since we have a confirmed date (October 22), it's also possible that one or the other won't be available. Carolan and Shank agreed to contact Thomas and Schuetz and extend the Commission's invitation. This item will be placed on the agenda in March. Accessible Caucus Sites: The caucus subcommittee is obtaining a list compiled in approximately 1985 of accessible buildings. Clearly, this needs to be updated, but it will give the subeornmittee someplace to start. It was clarified that the eventual list should include not only what buildings are accessible, but the specifics thereof: where the accessible entrance is, whether a key is required for the elevator, where the accessible restrooms are, etc. Shank said she could get a list of accessible city buildings. After some discussion, it was decided that area churches need not be included on this list, because they're rarely if ever used for caucus sites because of church/state concerns. Warren is going to draft a cover memo and form to organize the information. Carolan will get the back issue(s) of the Press-Citizen to compare where caucuses were held during the last presidential elections. Looking ahead, Warren and Martin suggested perhaps one of the people who have said they wanted to do volunteer work for the Commission might agree to enter this information into a database. This item will be placed on the agenda in March. Revision of By-Laws: A subcommittee (Major and Vincent) will draft revisions for the by- laws reflecting the new administrative closure procedures. The rough draf~ will either be included in the March packet, or distributed at the March meeting. Movie: MvLefi Foot: Saturday, March 14, 1998 at 1:00 p.m. Commissioners were given flyers to post, along with a new list of possible posting places. The list of places was split up. Carolan has arranged for the popcorn cart and will bring a cooler; Martin will bring pop, ice, and cups. Dickerson is doing the introductory comments. Senior Center Panel: Commissioners who might be available for a daytime panel include: Jehle, Vincent, Major, and Dickerson (provided it is a Mon, Wed, or Fri). Carolan agreed to contact Julie Seal for some potential dates. The Commission is still interested in doing a larger, longer, evening panel (perhaps in June) for the whole community, basically introducing the commission and what they do. This item will be placed back on the agenda for March. Human Rights Commission February 23, 1998 Minutes Page 3 NEW BUSINESS: Panel to Discuss Women's Human Rights: Dorothy Paul has asked Shank to moderate a panel in March on Women's Human Rights. The panel is Friday, March 6, at 3:45 p.m., probably in Council Chambers. The panel members are Jael Silliman, Dorothy Paul, Marilyn Cohen, and Monique DiCarlo. Jonathan Wilson: Shank said she's received a lot of requests from the public for some sort of gay and lesbian program. Shank inquired whether the Commission wanted to ask Jonathan Wilson to come speak sometime in April. There was discussion over whether this would work better during Pride Month (June). Since there was so much scheduled for June last year, some Commission members were afraid the program might just get lost in the shuffle. Shank will contact Wilson to check on his availability, with June as a possible fall-back time. She'll also check availability of the Public Library. Commissioners indicated that they'd prefer a Tuesday. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Vincent: Strongly recommended that any Commissioners who have not attended Cultural Diversity Day (which was this past weekend) do so in the future. Major and Harvey related an incident where a citizen confronted them and became quite heated in his comments. This individual expressed great hostility toward state employees, and Harvey and Major had difficulty getting across that they were a) volunteers, and b) in no way connected with the state. Major: Saw the movie Kundun, which deals in part with the overthrow of Tibet. It was quite good. Warren: Reported on a panel she was part of on February 19, on the state of affirmative action. Other panelists were Susan Mask and Stepharm Colbert. This was the second in a series of discussions geared to make the University community more open and welcoming. There were 25- 30 people present, and it ran well over two hours. STATUS OF CASES There are two cases in legal; there's one case ready to go to Team B. Team C has a case. There was one predetermination settlement. One case was transferred to ICRC. There's one investigative summary pending. There is another case scheduled for mediation. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: The March meeting will be March 23, 1998 in the Civic Center Lobby Conference Room. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Vincent/Martin. 02/25/98 transcribed by kkc MINUTES PARKS ~AND RECREATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 11, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: GUESTS PRESENT: Barbara Endel, Matt Pacha, Rex Pruess, Allen Stroh, Kathy Wallace, Ross Wilburn Ken Fearing, Judith Klink, Bruce Maurer Terry Trueblood, Marilyn Kriz Tom Dunbar FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Pruess, to approve the January 14, 1998 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved bY Wilburn, seconded by Stroh, to dedicate to the School District a mortion of the old street right-of-way as noted on the City plat which is adgacent to Horace Mann School, with the understandin~ that the area will continue to be accessible. After discussion, the motion was withdrawn. Moved by Wilburn, seconded bY Pruess, to endorse and summort the Peninsula Parkland Committee's recommendations for the peninsula area. Unanimous. OAKLAND CEMETERY CONCEPTUAL PLAN The consultant, Thomas Dunbar of Dunbar/Jones Partnership, presented a preliminary conceptual plan encompassing 10 acres as directed by the City Council. The slope, soils and vegetation were reviewed and applied in a more specific way. The road pattern is very similar to that in the initial plan, with roads laid out in a east-west orientation, and there will be accessible walkways. Included in the design are 6,690 monument lots, 1,700 flush-marker lots, 138 infant lots, 425 cremation lots, a cremation garden which will hold an infinite number of cremains, 1,420 mausoleum spaces, and 400 columbarium spaces. He pointed out an area that would accommodate an additional 50 burial spaces within 10 large "family plots", and various corners where this would also be possible. Dunbar indicated that many variables come into play, but utilizing existing data this plan could accommodate lot sales up to 240 years, utilizing the historical average of 45 lot sales per year. He noted depending on how this plan is phased in, there could be new and different ways of burials in the future that could extend these numbers. He noted some of the variables such as: Will cremations become more popular? Will the mausoleums prove to be more/less popular? He emphasized that this plan is, and needs to remain flexible. Parks and Recreation Commission February 11, 1998 Page 2 Endel asked if individuals would be able to plant trees on the lots. Dunbar indicated it would not be possible to plant trees on every lot. A survey will be completed to determine topography and to identify existing trees. Trueblood noted after this plan is approved the next step for the consultant would be to develop a planting plan, and preliminary cost estimates. Trueblood stated this conceptual plan, when completed, will be placed on a future agenda for commission's endorsement, then sent to City Council for approval. SCHOOL DISTRICT/NORT~ MARKET SOUARE PARK Trueblood stated a letter has been received from the attorney for the School District requesting that the City vacate property adjacent to North Market Square Park and convey it to the School District. Trueblood noted the copy of the plat furnished by the School District highlighting the area was incorrect. He pointed out on a City plat the area in question; an area that abuts the Horace Mann School building and continues into another area, both of which are old street right-of-ways. He stated that the Commission might want to recommend retaining the southernmost part of the right-of-way, and conveying the remainder to the School District.. Stroh noted the school playground equipment serves the public's recreational use in this area, with Trueblood indicating the school uses this park as an extension of their playground also. Trueblood noted there has never been a fence separating the City and school property, and it could be written into the agreement that this area could not be fenced off. Endel asked if the City would sell the land to the School District, with Trueblood indicating it would more likely be given to them. Trueblood noted from a parkland perspective this area is of little value to the City in that it is mostly used by Horace Mann School, and some of it has been asphalted by the School District. Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Stroh, to dedicate to the School District a portion of the old street right-of-way as noted on the City Dlat which is adgacent to Horace Mann School, with the understandin~ that the area will continue to be accessible. Wallace stated she would be voting against the motion, questioning why the School District wants this property now. She did not think School Board members were aware of this proposal, and felt the commission should discuss this matter further with the School District and School Board. Wilburn suggested having School District/Board representatives attend next month's meeting before action is taken. Trueblood referred to the letter in which it stated "the advantage for doing this would simply be to eliminate uncertainty as to the responsibility for the property... it would also eliminate Parks and Recreation Commission February 11, 1998 Page 3 (the City's) liability." Stroh questioned why the School District would be interested in acquiring more liability. After further discussion, it was determined that further clarification was needed and Wilburn withdrew his motion. Pacha asked that members of the School District and School Board be asked to attend a future meeting to address the School District's proposal. PENINSULA TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS A packet of information had been sent to the Commission, which included the Peninsula Task Force recommendations for the peninsula. Wallace indicated the only thing different was that there may need to be two consultants hired since the housing consultant did not have the expertise in planning passive-use park elements and dealing with sensitive environmental features. Trueblood stated it would depend on who they hired, noting there are consultants who have expertise in both areas. Wallace stated a slide presentation had been given and everything on the slides was low maintenance and very beautiful. Stroh noted the housing plan should have a minimal impact on the area also. Moved b~ Wilburn, seconded by Pruess, to endorse and suDDort the Peninsula Parkland Committee's recommendations for the peninsula area. Unanimous. PARKLAND ACOUISITION FUND Pacha noted a memo had been included in the packet stating although the City budget is not yet adopted, the City Council, at this point, has decided to support the City Manager's proposal to discontinue funding the Parkland Acquisition Fund through the Hotel/Motel Tax. He expressed appreciation to Pruess and Klink for their time and effort in drafting the letter to the City Council on behalf of, the Commission expressing concern and opposition to this proposal. Stroh and Pruess pointed out the possibility that the money presently in the Parkland Acquisition Fund could be taken away if there is a budget crunch next year. Pruess referred to the Iowa River Trail which could have a substantial cost overrun. He indicated that, based on his information, it appears the overrun will be due to acquisition costs of land between Burlington Street and Benton Street. He noted the path/sidewaLk in this area is still in the same dangerous and dilapidated condition as it was 30 years ago. He also noted this is a gateway into the community that could be beautified. He stated he would support using Parkland Acquisition Funds to help pay for the Iowa River Trail if funds are needed. Pruess read the following proposal which he had drafted: We support allocating up Parks and Recreation Commission February 11, 1998 Page 4 to $200,000 from Parkland Acquisition Funds for trail right-of-way along the -Iowa River in the interest of extending and enhancing our recreational and non-motorized transportation system. He indicated he was planting a seed for the commission to think about, noting timing was a concern in that it appears the City Council is lining up as to whether or not they will support this section of the trail. Endel asked what the balance would be in the Parkland Acquisition Fund. Trueblood stated there is approximately $400,000 presently in the fund, $200,000 of which will be borrowed to finance the Scanlon Gymnasium. The Iowa River Trail proposal would take the remaining available funds. There will be future parkland acquisition funds as this $200,000 is being paid back over the next ten years or so. Stroh questioned the status of the Iowa River Trail project, with Trueblood noting it is still in the design stages, and bids had not been let. Stroh stated it was unknown at this time whether there would be a shortfall. Pruess stated the bids are due in on April 28th. Stroh noted the estimates are based on how much the land will cost if the trail runs along the river, but did not know how that could be done since the City does not own the land. Trueblood stated the City is working on acquiring the necessary land and it appears that this will be accomplished soon. Stroh stated he could be persuaded to allocate Parkland Acquisition Funds if land acquisition costs in this area for the Iowa River Trail came in over budget, noting there are still a lot of unknowns, meaning we don't know if there will be a shortfall. After further discussion, the consensus of the commission was to put forth the proposal informally to the City Council and to take official action on it at next month's commission meeting. Pruess stated he would prepare a memo to the City Council apprising them that the commission is open to use of Parkland Acquisition Funds to help offset the cost of land acquisition for the trail. Wallace stated she would like to know what other high priority properties the City may have an interest in acquiring that would be possible to do so with the available funds. Trueblood stated he would also review the Neighborhood Open Space action plan priorities. PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION REPORT Pacha asked when the Scanlon Gymnasium would be let for bids, with Trueblood stating it was his understanding from the architect that bids would be let in earlyApril. Pacha stated he would like to break ground in early April. Parks and Recreation Commission February 11, 1998 Page 5 RIVERFRONT AND NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION REPORT Endel reported: the RFNA Commission was concerned that the buffer around the peninsula would be destroyed by developing the area with soccer fields or other recreational uses and she reassured them that the Peninsula Task Force Committee and the Parks and Recreation Commission would not let that happen; they will be participating in a water festival event in September; and they will be observing Arbor Day on April 25th by planting trees and encouraged the Parks and Recreation Commission to attend. Endel stated she has a conflict and would not be able to attend the March RNAC meeting; Pruess indicated he would attend in her place. COMMISSION TIME Endel expressed concern at the inattentiveness and attitude of a lifeguard at the Mercer Park Aquatic Center when she was swimming laps one evening; staff will follow up. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: IPRAAnnual Conference. Commission members interested in attending this year's conference should contact staff by the end of the first week in March. Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Wallace, ,to adjourn. meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Unanimous. The POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - FEBRUARY 17, 1998 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM CALL TO ORDER Chair P. Hoffey called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, M. Raymond, and P. Hoffey. Board members absent: J. Watson. Legal Counsel D. Russell, City Clerk M. Karr and Assistant S. Bauer were also present. CONSENT CAI,ENDAR Motion by M. Raymond and seconded by P. Farrant to adopt Consent Calendar. Motion carried, 4/1, J. Watson absent. RECOMMENDTION TO COUNCIL None PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCItE~DULE Future meeting dates: EXECUTIVE SESSION February25, 1998 ~ 11:30A.M.-l:30P.M. March 4, 1998 - 7:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. · March 11, 1998 - 7:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. To discuss PCRB Complaints #97-2, #9%3 and #97-7, Motion was made by L.Cohen and seconded by P. Farrant to adjourn into Executive Session based upon 21.5(g) of the Code of Iowa to avoid disclosure of specific law enforcement matters, such as current or proposed investigations, and 22.7(5) of the Code of Iowa requiring peace officers investigative reports be kept. confidential. Motion carried, 4/1, J. Watson absent. Meeting adjourned at 7:05 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 7:55 P.M. The Board discussed the ad h0c committee which is being formed by bar/restaurant owners, the police and City administration to review police conduct in the downtown area. As information becomes available from this committee to the City Council, it was decided by the Board that they do not want to compromise their position of neutrality should a complaint be filed with the PCRB. P. CRB -Minutes 2/17/98 Page 2 ADJOURNMENT The issue can be discussed when the Board reviews the Iowa City Police Department's policies and procedures. The issues of conflict of interest was also addressed. Legal Counsel encouraged board members not to participate in those meetings or to become part of that ad hoc group. D. Russell suggested that future agendas contain a standard agenda item called "Board Information." Motion for adjournment by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 4/1, J. Watson absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:12 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - February 25, 1998 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair P. Hoffey called the meeting to order at 11:30 A.M. ATTENDANCE CONSENT CALENDAR Board members present: L. Cohen, M. Raymond, P. Hoffey, J. Watson (11:35 A.M.) and P. Fan'ant (11:40 A.M.). Staff present - Legal Counsel D. Russell, City Clerk M. Karr, Admin. Assistant S. Bauer. Also present, R.J. Winkelhake, Police Chief, for the purpose of discussion regarding complaint forms. Motion by M. Raymond and seconded by L. Cohen to adopt Consent Calendar as amended. Motion carded, 3/0, J. Watson and P. Farrant absent. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL · Receive PCRB Public Report on 97-2; · Receive PCRB Public Report on 97-3; · Receive PCRB Public Report on 97-7; · Approve PCRB Mediation Policies/Procedures and Guidelines. COMPLAINT FORMS Police Chief R. J. Winkelhake addressed issues of two separate complaint forms - "Citizen Complaint Form, Iowa City Police Department" and "Police Citizen's Review Board, Citizen's Complaint Form." Discussion followed. The Board felt strongly that it be informed of any written complaints from citizens regarding police officer misconduct regardless of which form is used. This would provide a much better picture to what the Board feels is their direction from the Council, noting the preamble to the Ordinance. The concern is that a complaint about police misconduct could be filed on the "Citizen Complaint Form, Iowa City Police Department" and never seen by the PCRB. Chief Winkelhake will attend the meeting on March 11 and present a report which will address how many complaints were handled in the Police Department in 1997, the nature of those complaints, and the results of investigations. PCRB - 2/25/98 Minutes Page 2 A subcommittee was appointed comprised of L. Cohen and P. Fan'ant to streamline and revise the PCRB complaint form and report back to the Board. Further discussion of this matter will continue at meeting of March 11. MEDIATION PROCESS Draft copies of the mediation documents were discussed. Direction was given to amend the mediation documents to reflect: Policies & Procedures: Add to #3, "Every effort will be made by the PCRB staff to arrange for the selected mediator. If, however, that is not possible, then the PCRB staff will discuss another possibility with the parties." Consent to Mediate: Change "choice" to "preference." Last line of the document, change "staff' to "PCRB staff." Letter #2: Paragraph 2, first sentence - Change "choice of' to "preference for;" second sentence - eliminate first choice and include second choice, "A Consent to Mediate and list of mediators has also been sent to the police officer(s) named in your Complaint." Letter #1, 82, & #3: The Board agreed the chairman's name should appear on all three letters, but gave authorization to PCRB staff to sign them in an effort not to slow the process. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by M. Raymond to approve the mediation documents as amended and send them to the City Council for approval. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCHEDULE Future meeting dates: · March 4, 1998 - 7:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. · March 11, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M. PCRB - 2/25/98 Minutes Page 3 EXECUTIVE SESSION BOARD INFORMATION ADJOURNMENT To discuss PCRB Complaints #97-2,//97-3,//97-7 and//98-1, Motion was made by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Fan'ant to adjourn into Executive Session based upon 21.5(g) of the Code of Iowa to avoid disclosure of specific law enforcement matters, such as current or proposed investigations, and 22.7(5) of the Code of Iowa requiring peace officers investigative reports be kept confidential. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 12:55 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 1:35 P.M. Motion by M. Raymond and seconded by L. Cohen to approve as amended PCRB Public Reports regarding Complaints//97-2,//97- 3, and//97-7. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Farrant that the level of review for PCRB Complaint//98-1 be 8-8-7 B(1)a. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. City Clerk M. Karr noted discussion at the City Council work session of February 23 regarding the format of PCRB reports to Council. Council Member Kubby suggested that additional information be provided under "Board Responsibility" to further explain Code citations to citizens. The PCRB Board will take the suggestion under advisement. The Board extended their appreciation to those reading the reports, noting that report writing was an evolving process and welcomes comments and suggestions. Motion for adjournment by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 1:40 P.M. °PCRB PUBLIC REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Re: Investigation of Complaint PCRB97-3 This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB97-3 (the "Complaint"). ROAR1}'S RESPONSIBII,ITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report to the Board of the investigation of a complaint (the "Report"). The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference to the...Report because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7B(2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact," it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if those findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence," if they are "unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious," or if they are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State, or local law." Sections 8-8-7B(2)a, b and c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE On November 17, 1997, this Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to Section 8-8-5, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. The Report was completed and submitted on December 171 1997. On December 23, 1997, the Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Sections 8-8-7 B(1)b, d, and e. On January 8, 1998, the Board requested, and was subsequently granted by the City, Council, a 45-day extension of the 30-day reporting deadline for this Complaint. The Board met on January 7, 8, 23, 29, 1998, and February 5, 9, 17 and 25 to consider the Report. GENF. RAI J I~ACKGROUND This Complaint is one of three filed in 1997 by the complainant. Because these three complaints appeared to arise fi'om interrelated events and because of the nature of the various allegations in the complaints, the Board decided that, although we would review the Report on each complaint separately, it would be helpful to obtain information about the context for certain allegations contained in all three complaints. On December 29, 1997, a subcommittee of the Board met with the complainant to obtain more information about his perspective on the complaints and to reiterate the availability of mediation. On January 23, 1998, the complainant delivered a package of materials and documents that he felt were relevant to the complaints. Because of the expansiveness of these materials, the Board asked the subcommittee that had met with the complainant to review the materials. The subcommittee reviewed all of the contents of the package of materials, including an audio tape, and reported to the full Board a summary of its meeting with the complainant and the materials submitted by the complainant. In addition, as part of its review of the Report of another related complaint, the Board viewed a police videotape of events related to the complainant's arrest for simple assault. The review of the supplementary and background information reveals that the complainant's dissatisfaction with the Iowa City Police Department extends back several years and involves a number of claims by the complainant. These claims, listed belows'. are part of the background information collected, but are not specifically the subject of complaints to the Board. · Police investigation of complaints concerning incidents involving his car in his former apartment complex parking lot and at his current residence. · Other interaction with police related to his tenancy at this apartment complex. · Investigation of a property accident involving his bike and a car in a supermarket parking lot. His treatment by police in connection with an arrest during Homecoming Parade in 1994. · Continuing problems with a current neighbor and with police handling of these problems. · Alleged surveillance of his home and family by police. · Vehicle stops by police that the complainant considers unwarranted. · Various other interactions with the police in general, and several officers in particular, that he considers to have been insensitive, harassing, and vindictive. · A pervasive feeling that his civil rights are being continuously deprived by the police. FINDINGS OF FACT A neighbor of the complainant filed a complaint against him with the Police Department. The officer assigned to the case (Officer 780911) requested a review of the complaint by the County Attomey's office. The County Attorney's office subsequently advised the officer that a simple assault charge against the complainant was in order. The officer wrote the charge for simple assault and obtained a warrant for the complainant's an'est.. Because the officer was concerned that the complainant would make allegations against him and the police department, he requested and was granted permission to videotape the arrest. Officer 780911 and three other officers attempted to serve the warrant at the complainant's home. The complainant"s wife stated to the police that her husband was not home. This sequence of events at the complainant's home was videotaped. The complainant voluntarily appeared at the police station a few hours later, accompanied by his wife and mother. He was met by Officers 780911 and 950906. He was placed under arrest, handcuffed by Officer 950906, using two sets of handcuffs linked together, and placed in a police vehicle for transport to the county jail. At the jail the complainant was processed by Johnson County deputies. Bond was posted by one of the complainant's family members and the complainant, his wife, and his mother departed the jail. These events at the police station and the county jail were videotaped. The complainant alleges that: · Officer 780911 slandered the complainant; · Officer 780911 attempted to incite him; · Excessive force was used against the complainant because the handcuffs placed on him were too tight; · Officer 780911 videotaped the complainant's daughter; · Officer 780911 maliciously charged him and harassed him; 4 The investigation by the Police Chief included interviews with the complainant, Officer 780911, Officer 950906, three Johnson County deputies, and an assistant County Attorney; and a review of the videotape of the events surrounding the arrest. CONCI,USION Allegation 1: Officer 780911 slandered the complainant. The Report on the investigation of Complaint PCRB97-2 reveals that another officer, not Officer 780911, told another officer that the complainant had been evicted from a previous apartment residence. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #1 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious, Accordingly the first allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 2: Officer 780911 attempted to incite him. The videotape reveals that Officer 780911 made two remarks, one at the police station and one at the county jail, which could be characterized as sarcastic or condescending. The officer's comments did not appear to incite the complainant and the officer's comments did not persist. While the tone of the comments could certainly be questioned, the Report's finding that the statements were not intended to incite the complainant is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Accordingly the second allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 3: Excessive force was used against the complainant because the handcuffs were too tight. The videotape shows that two pairs of handcuffs linked together were used for the complainant's an'est. The videotape shows that the deputy at the jail could put at least two fingers between the cuffs and the complainant's wrist. The cuffs were double locked to prevent tightening. One deputy stated to the investigator that the cuffs were "too loose." The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #3 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the third allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. 5 Allegation 4: Officer 780911 videotaped the corrlplainant's daughter. Officer 780911 denies videotaping the complainant's daughter. Officer 950906 denies seeing the daughter. The videotape does not reveal that any child was videotaped. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation g4 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the fourth allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 5: Officer 780911 maliciously charged him and harassed him. This Complaint stemmed from a report by a neighbor to the Police Department alleging assault by the complainant. Officer 780911, who was assigned the case, requested that the County Attorney's office review the merits of the neighbor's allegation against the complainant and was told that there was probable cause for a charge of simple assault against the complainant. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #5 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the fifiah allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. DATED: February 25, 1998 'PCRB PUBLIC REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL IRe: ":Investigation of complaint PCRB97-2'"': ' This is the Rq0ort of the Police Citizens Review Board (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB97-2 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIRII,ITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B, the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report to the Board of the investigation of a complaint (the "Report"). The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference to the...Report because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7 B(2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact," it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if those finding are "unsupported by substantial evidence," if they are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious," or if they are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State, or local law." Sections 8-8-7B(2)a, b, and c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE On October 20, 1997, this Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to Section 8-8-5, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. On November 19, 1997, the Board granted an extension to the Police Department to complete its investigation of Complaint 97-2. The Report was completed and submitted on December 30, 1997. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Sections 8-8-7B(1)b, d, and e. On January 8, 1998, the Board requested, and was subsequently granted by the City Council, a 45-day extension of the 30-day reporting deadline for this Complaint. The Board met on January 7, 8, 23, 29, 1998 and February 5, 9, 17, 25, 1998 to consider the Report. GENERAI J BACKGROUND This Complaint is one of three filed in 1997 by the complainant. Because these three complaints appeared to arise from interrelated events and because of the nature of the various allegations in the complaints, the Board decided that, although we would review the Report on each complaint separately, it would be helpful to obtain information about the context for certain allegations contained in all three complaints. On December 29, 1997, a subcommittee of the Board met with the complainant to obtain more information about his perspective on the complaints and to reiterate the availability of mediation. On January 23, 1998, the complainant delivered a package of materials and documents that he felt were relevant to the complaints. Because of the expansiveness of these materials, the Board asked the subcommittee that had met with the complainant to review the materials. The subcommittee reviewed all of the contents of the package of materials, including an audio tape, and reported to the full Board a summary of its meeting with the complainant and the materials submitted by the complainant. In addition, as part of its review of the Report of another related complaint, the Board viewed a police videotape of events related to the complainant's arrest for simple assault. The review of the supplementary and background information reveals that the complainant's dissatisfaction with the Iowa City Police Department extends back several years and involves a number of claims by the complainant. These claims, listed below, are part of the background information collected, but are not specifically the subject of complaints to the Board. * Police investigation of complaints concerning incidents involving his car in his former apa~hnent complex parking lot and at his current residence. * Other interaction with police related to his tenancy at this apartment complex. · Investigation of a property accident involving his bike and a car in a supermarket parking lot. · His treatment by police in connection with an arrest during Homecoming Parade in 1994. · Continuing problems with a current neighbor and with police handling of these problems. Alleged surveillance of his home and family by police. · Vehicle stops by police that the complainant considers unwarranted. · Various other interactions with the police in general, and several officers in particular, that he considers to have been insensitive, harassing, and vindictive. · A pervasive feeling that his civil rights are being continuously deprived by the police. FINBINGS OF FACT An officer was dispatched to the complainant's residence in response to a call from the complainant's wife regarding a dispute with a neighbor. The officer spoke with the complainant's wife and the neighbor and determined that charges against neither party were wan'anted. The officer attempted to conciliate the dispute. Later the same day, the officer was informed that the complainant had called the dispatcher and wanted to speak to the officer. The officer returned to the station and called the complainant. The conversation consisted primarily of reasons the complainant felt that charges should be filed against the neighbor and the officer's reasons for not filing charges. (This conversation was tape recorded by the complai.nant and the subcommittee of the Board listened to this tape). During the course of the conversation, the officer questioned the complainant regarding an alleged eviction from a former apartment residence. The complainant denied that he had been evicted and asked the officer to tell him the source of the allegation. The officer told him that the allegation came from another officer. The Complaint alleges: · The Iowa City Police conspired to deny his rights; · Two officers specifically conspired against the complainant; 4 · The officers were vindictive and made up charges. The investigation by the Police Chief included interviews with the complainant, the neighbor, the officer and the officer's supervisor. CONCI .USION Allegation 1: Police conspired to derly conlplainant's rights. The incident that precipitated this Co. mplaint was a dispute between a neighbor and the complainant and his family. Police involvement was in response to a call from the complainant's wife and a subsequent request by the complainant to talk to the officer that responded to his wife's complaint against the neighbor. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #1 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly, the first allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 2: Two officers conspired against the conlplainant. The two officers involved in this Complaint, one of whom was the other's supervisor, discussed the situation after the meetings with the complainant's wife and the neighbor. The discussion included some background information regarding the complainant. While this information appears to have been unsubstantiated and even erroneous, i't does not signi~' to the Board the existence of a conspiracy to harm the complainant. The only action that was discussed and carried out was to rerum the complainant's phone call. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #2 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious. Accordingly the second allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 3: The officers were vindictive and made up charges. While asking the complainant about his alleged eviction did not appear to be relevant or important enough to be mentioned during the phone call with the complainant, it was stated as a question and not an accusation. The tone of the taped conversation does not demonstrate any vindictiveness on the part of the officer and there is no other evidence of vindictiveness regarding the handling of this incident. No charges were filed against the complainant regarding this incident. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegations//3 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the third allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. · DATED: February 25, 1998 PCRB PUBLIC REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL IRe: Investigation of Complaint PCRB97-7 This is thc Rcpon of thc Policc Citizens Review Board (thc "Board") rcvicv,' of the investigation of Complaint PCRB97-7 (the "Complaint"). ROARD'S RESPONSIBIIITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B, the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report to the Board of the investigation of a complaint (the "Report"). The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference to the...Report because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7 B(2). While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact," it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if those findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence," if they are "unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious," or if they are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State, or local law." Sections 8-8-7 B(2)a, b, and c. BOARD'S PROCEDURE On December 1, 1997, this Complaint was received at the Office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to Section 8-8-5, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. The Report was completed and submitted on December 30, 1997. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Sections 8-8-7 B(1)b, d, and e. On January 8, 1998, the Board requested, and was subsequently granted by the City Council, a 45-day extension of the 30-day reporting deadline for this Complaint. The Board met on January 7, 8, 23, 29, 1998, and February 5, 9, 17, 25, 1997 to consider the Report. GENERAl, RACKGROUND This Complaint is one of three filed in 1997 by the complainant. Because these three complaints appeared to arise from interrelated events and because of the nature of 2 the various allegations in the complaints, the Board decided that, although we would review the Report on each complaint separately, it would be helpful to obtain information about the context for certain allegations contained in all three complaints. On December 29, 1997, a subcommittee of the Board met with the complainant to obtain more information about his perspective on the complaints and to reiterate the availability of mediation. On January 23, 1998, the complainant delivered a package of materials and documents that he felt were relevant to the complaints. Because of the expansiveness of these materials, the Board asked the subcommittee that had met with the complainant to review the materials. The subcommittee reviewed all of the contents of the package of materials, including an audio tape, and reported to the full Board a summary of its meeting with the complainant and the materials submitted by the complainant. In addition, as part of its review of the Report of another related complaint, the Board viewed a police videotape of events related to the complainant's arrest for simple assault. The review of the supplementary and background information reveals that the complainant's dissatisfaction with the Iowa City Police Department extends back several years and involves a number of claims by the complainant. These claims, listed below, are part of the background information collected, but are not specifically the subject of complaints to the Board. · Police investigation of complaints concerning incidents involving his car in his former apartment complex parking lot and at his current residence. · Other interaction with police related to his tenancy at this apartment complex. · Investigation of a property accident involving his bike and a car in a supermarket parking lot. · His treatment by police in connection with an arrest during Homecoming Parade in 1994. · Continuing problems with a current neighbor and with police handling of these problems. · Alleged surveillance of his home and family by police. · Vehicle stops by police that the complainant considers unwarranted. · Various other interactions with the police in general, and several officers in particular, that he considers to have been insensitive, harassing, and vindictive. · A pervasive feeling that his civil rights are being continuously deprived by the police. 3 FINDINGS OF FACT Two officers were dispatched to the home of a neighbor of the complainant. The neighbor alleged that the complainant had used his automobile to cut him off while the neighbor was running near Sycamore Mall. At approximately 10:00 p.m. the two officers went to the residence of the complainant to interview him. The officers observed lights on in the house. One of the officers knocked on the front doorframe and, when no one answered, opened the storm door and knocked on the entrance door, which has panes of glass. One officer noticed that at least one pane of glass was already cracked and that the other officer knocked directly on a pane of glass. Neither officer believed that they had caused a pane to crack. There was still no response, so the officers left after about ten minutes. They did not return because of other calls for service. The complainant admits that he was home and heard the knocking, but did not want to open the door at 10:00 p.m. The complainant alleges that: · He was harassed by the police; · He was denied his human rights; · He was subjected to malicious prosecution; · Officers cracked the glass in his front door; The investigation by the Police Chief included interviews with the complainant, the complainant's wife, the neighbor, and the two officers; and an inspection of the door. CONCI JUSION Allegation 1: He was harassed by the police. The two officers involved in this case responded to a complaint by a neighbor against the complainant. After interviewing the neighbor, the officers went to the complainant's home to interview him. After knocking for about ten minutes, the officers left. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #1 is supported by substantial evidence and is not 4 ~unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the first allegation of this Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation ?: He was derfled his human rights. The investigator of the Complaint states that, based on his interview with the complainant, this allegation pertains to events addressed in PCRB Complaint 97-3. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #2 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the second allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 3: He was subjected to malicious prosecution. No charges had been filed at the time of the Report. The investigator states that this allegation pertains to events addressed in PCRB Complaint 97-3. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation #3 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the third allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 4: Officers cracked the glass in his front door. The Report finds that there is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the claim and that, if the officers did cause damage, it was unintentional. Statements by the complainant, the complainant's wife, and the two officers are not consistent. The recommendation to file a claim with the City Finance Department appears appropriate. The Board finds that the conclusion in the Report concerning allegation g4 is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Accordingly the fourth allegation of the Complaint is NOT SUSTAINED. DATED: February 25, 1998 (2/25/98) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD FORMAL MEDIATION POLICIES/PROCEDURES 10. 11. 12. Requests for mediation, by either the complainant or the police officer, can be made at any time during the review process. Mediation will proceed as promptly as possible. Mediation may proceed only upon written agreement of all parties. Once an interest in formal mediation is expressed, the complainant shall be provided with a list of approved mediators to select from. Every effort will be made by the PCRB staff to arrange for the selected mediator. If, however, that is not possible, then the PCRB staff will discuss another possibility with the parties. Formal mediation arrangements will be handled by PCRB staff. Mediation shall be conducted at no cost to the parties by a trained mediator authorized by the PCRB. Mediators shall conduct mediation sessions at times and in places agreed to by the parties. Matters discussed in mediation sessions shall be confidential. Statements and records disclosed during mediation may not be used or introduced in evidence during any legal proceeding or PCRB investigation. If mediation is successful in resolving the complaint, the mediator shall inform the PCRB in writing, and the complainant shall withdraw his/her PCRB complaint. If mediation fails to resolve the complaint, the mediator shall inform the PCRB in writing, and the review of the complaint shall proceed as though mediation did not occur. Mediation does not "stop the clock" in the normal complaint process, but extensions based on mediation can be sought through the City Council. Only parties named in the complaint can participate in mediation. Others may be present if all parties agree. (2/25/98) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD GUIDELINES FOR FORMAL MEDIATION The goal of the PCRB is to assure that investigations into claims of police misconduct are conducted in a manner which is fair, thorough and accurate. Formal mediation is offered as a method to facilitate a successful resolution of the issues involved in the complaint. 1. Mediation is a process in which the parties named in a complaint meet together with a mediator to discuss resolution by promoting voluntary agreement between the parties. 2. Formal Mediation shall be available at any time during the review process upon written consent of the complainant and the police officer(s) who are the subject of the complaint. 3. Participants. Only the parties named in the complaint can participate in mediation, however others may be present if all parties agree. 4. The Mediator is a neutral person who is not an agent for any party. The mediator is to assist and help the parties reach their own resolution or agreement and does not give legal advice. 5. Place. Mediations shall be held at times and in places agreed upon by the parties. 6. Confidentiality. The parties understand that in order for mediation to work, open and honest communications are essential. All communications during the mediation are agreed by the parties to be inadmissible for any later purpose and shall not be admissible as arguments or evidence in a hearing or in any legal proceeding. Neither the mediator nor the mediator's notes and records shall be subject to subpoena or other discovery by any party following the mediation. 7. Termination. Mediation is a voluntary process, and it is understood that any party may terminate at any time. 8. Results of the mediation shall be reported by the mediator as either (a) Resolved and PCRB complaint is withdrawn, or (b) Unresolved, and the PCRB investigation shall proceed as though mediation did not occur. 9. Fees and expenses of the mediator shall be billed by invoice and paid by the PCRB through the City of Iowa City, IA at an hourly rate. MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1998 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Phil Shive, George Starr, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: Benjamin Chair STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: John Moreland, Jr., Steve Schmidt, Harvey Miller, David Forkenbrock, Gary Carlson, Larry Schnittjer, Joe Holland, Gary Hammers, Dennis Wismer, James Levy RFCOMMFNDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, of RE797-0019, a request submitted by Gary Watts, on behalf of property owners Arlington L.C., to rezone approximately 41 acres located between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 mile west of Taft Avenue from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS~5) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for 29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres, subject to a conditional zoning agreement outlining the applicant's obligations regarding the extension of Court Street and requiring approval of a future OPDH application for each parcel prior to development of the property, to be prepared and reviewed in accordance with the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Recommended, by a vote of 6-O, that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending that C79801, a request to fezone 5.3 acres from RS-10, Suburban Residential, to CP2, Planned Commercial, for property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Highway 1 and Landon Avenue be denied. Recommended denial, by a vote of 6-0, of RE797-0007/SUB97-0014, an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc. to rezone 24.12 acres from ID-RS, Interim Development, to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and for a preliminary plat of First and Rochester, Parts 4-6, a 4§-lot residential subdivision located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail. Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, of RE798-0001, a request for an amended preliminary OPDH plan of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 20-lot residential subdivision located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Starr called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCFMFNT OF VACANCIES ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Chairperson Starr announced the following vacancies: one vacancy on the Airport Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 2 commission for a six-year term ending March, 1, 2004; one vacancy on the Broadband Telecommunications Commission for a three-year term ending March 13, 2001; three vacancies on the Civil Service Commission with one two-year term ending April 3, 2000, one three-year term ending April 2, 2001, and one four-year term ending April 1, 2002; one vacancy on the Design Review Committee to fill an unexpired term for an architect ending July 1, 1998 in addition to a three-year term ending July 1, 2001; two vacancies on the Historic Preservation Commission for three-year terms ending March 29, 2001 with for one Summit Street District representative and one for an at-large representative; and one vacancy on the Housing and Community Development Commission to fill an unexpired term ending September 1, 1998. He stated that these appointments would be made at the City Council meeting of February 24, 1998. Starr added that the Animal Control Advisory Board has one vacancy to fill a three-year term ending April 5, 2001, and the appointment will be made at the March 12, 1998 meeting of the City Council. RE?ONING ITEMS: RE797-0011. Public discussion of an application submitted by H & O LLC, on behalf of property owner Norwood C. Louis, to rezone 4.46 acres from Interim Development Single- Family Residential (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8) to permit 35 dwelling units located at 500 Foster Road. (45-day limitation period waived to March 5, 1998) Miklo stated that the applicant requested deferral of this item to the March 5, 1998 meeting. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer R!=797-0011, an application submitted by H & O LLC, on behalf of property owner Norwood C. Louis, to rezone 4.46 acres from Interim Development Single-Family Residential (IDRS) to Sensitive Areas Overlay-8 (OSA-8) to the March 5, 1998 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Supple seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. RE797-0019. Public discussion of an application submitted by Gary Watts, on behalf of property owners Arlington L.C., to rezone approximately 41 acres located between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 mile west of Taft Avenue from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for 29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres. (45-day limitation period waived to February 19, 1998) Kugler said there had been no changes to the plan since the Commission's last meeting. Due to concerns of some Commission members regarding the size of the proposed RM-12 zone, Kugler said staff has revised its recommendation such that the review of the required future OPDH application would be tied more closely to the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan. He said staff recommends that this rezoning be approved subject to a Conditional Zoning Agreement outlining the applicant's obligations regarding the extension of Court Street and requiring approval of a future OPDH application Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 3 for each parcel prior to development of the property, to be prepared and reviewed in accordance with the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Ehrhardt thanked staff for the additional language in the recommendation and asked if the concepts in the Comprehensive Plan are specific enough for developers to get a clear message. Kugler responded that the concepts in the Plan are clear enough that if the Commission does not feel the application is in accordance with the Plan, there would be grounds for denial. Supple asked Kugler if he agreed.that this rezoning is necessary to get the overlay and the mixed use the Commission is looking for. Kugler replied that it was not necessary, but what is occurring is that the density increases are being requested at this time, and the developer would be agreeing to submit more detailed plans in the future, when the property is ready to be developed. He said it would be possible for the developer to wait and apply for a rezoning at that time. Kugler said, however, this method makes it easier to increase density on certain parcels throughout a residential area when it is being planned. He said it also provides more notice to surrounding property owners who may be interested in developing their land, as well as people who are considering buying lots in the area. Supple said if the entire parcel were rezoned OPDH-8, it would allow ten units per acre, which could be adjusted in different ways on the land, shifting higher density to one area or another. Kugler confirmed this, but said if the applicant was filing for a PDH rezoning, he would have to provide a plan. He said the other alternative would be to rezone the property RS-8 at this time and come in with a planned development in the future to distribute the units differently on the property and provide some alternative housing types. Kugler said that method would not provide notice to adjacent property owners that there may eventually be apartments or condominiums there. Bovbjerg raised the point that this would be going from an RS to an RM zone and from 5 to 12 zoning, both of which are fairly unusual. She said that a jump from RS-5 to RM-12 seems like a large change in land use. Bovbjerg said she wondered if this has been done before, and if so, how it has worked out. She said she also wondered about RS-8 zoning for the entire parcel, saying it would not seem so drastic. Kugler said the Commission has, in some cases, zoned parcels from RS-5 to RM-12. He said when Windsor Ridge was annexed, the entire property was zoned RS-5. Kugler said the Comprehensive Plan would suggest something else, such that at least around the CN-1 zone, there be some higher density zoning and a mix of housing types around the neighborhood. Kugler said hopefully with the design concepts in the Comprehensive Plan, the design and development of these areas will be successful and will be integrated into the neighborhood. He said the parcel could be zoned RS-8 in its entirety and at a future time, the density could be concentrated at the southern end. Kugler said staff feels that some multi-family zoning along Court Street would be appropriate for this area and is therefore recommending approval. John Moreland. Jr.. ?60? Rochester Avenue, said he is one of the applicants from Arlington L.C. He said he developed property of 45 acres by New Life Fitness that was zoned RM-12. Moreland said the City was then in the process of changing the procedures for how development progressed, and at one time it was taking between six and fifteen weeks to get a project started. In order to streamline the process, Moreland said the City adopted an administrative policy to review the site plans, cutting the time to two to three weeks. Moreland said the westside project is one of the most successful in Iowa City, with a mix of $160,000 condos down to $60,000 condos. He said it worked out well, and he Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 4 did not have to go back through the Planning and Zoning Commission every time he wanted a project. Moreland said he takes pride in his work and made the designs the way they should be to sell the housing. He said it is overkill on staff's part to require an OPDH every time someone wants to do a project. Moreland said he meets the density requirements as well as the parking and screening considerations. He said the site plan process contains thousands of things to follow to get the site plan approved. Moreland asked why this should go back through the Planning and Zoning Commission again. He said the Commission is supposed to decide how land should be zoned and how the Comprehensive Plan should be followed, and he thought the Planning and Zoning Commission should not be deciding detail issues, such as the color of the shingles. Moreland said that Bruce Glasgow's land along Scott Boulevard is zoned RM-12, RM-20, and CN-1 and it all butts up to land that is zoned RS-5. He said this is because there is a need for this type of housing. Moreland said the OPDH adds a lot of red tape to the process. He said the Commission has to trust the developer to a certain 'extent to do what is right, because the developer needs to sell his product, and if he does not, it will catch up with him. Moreland stated that he did not think every little item needed to be policed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Gibson said the Commission is granting additional density here and would like to see that taken advantage of by the developer to move toward some of the concepts that are in the Comprehensive Plan. He said that in exchange for the density increase, the developer needs to come back and go over the plans to show the Commission that he is willing to develop according to the Comprehensive Plan. Gibson said this is a tradeoff and that he did not see this as going on forever or as backsliding at all as far as the Commission staying out of plan review. He said the City does not have in place the necessary zoning and development rules to move toward the current ComPrehensive Plan without the OPDH process. He added that Moreland does not have to go through the OPDH process if he does not want to increase the zoning density on this property. Moreland said he does not mind coming back to the Commission regarding important issues, but thought it was wrong to try to satisfy everyone's personal tastes on design issues. Supple asked Moreland what he anticipated the number of dwelling units would be if this were zoned RM-1 2, as requested. Moreland responded that it depends on what the market warrants. He said he could have put more units on the RM-12 zoned property on the west side, but did not because the market would not accept that. Moreland said he could not specify a number at this time, but it would be nice to have the option to develop several different concepts. He said it would be difficult to get the maximum number allowed, because of the terrain and putting garages on the property. He added that most of the RM- 12 and RM-20 zones are already developed so that there is no longer much of that zoning in the area. Supple asked Moreland if he felt the RM-12 zoning would entitle him to the maximum number of units. Moreland replied that he felt it would, if he came back through the OPDH process and his application was approved. He said this property would be right on Court Street, which will be fairly busy, and people will not be building expensive homes there. Moreland said a first-time buyer would be willing to put up with this road traffic, and that is the type of housing he will be looking at. Starr asked if the downside of the OPDH process is an increase in costs. Moreland said he felt the real issue is the timing, and if things get moved through promptly, he did not see a big cost. Ehrhardt said although she sees the point of putting this density along Court Street, one of her concerns is that the proposed RM-12 area is so large. She stated that 12 Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 5 acres is a large parcel and that the neighborhood design concepts discuss little pockets of this higher density, but not a large area. She asked why it is necessary to have such a large area zoned RM-12. Moreland said he compromised by eliminating the four acres at the north end of the property to be rezoned RM-12. He said he felt all along Court Street, it should be zoned RM-12. He said on the west side, he has 12-plexes right across the street from zero-lot line duplexes. Moreland said he put the parking behind the building and landscaped the property. He added that anyone there who owns a zero-lot line residence would say it has not affected the property values. He said the concern that multi-family housing might bring down the property values of other properties was not a legitimate argument. Bovbjerg said one reason the project on the west side was good was that the Planning and Zoning Commission did a good job and everyone worked together to get a good mix of housing types. She said the Commission wants to give the developer some flexibility, but does not want to see 12 acres of 12-plexes, which would be overwhelming. Bovbjerg said the mix of housing types, as suggested by the Comprehensive Plan, as well as flexibility for the developers is what the Commission is wrestling with now. She said as far as she knew, planned developments have never held things up or cost a lot of money. Moreland said he could not give exact numbers, but by the time the streets and green space are there, half of the land will be used up. He said he did not envision 12 acres with 144 units on it, which would be physically difficult to do. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of RE797-0019, a request submitted by Gary Watts, on behalf of property owners Arlington L.C., to rezone approximately 41 acres located between Lower West Branch Road and Court Street extended, approximately 4/5 mile west of Taft Avenue from Low Density Single-Family Residential {RS-5) to Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) for 29.1 acres and Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) for 11.9 acres, subject to a conditional zoning agreement outlining the applicant's obligations regarding the extension of Court Street and requiring approval of a future OPDH application for each parcel prior to development of the property, to be prepared and reviewed in accordance with the neighborhood design concepts contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Gibson seconded the motion. Gibson asked about the definition of the term "parcel". Kugler said that in this case, it referred to the two zoning parcels. He added that there could be one plan for the entire 41 acres, and if it were approved, then the final plans would be approved administratively. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. C79801. Public discussion of an application submitted by Harvey Miller and Steve Schmidt to rezone 5.3 acres from RS-l O, Suburban Residential, to CP2, Planned Commercial, for property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Highway 1 and Landon Avenue. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 6 Mik10 said this property is part of a larger 45-acre parcel that was rezoned in 1996 from agricultural to RSo10, which allows one dwelling unit per ten acres. He said the Commission considered a subdivision plat for this property to four lots, which was deferred due to concerns about the number of access points onto Highway 1. Miklo said the current owner of the property, who recently purchased it, would like to rezone approximately five of the 45 acres from RS-10 to CP2, which is Planned Commercial in the County. He said the purpose of the rezoning would be to allow the construction of a contractors' yard on the property, where a contractors' building office would be located and supplies and materials would be stored. Miklo said that the Fringe Area Agreement between the County and the City of Iowa City, which governs this area, indicates that it is generally appropriate for continued agricultural uses.and agricultural zoning and that on a case by case basis, rezonings to RS-10 to allow residential development would be considered. He added that the Fringe Area Agreement does not recommend commercial zoning in this location, but recommends that commercial and industrial development occur on paved roads near the existing City limits within the growth area and according to the City's infrastructure requirements. Miklo said the proposed rezoning would not be in compliance with the Fringe Area Agreement. He said the County planning staff has also indicated that there is existing vacant commercial property in this vicinity on the other side of Highway 1. Miklo said staff is therefore not recommending the extension of commercial zoning into this area or the approval of this development. He said although the proposed contractors' yard might be compatible with the adjacent agricultural and residential uses, the planned commercial zoning in the County allows a wide variety of commercial land uses that may not be appropriate adjacent to the existing and potential development in this area. Miklo said staff therefore recommends that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending that this rezoning request be denied as it is not in compliance with the Fringe Area Agreement. Gibson asked if it were true that if this were zoned CP2, that any use satisfying the requirements for this zone could be placed on this property. Miklo said that was correct. Ehrhardt asked if the rest of the parcel could eventually be subdivided. Miklo confirmed that it could be, as it is more than ten acres. Ehrhardt asked about the opinions of the adjacent property owners. Miklo said he had not heard, as the adjacent property owners are notified at the County level. Steve Schmidt. 500 5th Avenue. Mount Vernon, said he is co-owner of Apex Construction Company. He said this section of land was purchased by himself and Harvey Miller with plans to build an office building/warehouse for their construction company. He said the intent is to construct a building that would house all their equipment, tools, and materials. He said all supplies would be stored completely inside the building. Schmidt said he feels this land falls within the criteria that is spelled out for Fringe Area C. He said it does lie on a paved road, and he has agreed to treat the gravel road, Landon Avenue, for dust. He said that eventually the road will be paved. Schmidt said he felt that particular section of land would be appropriate for a commercial location since there is commercial land directly across the street, within 75 feet of this property. He said he felt this would be a good location, as it would not impact the area. Schmidt said they would like to rezone 5 acres of a larger area of approximately 46 acres. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 7 He Said the rest of the parcel is not going to be developed, but Harvey Miller would like to construct a house on the 40-acre parcel and together with the office building, that would be the extent of construction on the property. Schmidt said if the property were developed to allow one owner for each ten acres, there would be a lot of room for expansion by those property owners that would possibly be uncontrolled. He stated that this proposal would give some control over what happens on the property. Schmidt displayed an artist's concept drawing of the proposed building from two perspectives. Bovbjerg asked where the stream was located in relation to the building, and Schmidt pointed out the area. Public discussion: Harvey Miller. 516 Kirkwood Avenue, said his company is three years old and is a small commercial company with six employees. He said they do a lot of work at University Hospitals and also do small commercial projects. Miller said they have been looking at lots in town for three years, as the company does all of its work in Iowa City. He said they currently have a small office in Iowa City and a shop in Mount Vernon, and they have been looking to combine these offices so that they can continue to grow and ,prosper and keep working in Iowa City. Miller said there is not much affordable commercial land in Iowa City. Miller said the parcel they purchased has a great deal of slope and is not really well suited to many applications. He said this property cost less for 46 acres than for most of the one to two-acre lots in Iowa City. Miller said the new building would give them an opportunity to have their business in Iowa City as well as their employees and to keep growing. He added that there is a lot of commercial property across the street. He said they would have bought commercially-zoned property if there were some available that was affordable. Miller said the company has a reputation as a quality organization and added that the property across the street is unsightly, and he felt his company might be mistakenly grouped in the same category. Miller said the Living Word Church, which owns 20 acres behind his property, is in support of what the company is doing. He said the company originally wanted to locate along the highway, but after talking to the neighbors, decided to move down the slope to be buffered from them, out of consideration for the neighbors. Steve Schmidt said that the CP2 is planned commercial zoning and would require a plan in place before the building could be approved. He said this zoning would not allow other types of businesses without planned review and approval. Ehrhardt asked where the church is constructing its new building. Miller said it would be to the west of Landon Avenue and pointed the area out on the map. Ehrhardt asked if the two adjacent property owners were supportive of this, and Schmidt responded that they were supportive, to a degree. He said that none of the property owners on Landon Avenue have a problem with this rezoning request. Schmidt said that on Highway One, one resident property owner is opposed. Ehrhardt asked about the property owner who lives right next to this property, and Schmidt responded that he is neutral. Public discussion closed. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 8 MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending that C79801, a request to rezone 5.3 acres from RS-10, Suburban Residential, to CP2, Planned Commercial, for property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Highway I and Landon Avenue be approved. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said one of the stumbling blocks here is the state of Landon Avenue. She asked what the County's intention was regarding the paving of this road. Miklo said he understood that the County has no plans to pave or improve Landon Avenue. He said the applicant's letter states that they agree to provide some dust alleviation and maintenance of the street, but he did not think that included paving. Miklo said the County Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors that the rezoning not be approved, partially because it would be inconsistent with the Fringe Area Agreement and possibly because of other details he was not aware of. Schmidt said the County did not want commercial development on that side of the highway. Gibson said he would not vote in favor of the applicant's proposal for two reasons. He said the intention of the Fringe Area Agreement is not to facilitate growth in this area, but to discourage it, and when development does occur, to cause it to go in certain directions. 'Gibson said he does not want to see Highway One strewn with businesses all along it. Secondly, Gibson said that the advice the Commission has received is that if the CP2 zone is approved, it can be used for restaurants, filling stations, distribution facilities, and possibly a large number of other uses. He said the Commission needs to consider the request in the context of what can happen on the property if it is rezoned, and if it is an appropriate parcel for any of these uses, not whether the current proposal is good or bad. Gibson said he felt this proposal was fairly innocent, but the owners could later put any of these other uses on it, and he could not be in favor of that. Supple said she agreed with Gibson's comments, although she sympathized with the applicants. She agreed that commercial land is expensive. Supple said she did not believe the proper way was to find more affordable land and then look for the rezoning. She stated that this use looks rather innocent, but said the future potential is too frightening and she would also be voting no on this issue. Bovbjerg said she agreed with Supple's comments. Starr said no one on the Commission is questioning the ethics of the applicants or their ability to provide a quality service. He said the real consideration is the land use issue, which is what the Commission is concerned with. Starr said the potential always exists for the use to change. He stated that he feels compelled to honor the Fringe Area Agreement, and he will also be voting against the recommendation. Shive said he agrees that the issue involves the consideration of what other things could happen to the land, if rezoned. The motion failed on a vote of 0-6. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend that the City Council forward a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending that CZ9801, a request to fezone 5.3 acres from RS-10, Suburban Residential, to CP2, Planned Commercial, for property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Highway I and Landon Avenue be denied. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 9 RF7ONING/DFVFLOPMFNT ITEMS: SUB98-000?. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dav-Ed Ltd. for a preliminary plat of Galway Hills, a 13.63 acre, eight-lot residential subdivision located on the south side of Melrose.Avenue west of West High School. (45-day limitation period expires March 15, 1998) Gibson stated that his staff has been working to negotiate sewer easements across University property to permit this development to go forth. Holecek asked if the negotiations would benefit his employer. Gibson said that it might. Holecek asked Gibson if he could give a fair and impartial rendition of the merits of the case. Gibson responded that he could. Miklo said the subdivision would contain eight lots, with seven of them on the west side of Dublin Drive, a new collector street that would intersect with Melrose Avenue. He said the seven lots would be conventional single-family lots zoned RS-5 and would allow single- family development. Miklo said that Lot 1 17, the eighth lot, is ten acres in size, and is intended for the development of a retirement community, which is subject to a rezoning to planned development, the next item to be considered. Miklo showed a concept plan of how the remainder of the Galway Hills property might develop in relation to this property. He showed how Dublin Drive would intersect with Shannon Drive, so the connection would not result in a direct connection between Melrose Avenue and Rohret Road, two arterial streets. The design creates more of an indirect connection of two collector streets. Miklo said it is designed to carry traffic from this neighborhood, not to serve as a shortcut for arterial street traffic. Miklo stated that this property covers approximately 13 acres. He said the earlier portions of the Galway Hills Subdivision were covered by a Conditional Zoning Agreement that specified that six acres of neighborhood open space would be dedicated by the City. Miklo said this property falls outside of the area covered by the Conditional Zoning Agreement, so that approximately 1/3 of an acre of neighborhood open space should be dedicated, according to the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance, or fees in lieu of the dedication should be paid by the developer. Miklo said the Parks and Recreation Commission has indicated that it would prefer to have fees paid instead of having open space dedicated. He said their preference is for an eight-foot sidewalk along the east side of Dublin Drive extending down Shannon Drive to connect to the open space that is dedicated on the southern boundary of Galway Hills Subdivision. Miklo added that if the next item is approved, an additional .1 3 acres of open space or fees in lieu of, would be required due to the increased density. Miklo said one of the main issues involved with this subdivision is sanitary sewer service. He said there is currently no service available to this property, and the property owner and applicant are negotiating with the University of Iowa and the school district for easements for a sewer line to extend north of Melrose Avenue to the northwest trunk line. He said those negotiations and easements must be in place for this subdivision and subsequent rezoning to be approved. Miklo said there are also minor details to be resolved on the subdivision plat, including a tree easement belonging to the City that needs to be extended, because a portion of it is Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 10 being displaced by Dublin Drive. He said there is also a need to resolve a pedestrian access issue raised by staff. He showed a potential trail access easement suggested by staff to provide access from the larger Galway Hills Subdivision to West High School, which staff feels is a logical location. Miklo said if the applicant is able to identify another location somewhere in the vicinity to provide access to the high school, it would certainly be considered. He said the trail would not be built at this time, and the current school administration would rather not have trail access to the high school. Miklo said staff would like to have the access in place, should that policy be changed in the future. Miklo said there are also minor deficiencies on the plat to be resolved, but the main concern is the sanitary sewer service. He said staff recommends deferral until that issue and the minor deficiencies can be resolved. Starr asked what would happen to the easement if the school policy never changes. Miklo said it would remain. Bovbjerg asked if the stub that currently comes off Melrose Avenue is the beginning of Dublin Drive, and Miklo confirmed this. Supple asked if the connection from Dublin to Shannon, actually from Melrose Drive to Rohret Road, was not considered a straight shot. Miklo said it is not a straight shot and said that the Transportation Planner feels this would not be an attractive alternative, so through traffic would be discouraged. He said there are traffic calming measures designed into Shannon Drive, such as the neckdowns at the intersections. Supple asked if this item and the next are contingent upon each other in the developer's mind. Miklo said the subdivision could be approved without approving the rezoning. He said it is possible that Lot 117 could be further subdivided into single-family residential lots. Ehrhardt asked if the Commission could recommend that the open space be dedicated instead of fees. Miklo confirmed this. Ehrhardt said that Terry Trueblood had indicated that part of his criteria for determining whether open space should be dedicated or fees requested included the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Mikl'o said the Parks and Recreation Commission generally reviews these items before the Planning and Zoning Commission does. Supple asked if the developer anticipated having the sewer service situation resolved. Miklo did not know, but said there have been negotiations and Public Works has been involved with those negotiations to a certain extent. Gibson said he understood that this sort of land transaction must be approved by the State Board of Regents and possibly the State Executive Council. He said he believed that the earliest the State Board of Regents could approve this would be the April board meeting. Miklo said one possibility would be that if it does look like there will be a successful negotiation, the subdivision request could be approved, subject to the sanitary sewer situation being resolved before the City Council votes on the application. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Supple moved to defer SUB98-000;~, an application submitted by Dav-Ed Ltd. for a preliminary plat of Galway Hills, a 13.63 acre, eight-lot residential subdivision located on the south side of Melrose Avenue west of West High School to the March 5, 1998 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Shiva seconded the motion. The motion carried on Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 11 a vote of 6-0. RF798-0007. Public discussion of an application submitted by Newbury Development Company to rezone 10 acres from Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) to Planned Development Housing (OPDH-8) to permit an 80 dwelling unit retirement community located on the south side of Melrose Avenue west of West High School. (45-day limitation period expires March 15, 1998) Miklo said this concerns Lot 117 of the Galway Hills, Part V Subdivision. He said the request is to rezone this one lot to OPDH-8 to allow a planned development for a retirement community. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plan indicates that this particular area of the City should develop residentially at a density of 2-8 dwelling units per acre. He said the proposed OPDH, which would result in 80 units on ten acres, would be at the upper end of the density, but certainly in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plan also contains a number of policies to encourage a variety of housing types within most neighborhoods, and this would introduce more variety into this neighborhood, which is generally low density, single-family. He said the Comprehensive Plan also encourages the development of housing options for elderly residents, and this is designed to do that. Miklo said the Plan also states that high density should occur near arterial or collector streets, so that traffic is not directed through lower density neighborhoods. He said that since this would have nearly direct access onto Melrose Avenue, staff feels that this does meet that criteria. Miklo said the Transportation Planner did a brief study of this site, finding that the traffic characteristics of a typical unit in housing for the elderly would result in two to three vehicular trips per day, versus a single-family house, which generates from seven to eight trips per day. Miklo said even though this development would double the density that probably would occur here if the rezoning was not approved, the actual traffic generated will probably be less than or at most equal to what a single-family development would generate. Miklo said the developer proposes one building consisting of five wings. He said a portion of the building would be one story tall, and other portions would be three stories tall. Miklo said because of underground parking, there would be some elements of one side that would be four stories tall, and staff has asked for details regarding how that would be handled. Miklo said this is a very large building, but there have been several things done with its design to help it fit into a lower density neighborhood, including a varied roofline, projecting bays, a combination of brick and siding, and a generous setback of 60 to 100 feet from the street. Miklo said the building will sit at a lower point on the site than the rest of the surrounding subdivision. He said that Dublin Drive will actually be higher up than this site, which will help in terms of the perceived height of the building. Miklo said staff has asked the applicant for more details regarding how the building will look from Melrose Avenue. He said staff has illustrations of the proposed design from Dublin Drive, and if the Melrose Avenue view is of the same quality, staff feels it would be suitable for this location. Miklo said staff has asked for more sidewalks on the property for internal pedestrian circulation. He added that the open space fee for this property, because of the increase in Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 12 density, would be slightly higher than that for the subdivision. Miklo said the major issue here is also the provision of sanitary sewer service, which must be provided before this can be constructed. He stated that storm water management would occur on the property and showed the designated area on the map. Miklo said the applicant's landscape architect has considered using wetland plants, rather than a conventional storm water management facility. Miklo said there are minor deficiencies to be resolved, in addition to the sanitary sewer issue. He said because this is a rezoning and because of the deficiencies, staff is recommending deferral of this item to the next meeting. Miklo said if those issues are resolved, the rezoning would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and staff would recommend approval. Ehrhardt asked what the required parking would be for this building. Miklo replied that for housing for the elderly, the requirement is one parking space per unit,. so that this does exceed the minimum required. He said the applicant was anticipating parking for staff and visitors as well. Miklo said the applicant has proposed 60 parking spaces for the interior of the building as well as an additional 50 spaces on the surface, spread out in pockets around the site. Garv Hammers, of Crose Gardner Shukert Landscape Architects, Des Moines said he was representing the applicant. He said one of the concerns with this type of housing is controlled access into the building. He said that most of the public and residents should be entering the building through the main access. Hammers said that adding sidewalks and connecting up the other doorways tell people that it is okay to use other doors, which is not what the developer wants. He said he had no problem with connecting the main walk to the building out to the eight-foot sidewalk. As far as the four-story elements, Hammers said the applicant will be putting in a retaining wall to minimize the amount of garage-wall that is showing. He said that is a two-story building element anyway, so in essence it will only be a three-story building, rather than a four-story building. Hammers showed some diagrams showing the view from Melrose Avenue. He said there will be a small berm, and the building itself is a little lower than Melrose, so that the impact of the building on the Melrose Side will not be that of a three- story building. Hammers showed a perspective from Dublin Drive. Hammers said due to storm water management practices, they would be doing rerouting of swales and build a fairly flat pad. He said there would be some steep, three-to-one slopes and a lot of terracing. Hammers said the idea is to try to use as much natural plant material as possible to make it look good and minimize erosion. Supple asked for clarification of the number of stories on the building. Hammers said the V- shape of the building contains the independent living units, showing a line from where the building is three stories high. He said the two end units are two stories in height. Dennis Wismer, of RDG Architects in Omaha, showed conceptual floor plans to help identify different areas of the building. He showed the independent living unit apartments, of which there are 48. Wismer said the central area of the building is the common living area and support spaces, and the two wings on the south end are one-story and are assisted-living units. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 13 Wismer stated that the entire footprint of the lower level of the independent living wing would be a parking garage. He showed sketches of the main entry from Dublin Drive and a view 'from Melrose Avenue looking toward the southwest. Wismer said they have tried to incorporate residential materials and styles, because on a building of this size it is important to articulate to break down the institutional appearance as well as to use materials that are not too opulent, but keep a residential material with brick and siding. Ehrhardt said she appreciated the fact that the developers have worked with the neighborhood over a long period of time. Supple asked about the difference of opinion regarding the additional sidewalks. Hammers said he does not want to have sidewalks interconnecting all of the doorways because he wants to control access to the building at one location. He said the additional sidewalks would provide a good configuration for an apartment building, but not for this building because of security concerns. Miklo said staff's main concern was to have access to the public walk from the building. He said he can see benefits in having the other sidewalks, but can understand the applicant's argument. He said the applicant seems to be agreeing to add certain sidewalks, specifically the ones that staff deems the most important. Bovbjerg asked if there would be fencing or gating on the site. Hammers said there would not be fencing except for the fence that is already there on the east property line. Wismer pointed out that the traffic studies may have considered the total number of units, but the 22 assisted-living residents will probably not drive. Public discussion: James Levy, said he is the President of Newbury Development Company. He said regarding the sanitary sewer, there are two choices: either a gravity feed sanitary sewer that runs to the north, or a lift station. Levy said the cost is roughly equal for both but the maintenance on the lift station is far greater for all parties involved. He said since the lift station would eventually be maintained by the City, a gravity feed system was felt to be in everyone's best interest. Levy said a benefit of a gravity feed system is that it might serve other land. Levy said he has been discussing with University representatives, the possibility of putting the sanitary sewer in a line that comes close to the right-of-way line of the Hawkeye Drive area. He said another purpose served by that line is the possibility that, should the University ever develop the land on the high ground to the west of the relocated Hawkeye Drive, there would be a sanitary sewer in place. Levy said he discussed this at a meeting with two people from the City of Iowa City, two people from the University of Iowa , and an engineer from Shive-Hattery. He said the consensus at the meeting was that the most time and cost-efficient solution would be the one shown here. Levy said if the Board of Regents or the University staff would not agree to this solution, he would resort to the lift station solution. He said he has requested an agreement from the University and understands that it has to go through various levels. Levy said the Newbury Development Company has built a similar, licensed facility in Des Moines at 3801 Grand Avenue. He said the company has been in existence about ten years and has done many projects of various types around the state, but mostly in the Des Moines area. Supple said the Commission cannot approve the request unless the sewer service issue is Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 14 satisfied, and Levy has indicated it could take several months. Levy said he did not see that the project needed to be postponed, because he always has the option of constructing a lift station. Starr said the Commission could send the project to the City Council, if it were subject to a sanitary sewer agreement. Miklo said there may be an alternative, and he will have a report from Public Works at a future meeting. He said that if Public Works accepts an alternative design using the lift station approach, the Commission could vote on the application subject to one of the two designs being determined before the City Council votes. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Shive moved to defer RE798-000~, an application submitted by Newbury Development Company to rezone 10 acres from Low Density Single-Family (RS-5) to Planned Development Housing (OPDH-8) to permit an 80 dwelling unit retirement community located on the south side of Melrose Avenue west of West High School to the March 5, 1998 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Supple seconded the motion. Bovbjerg asked staff to research whether the trips generated by this type of facility included staff. Miklo said he thought that figure was included but would find out for sure. Bovbjerg said that she was interested in ways of dissipating water from all of these roof lines. She said that it could be incorporated tastefully and effectively in a planned development such as this. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. RE797-O007/SUB97-0014. Public discussion of an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc. to rezone 24.12 acres from ID-RS, Interim Development, to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and for a preliminary plat of First and Rochester, Parts 4-6, a 45-1ot residential subdivision located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail. (45-day limitation period waived indefinitely) Kugler said this application had been deferred indefinitely at the Commission's November 6, 1997 meeting at the applicant's request. He said staff recommended denial at that t~me, which was shortly after the First Avenue extension was delayed at least two years by the November 4th referendum. Kugler stated that staff felt in the absence of the extension of First Avenue and an additional means of access to this general neighborhood, the City's secondary access guidelines would not be met and no additional development should be approved in this area. Kugler said a Conditional Zoning Agreement between the City and the developer from 1988 indicates that no development should occur on the subject property until secondary access is provided in some manner. Kugler said the applicant requested that this item be put back on the agenda and is requesting a vote by the Commission. He added that the applicant is questioning the City's secondary access guidelines and how they apply to this property. Kugler said the applicant also feels that the Conditional Zoning Agreement from 1988 does not preclude the City from approving additional development in this area if both the applicant and the City agree to amend the Conditional Zoning Agreement. He said the applicant also feels that time and circumstances have changed and that the need for these types of building lots and housing stock in the City outweigh the negatives of not having secondary access to this area. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 15 Kugler said the proposed plat and Sensitive Areas Development Plan are in conformance with City regulations, miscellaneous corrections to the plat have been made, and it is ready to be voted on. He added that a grading plan would be needed if the application proceeds to City Council. Kugler said the proposed street width of Tamarack Trail is now being proposed for 28 feet rather than 25 feet, as was recommended by the planning staff. He said the planning staff feels there are good arguments for a narrower street in this location, and the Sensitive Areas Ordinance both advocates and allows for that to happen. Kugler said Public Works is not in agreement with the narrower street width. He said if the rezoning and plat are approved, the street width issue should be resolved prior to final plat approval. Kugler said staff still recommends denial of this application based on the lack of secondary access to the property. He said there are approximately 132 dwelling units located on this single means of access, and other lots that are zoned for development along First Avenue could increase the number to over 230 units with no other zoning approval needed from the City. Kugler stated that this development would increase the number by 45 units, with no guarantees that secondary access would be provided by First Avenue or another route in the future, if ever. He said the secondary access guidelines allow for a single means of access if a temporary situation exists, but this does not fit within those guidelines that call for a plan in place to provide secondary access within a reasonable amount of time. Kugler referred to the City's secondary access guidelines. He said the point of single access for this neighborhood is at the intersection of First Avenue and Rochester Avenue. Kugler said to the north of the intersection, First Avenue crosses Ralston Creek at a point where there is the potential for the street to be blocked by high water. He said there is a regional storm water facility located just downstream. He said there have been reports of problems upstream, with the culvert being blocked by debris and water backing up. Kugler said staff feels there is the potential at some point for this waterway to be blocked, which would restrict emergency and other vehicle access. He said Ralston Creek has also demonstrated a history of flooding, which is cause for concern, and it is staff's opinion that the current situation requires secondary access prior to the development of additional lots in this area. Kugler said these secondary access concerns are not new, as staff has recommended a number of times that other cul-de-sacs that have been platted coming off of Rochester Avenue as well as First Avenue be extended and connected with Rochester Avenue to provide a secondary means of access. He said that staff has also inquired about the possibility of the City condemning or acquiring a means of access from the end of Hickory Trail up to Rochester Avenue, but the City Council decided not to pursue that option at that time. Kugler stated that in the absence of any secondary means of access to this neighborhood, staff recommends that the proposed rezoning and preliminary plat be denied and that no changes be made to the previous Conditional Zoning Agreement that applies to the subject property. Kugler also cited a letter from a resident on Evergreen Court regarding concerns of water runoff, erosion along Ralston Creek and the design of the neighborhood street system. Ehrhardt asked Kugler to address the runoff problem. Kugler said Public Works has indicated that storm water management is not required on this parcel, because the regional basin downstream is large enough to accommodate runoff from this development. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 16 stated there has been erosion along Ralston Creek, as reported by property owners. Gibson said the central issue here is one of secondary access and suggested that if the Commission is not willing to change its position regarding that issue, the other information is irrelevant at this point. Kugler said the applicant has the right to send this on to the City Council, and the general procedure is, despite the recommendation, to have a plan in front of the City Council that meets the technical requirements. He said if there are drainage concerns, they should be resolved in case the City Council considers the plan. Kugler said regarding concerns about water backing up into backyards of homes along Ralston Creek and how the development will affect those problems, Public Works believes that the problems were mostly due to debris collecting in the culvert. He said the culvert has been cleaned out and will need to be examined periodically to make sure it stays functional. Kugler added that the elevation of the roadway is such that there should not be a problem with water backing up into homes, but rather it would spill over onto First Avenue before the water reached that high. Gibson said the Commission is going over the plan to perfect the entire thing and then vote it down on the basis of the secondary access issue, which he felt was a waste of time. Starr said the one thing discussion of the other factors would do would be to put them on the record, in case this goes before the City Council. Kugler said the plan would be ready for approval if secondary access was not an issue, because it meets the technical requirements of the subdivision ordinance in all other respects. He stated that there is no problem with the rezoning of the property, although the issue of street width still exists. He said staff feels the street width issue could be addressed before the final plat was considered. Gibson said there are two issues that concern him with this area, one of which is the secondary access issue. He added that the second issue of concern is that this local street has been turned into an arterial street in terms of the potential for the way this will develop. Gibson said it troubles him that all this growth has been added and it all goes down in front of the houses facing Hickory Trail. He said this is poor planning, and it troubles him much more than the secondary access issue. Kugler said the arterial street access for this neighborhood is intended to be provided by Captain Irish Parkway and Rochester Avenue. He said that Hickory Trail is not intended to be an arterial street, and it is expected that it will not be a through street, that it will not be a straight shot through the neighborhood. Gibson said he thought there had been two actions on this. He said that one is the Conditional Zoning Areement, which said that rezoning would occur subject to certain conditions. Gibson added that the Planning and Zoning Commission went on record a year ago stating that this would not be approved unless the First Avenue extension was approved. He asked what had changed since that decision. Joe Holland, 300 Brewery Square, said this area is a good place to live. He said this proposal is intended to add more high quality housing stock to Iowa City. Holland said these lots are basically near the center of the City, and there is not much of this quality housing available close to the downtown area. Holland said he was not aware of the Conditional Zoning Agreement when this process first started, although it was a good faith oversight. He said the Conditional Zoning Agreement Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 17 is a~ agreement between Plum Grove Acres and the City, which if read literally, says the City is not obligated to rezone this until there is secondary access. Holland said the City is never obligated to rezone anything, so that the Agreement essentially just states the obvious. Holland said circumstances have changed in Iowa City. He said that interest rates have come down, and demand for housing in Iowa City has increased dramatically in the last ten years. Holland said some lots in the proposed development are already spoken for if the rezoning goes through. Holland said he sees two issues here. The secondary access issue and traffic on Hickory Trail. He said he thought staff has been satisfied on all other issues as the plan has gone through many revisions. Regarding secondary access, Holland said staff is concerned that First Avenue could be blocked by high water where it crosses Ralston Creek. Holland said the facts need to be examined closely. He pointed out the culvert on First Avenue and said there are actually two 12-foot by 12-foot culverts, which will carry a lot of water. Holland said the surface of the road is not on the top of that culvert, that there is between one and three feet of soil on top of the culvert before one reaches the surface of First Avenue. He said that designers generally look at the 100-year flood standard in terms of safety, good planning and placement of improvements. Holland said that the top of the paving at this culvert is 2.8 feet above the 100-year flood plain and is therefore unlikely to ever be under water, even in a 100-year flood. He said it could be under water if it plugged up with debris, but a 100-year storm would actually benefit the area in terms of clearing debris out there. Holland said engineers have informed him that a 100-year storm would result in a lot of water coming down the creek to scour out the debris and go down into the detention basin. Holland said the rate of flow would actually slow down; it backs up and the water velocity decreases. He said that MMS designed this culvert for the City. Holland said a study was done in 1984 regarding this culvert, and the facts show that it is really not an issue that First Avenue could be under water. Holland said one of the issues was the potential of closing that area for maintenance. He stated this culvert has a useful life of 75 to 100 years and possibly longer because the statistics were figured on an "integral culvert", where the top of the culvert is the paving for the street. Holland said there have been a number of attempts to obtain secondary access to this area, some on the part of the City and some on the part of Plum Grove Acres, but these attempts have fallen through for a variety of reasons. He said that extending First Avenue to the north may not make any difference in terms of resident safety. Holland said the traffic on Hickory Trail is a legitimate concern. He said the Johnson County Council on Government provided him with traffic studies showing that the traffic count in 1994 was an average daily trip count of 1,710 vehicles and the traffic count in 1997 was an average traffic daily trip count of 1,571 vehicles, a decrease of almost 9%. Holland said this shows that at a minimum, the traffic count is stable. Holland stated that this is actually a 43-1ot subdivision, because the two lots at the north end of Tamarack Trail cannot be developed until access farther to the north is created. He said that the 43 lots, using City standards, would each generate 7 trips per day, resulting in another 300 trips using Hickory Trail. Holland added that no matter what is done about the secondary access issue, even if First Avenue is extended or Hickory Trail is extended to Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 18 the east, people will still use Hickory Trail for the most part. He said if the Commission says it will not approve this development because it uses Hickory Trail for access, it is effectively saying that this piece of property will never be developed. Holland said that secondary access is desirable, but is not essential and may never come. He stated that development of this property without secondary access does not present an unreasonable risk of harm. Public discussion: David Forkenbrock. 7813 Hickory Trail, said he represented the Bluffwood Homeowners Association. He said they were not opposed to development to the east of their property, and they knew it was going to happen. He said the property owners in the area actually welcome the development because the land is now in terrible shape, with gully washes, debris, and weeds on the property. Forkenbrock said the neighbors have four basic concerns. He said the secondary access is an obvious concern, and the neighbors are very worried about Hickory Trail. Forkenbrock said that if First Avenue is not extended and Tamarack is, all that traffic that people have discussed regarding First Avenue would come down Tamarack Trail onto Hickory Trail, resulting in a very bad situation. Forkenbrock said another issue is the drainage concern. He added that he disagreed strongly with the notion that all of the issues have been resolved except for secondary access. He said during the flood of 1993, one of the two culverts on First Avenue was completely blocked with debris. Forkenbrock said he did not believe that heavy rains clear out Ralston Creek, but said such rains would move debris that washes away from the banks to the first point of resistance, which has been the bridge. He said he lives on Lot 108 and when he moved in, Ralston Creek was about 8 feet wide. Forkenbrock said Ralston Creek is now 24 feet wide and is obviously eroding very quickly. He stated that with so much more runoff, once agricultural land is converted to sod, pavement, roofs, etc., one has to ask how much more Ralston Creek can tolerate. Forkenbrock said the third big issue is neighborhood open space. He said this parcel of land is supposed to have .55 acres of open space. Forkenbrock said the area has a real deficiency of open space. He pointed out the area that the developer has reserved for open space and said it was all but landlocked with only a little strip of access way off to the east. Forkenbrock said that the rest of the open space is a marshy bog, with no recreational value at all, being at best an attractive nuisance. Forkenbrock said the final issue is planning. He said this area is designated as the next area planned in conformance with the new Comprehensive Plan. Forkenbrock said that the plan is supposed to commence in March, and the neighbors are very positive about it. He said it seems harsh to the neighbors to approve a subdivision and then start the planning process the next month. Forkenbrock said he believes there are solutions to the traffic on Hickory Trail, but the planning process needs a chance. He said this subdivision should be held off until there is a decent plan for the area. Gary Carlson. 2806 Hickory Trail, said he lives on Lot 101 and is not opposed to development on this property. He said when he purchased his lot, he was told that the property behind him would be developed, but not until a secondary access was provided to Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 19 the area. Carlson said that the drainage problems have not all been addressed. He stated that at the corner of Lots 101 and 100 there is a water retention facility with an easement that goes across Hickory Trail and into the creek. Carlson said that it does fill up and that his yard will be flooded if there is more water coming across there. Carlson said he has safety concerns, as he has no way out of the area in the event of an emergency, other than Hickory Trail. He said that he believed that this entire area will be examined in March and feels that this application is ahead of the process. Public discussion closed. Starr asked if these items needed to be voted on separately or together. Holecek said this cannot be subdivided unless it is rezoned properly, so they could be voted on together. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval REZ97-0007/SUB97-0014, an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc. to rezone 24.12 acres from ID-RS, Interim Development, to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and for a preliminary plat of First and Rochester, Parts 4-6, e 45-1ot residential subdivision located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail. Supple seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said there are two very important topics here. First, she stated that the Conditional Zoning Agreement is entered into by all parties with very strong convictions, knowing that it is legally binding. She said that these are not suggestions, but are binding requirements. Bovbjerg said she does not like to break the Conditional Zoning Agreement, and the Commission has gone on record before as honoring Conditional Zoning Agreement as serious, binding agreements. Secondly, regarding secondary access, Bovbjerg said from the standpoint of health, safety, and welfare, as well as strong precedent, strong opinions and strong conclusions that the City and the Commission have had about the necessity for secondary access, she would not change her conclusions on secondary access. She said nothing has changed since November and her vote would be the same as in November, that is, a vote against approval of this rezoning and subdivision. Gibson said he had several reasons for his vote, not necessarily in priority order. He said his fundamental concern was the present, incremental developmental pattern that is not sustainable for this area. He said there should not be any more of it done, until the right way to do it is figured out, or the quality of life on Hickory Trail will continue to get worse and worse. Gibson also stated that the issues are clearly not all resolved for this application. He said because the Commission is not being given an opportunity to address these issues, and because the developer insists on a vote, he would have concerns about approving the application. Regarding the Conditional Zoning Agreement, Gibson said he would not treat it in as casual a manner as it has been referred to. He said it is an agreement reached by parties under a certain set of circumstances, and the party other than the City stood to benefit a considerable amount, as a result of entering into that agreement, or would not have signed it. Regarding the discussion of the need for this type of housing in Iowa City, Gibson said there are numbers of undeveloped RS-5 lots throughout the community, and the Commission should be supporting and advocating the development of those areas that can be developed without a whole set of problems associated with them. Gibson said he was not ready to vote, but because he was being forced to, he had no choice but to vote no. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 20 Supple said she agreed with the previous two speakers regarding the Conditional Zoning Agreement and secondary access. She said that even with secondary access, she would probably not vote for approval of this development. Supple said it bothered her a great deal that there are from 8 to 10 lots on the west side of Tamarack where the building site itself is located on a steep or critical slope. She said that a redesign of all of those streets could eliminate not only that problem, but also the 70-foot drop for 1,500 feet which creates Tamarack waterfall. Supple said this land is better suited for a clustering of lots. She said that Hickory Trail is, in effect, being treated as an arterial street, and something needs to be done to change that. Supple said that because of the lay of the land, the lack of secondary access, and the previous agreement, she would vote against approval. Ehrhardt said she agreed with the comments of the previous speakers. In addition, she said that the planning process involving staff, neighborhood residents, and developers could work out a really great area here. Starr said he strongly believed that the Conditional Zoning Agreement was an agreement entered into by both sides and specifically states, "until secondary access has been provided." He said the secondary access guidelines have been around for a long time and have been re-examined and reviewed and used in other developments. Starr said he firmly believes that the secondary access guidelines exist for a reason. He said he appreciated the fact that the neighbors know that development will occur and accept it but want it to occur with an appropriate method, in an appropriate manner, and at an appropriate time. Starr said that time will be when the secondary access issue has been taken care of, and he will also be voting to deny this application. The motion failed on a vote of 0-6.' MOTION: Supple moved to deny RE797-OOO7/SUB97-0014, an application submitted by Plum Grove Acres, Inc. to rezone 24.12 acres from ID-RS, Interim Development, to OSA-5, Sensitive Areas Overlay, and for a preliminary plat of First and Rochester, Parts 4-6, a 45- lot residential subdivision located at the east terminus of Hickory Trail. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Kugler said the City Council would set the public hearing for this item at its March 10, 1998 meeting, presumably to be held at the March 24, 1998 meeting, if the applicant so requests. RE798/0001/SUB98-0001. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development Co., on behalf of property owners Dorothy J. Kisner and John W. and Barbara Kennedy, to amend the preliminary OPDH plan and preliminary plat of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6-9 located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway. (45-day limitation period expires March 5, 1998) Kugler said that a Sensitive Areas Overlay rezoning was needed for this development, given that in the northwest corner of the site there is a woodland, in combination with critical slopes. He said that the preliminary plat had expired for this property and therefore a redesign or at least a review of the plat, in terms of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, was necessary. Kugler said in response to that, the applicant has decided to remove Parts 8 and 9 from the preliminary plat at this time and designate that as an outlot for future development. He stated that the applicant now intends to plat Parts 6 and 7, given that the features at that location would not affect the design of this area of the subdivision. Kugler said staff recommends a delay in the need for a sensitive areas rezoning until those areas Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 21 are proposed for development. Kugler stated that there is a stream corridor located along the south end of Part 6, which will require submission of a sensitive areas site plan, but this is not likely to impact the alignment of lots in that area. Kugler said a number of deficiencies were identified on the revised plan and made known to the applicant. He said that a revised plan has been submitted, but Public Works has not yet reviewed it. Kugler said since those revisions deal mainly with the plat and technical information thereon, staff is recommending that the Commission act on the rezoning and defer a vote on the preliminary plat, which could be considered at the March 5, 1998 Commission meetng. He said staff recommends that RE798-0001 be approved and that SUB98-0001 be deferred to allow full review of the most recently submitted plat. Ehrhardt asked about open space for this development. Kugler said the applicant is designating open space, but he did think it was public open space. He said he will check with the Parks and Recreation Department to see what they would like to see here. Larry Schnittjer. 1917 S. Gilbert Street, said that the plans for Parts 8 and 9 have not changed at the current time. He said there may be some revisions to accommodate the wooded areas and steep slopes, but he did not yet know what they would be. Schnittjer said that Kennedy Parkway would not move from where it was located on the previous plan. He said that the most recent revision was moving one storm sewer. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of REZ98-0001, a request for an amended preliminary OPDH plan of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, a 20-1ot residential subdivision located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway. Supple seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. MOTION: Supple moved to defer SUB98-0001, a preliminary plat of Walnut Ridge, Parts 6 and 7, located at the north terminus of Kennedy Parkway to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of March 5, 1998. Ehrhardt seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CODE AMENDMENT ITEM: Public discussion of amendments to the Title 14, Chapter 6, "Zoning," Article E, "Commercial and Business Zones," Section 2, "Neighborhood Commercial Zone" (CN-1) regarding size restrictions on restaurants. Kugler said that the City Council had requested that the Commission and staff review possible amendments to the CN-1 zone dealing with restaurants. He said this is the result of a number of unsuccessful attempts to locate a restaurant in the CN-1 zone on Scott Court on the corner of Court Street and Scott Boulevard. He said the applicant has had difficulties in meeting the requirements and obtaining approval of a special exception. Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 22 Kugler said the CN-1 zone is generally intended to allow limited commercial uses within residential neighborhoods. He said the idea is to provide some shopping and service needs of residents of the surrounding neighborhood within a reasonable distance from their homes to try to limit the number of trips across town for all shopping. I(ugler said to manage the scale and nature of commercial uses in the CN-1 zone, there are limitations on certain types of businesses, including restaurants, and there are some design provisions aimed at integrating these uses into the rest of the neighborhood. Kugler said the very nature of the CN-1 zone requires that its development be delayed pending development of the surrounding residential neighborhood. He pointed out that only about one half of the neighborhood around the Scott-Court CN-1 zone has been developed, and this may be contributing to the difficulty in attracting neighborhood-oriented uses in that CN-1 zone. Kugler said currently in the CN-1 zone, restaurants up to 2,500 square feet are allowed as provisional uses, and restaurants over 2,500 square feet require a special exception from the Board of Adjustment. He said these limitations were put in place in 1994 and allowed for a more streamlined approval process for the smaller scale restaurants, which seemed appropriate for that zone. Kugler said in researching that amendment, staff studied existing restaurants in Iowa City and also looked at various planning and zoning publications, and the 2,500 square foot limitation for restaurants without a special exception was what was recommended and adopted. He added that, since then, two restaurants of 3,~.O0 square feet have been approved by special exception within Walden Square and one of 3,376 square feet within the Scott Court development, which is the restaurant that generated this request. Kugler said the applicant had problems getting a building permit after the approval of that special exception. Kugler said the history of what happened at 200 Scott Court was listed in the staff report, and he would answer any questions the Commission might have about it. Kugler said the City (~ouncil has requested that the Commission look at possibly changing these regulations, and staff has collected additional information on existing Iowa City restaurants, looking at basement storage areas, floor areas, occupancy, and number of seats in various restaurants. He said staff is not aware of any changes to the standards suggested in national planning and zoning publications, so staff expanded research in the Iowa City locations. Kugler said basically the standards staff is finding nationally are aimed at allowing only limited commercial developments within neighborhood commercial centers. Kugler said staff has developed, based on this research, four different options for the Commission and the City Council to consider. He said staff is not necessarily recommending any particular one option, but if changes are to be made to the CN-1 zone regarding restaurants, option four appears to be the most appropriate. Kugler said option one generally involves no change and would be keeping the status quo, if the Commission feels that the current regulations are adequate. He said option two would be adding specific criteria for determining the appropriate scale of a restaurant, looking at things like building size, site design, size of the parking lot, a location within the neighborhood and its traffic impact, and the type of restaurant and its expected turnover. Kugler said this option would likely require some more staff time to develop this set of standards. Kugler said the third option would simply be to increase the size of the restaurant that is permitted by right. He said some other communities allow up to 3,000 square feet. Kugler said the Board Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 23 has already indicated that 3,200 square feet or slightly more than that might be appropriate. He said the latest request was for a restaurant of 4,666 square feet, which would include the basement area. Staff feels that would be too large to allow by right, given'some of the other regional type restaurants of that size that are listed on the chart attached to the staff report. Kugler said the fourth option would be to change the way the scale of the restaurant is calculated. He said staff is basically suggesting that the occupancy load of the restaurant be looked at rather than the square footage. Kugler said if there is additional storage area above and beyond what would typically be provided in a restaurant, the developer is not penalized for that as heavily as for having a larger seating area, because the ratios for determining the occupancy are much less. He said staff's analysis of the information suggests that anywhere from 85 to 100 persons might be an appropriate occupancy level for the CN-1 zone, and anything above that number should probably be handled through the special exception process, with the applicant justifying why his restaurant fits within that CN-1 zone. Kugler said one drawback associated with that approach is that an applicant must provide more detailed plans at the time of the special exception application such that he would be able to determine the occupancy of the building, at the risk of those plans not being approved, which would require additional cost for the developer. Kugler said whatever course of action the Commission and the City Council choose to take on this matter, staff recommends that the changes be well thought out and thoroughly examined in light of the CN-1 zone and what impact this might have City-wide. The ordinance amendment should not just be targeted to allow a specific restaurant in a specific location. He said any changes should be considered in light of what this might open up in other CN-1 zones. Bovbjerg said the feature that got laughs at the City Council meeting was the basement and the use of it. She said that option four discusses usable space for serving and preparing food, and this would allow a basement which would not enter into the calculations. Kugler said using the proposed Scott Court restaurant as an example, the Board saw a request for a restaurant of 3,300+ square feet, which was the main floor area. He said when the building plans were submitted, there was a basement area underneath, so the building would have been over 4,500 square feet. Kugler said the definition of floor area is the total gross floor area of all levels of the building. He added that if the Board had known there was going to be a basement underneath, they may have questioned what it would do to the occupancy of the first floor, e.g., does that mean there is now an extra 1,200 square feet of seating area on the first floor because areas that would typically be used for storage or other restaurant-type uses were being located underneath, or is this simply excess storage. Kugler said that the excess storage area, if it is truly excess, will not have a significant impact on the occupant load according to option four. He said that for a 1,2OO square foot basement, the number of occupants that results in terms of calculating the occupant load is four, but for a 1,200 square foot seating area, it is 80. Kugler said that if a larger restaurant is going to have additional seating area, it will affect the occupant load, and that number will be obvious to the Board of Adjustment when it is looking at an application. Kugler added that if there is a seating area in the basement, it would be counted as a seating area at one per fifteen square feet, rather than storage area at one per 300. Gibson said that the figures for Jimmy's Brick Oven Caf~ are 3,126 square feet, with no basement. He said there are 135 dining seats and 60 beer garden seats. Kugler said that Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 24 beer'garden seats are outside in a plaza area off to the side. Gibson said that it is a good- sized restaurant. Kugler said they have done a good job of maximizing the seating there. Gibson said Jimmy's Brick Oven Caf~ may be a neighborhood restaurant, but it will draw customers from the entire metropolitan area. He said the notion that it is serving a small area is not correct; although other uses may serve only the neighborhood, a restaurant may not. Kugler said he did not think it is reasonable to expect that there wile be a CN-1 zone filled with businesses that cater just to people within a five-minute walk. He said however, a restaurant is an amenity to a neighborhood and the thing to do is to manage the scale of the restaurant so it does not get out of hand but recognize the fact that it will draw traffic from around town. Starr said the question could then become if it is actually larger, is it going to draw even more than it is already doing. Kugler said that at some point, when you get to 4,000 to 4,500 square feet, you are talking about a substantial operation. Starr asked if this were the only request that has presented itself as a problem or if there have been other requests for restaurants in these zones that have not been accommodated because of the size limitations. Kugler said he was not aware of any others. Bovbjerg said that this particular request has gone on for several years trying to make a big restaurant. She said it was site specific, and she had a problem with changing a zoning ordinance section for a site or for a particular kind of service, because all kinds of things then end up being changed. Holecek said this case is currently in litigation. She said the Board of Adjustment was sued, because of its denial of the subsequent application for the 4,666 square foot restaurant. Gibson observed that as a continuous part of the problems in that area, people are complaining that they cannot build a basement. He said that the argument has gotten silly and that space is fungible. Kugler said the City Council will hold a public hearing at the March 10, 1998 meeting and would like to have a recommendation from the Commission from tonight's meeting or from the March 5, 1998 meeting. Kugler said staff has a draft of an ordinance based on option four for the Commission's review. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibson moved to defer discussion of amendments to the Title 14, Chapter 6, 'Zoning," Article E, 'Commercial and Business Zones," Section 2, 'Neighborhood Commercial Zone' (CN-1) regarding size restrictions on restaurants to the March 5, 1998 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Supple seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 5. 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the minutes of the February 5, 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of Planning and Zoning Commission February 19, 1998 Page 25 OTHFR BUSINESS: Miklo referred to the copy of the Community Housing Forum report, containing a section regarding possible amendments to the zoning ordinance for the Commission to review. He said staff could provide a complete presentation of the report in the future if the Commission so requests. Miklo distributed copies of the new zoning map to Commission members. PLANNING AND 70NING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bovbjerg said that the brook, which also serves as a storm water channel between All Nations' Church and Mormon Trek Village, is eroding very badly. She said she did not know who it belonged to, but it should be taken care of soon. Holecek said she thought there was a storm sewer project in the planning and acquisition stage to do storm sewer improvements in that area. Starr read his letter of resignation from the Commission, announcing his resignation effective as of February 20, 1998. He said although his term ends in April, he would have to be absent from the majority of meetings from March 1 through May 1, primarily due to employment responsibilities; therefore his resignation would hasten the appointment of a new Commission member. Starr said his experience on the Commission had been educational and enlightening and expressed thanks to a dedicated, talented, and experienced staff as well as past and present Planning and Zoning Commissioners for their commitment, dedication and confidence in allowing him to serve as Chair for the past few years. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:44 p.m. Lea Supple, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadrnin\mins\p&z2 - 19.doc MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1998 - 3:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Rick Fosse, Deborah Galbraith, Kevin Hanick, Nancy Pudngton, Clara Swan, Terry Trueblood, Lesley Wright STAFF PRESENT: Joyce Carroll, Karin Franklin, Traci Howard CA~ ! TO ORDFR: Carroll called the meeting to order at 3:33 p.m. R!=COMMI=NDATIONS TO COUNCIl: Recommend approval by a vote of 7-0, of the by-laws dated February 4, 1998, as amended. PUB! IC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITFM NOT ON THF AGFNDA: There was none. CONSIDI=RATION OF THF JANUARY ??. 1998. MFFTING MINUTFS: Purington asked to remove the word "solely" from the last sentence of the third paragraph on page 4. Galbraith said she would like the second sentence of the third paragraph on page 4 to read, "She suggested beginning the evaluation with project 229 because ..." MOTION: Wright moved to approve the minutes as amended. Galbraith seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDFRATION OF THF BY-! AWS: Franklin read the most recent changes suggested by the City Attorney, and made note of the changes that the Committee members suggested at the last meeting. Fosse said he liked the changes to Article VI that the Committee made..." Hanick asked who could call a roll call vote. Franklin said she was not sure if it was the Chairperson or a Committee member, but she knew that a member of the public could not. Hanick suggested adding a phrase to Article V, Section 10 to state the following, "Upon request of any Committee member, voting will be by roll call and will be recorded by Wayes" and "nays". MOTION: Trueblood moved to approve the by-laws as amended. Wright seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. Franklin said that the amended by-laws would be forwarded to the City Council Rules Committee for review and adoption. She said that would take about one-and-a-half to two months, and she would give a final copy to all members to work from. Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes February 4, 1998 Page 2 DISCUSSION Of WORK PROGRAM: Carroll said the members needed to look at the current work program, decide if items needed to be added to it and prioritize the items on the list. Purington suggested creating subcommittees to development a mission statement, objectives and procedures because she felt policies need to be in place for the Public Art Program before they can start choosing pieces for public view. She said that she had already been contacted by a few artists who were interested in the program. She thought the Committee should have files to keep all the work submittals, to better manage the business-aspect of the program. Wdght said she thought there should be an application process for artists to submit their work, but not an acquisition process because they do not have any pieces to receive at this time. Wdght explained the acquisition process of the Cedar Rapids museum. Franklin said what she meant by application and acquisition procedures was more broad, that the Committee would have a specific procedure for any way that they could obtain public art. Gaibraith said that the Committee could have a file where all of the artists submit their ideas, and then the Committee could contact them when there is an opportunity for a public art piece. Purington asked how large the search for public art was going to be. Franklin said that was one thing the Committee would have to decide. Purington said that the mission statement would reflect certain esthetic qualities that the Committee would like to have appear in the public art pieces, and would provide the artists and Committee members with a concept to fit into. She suggested forming a Mission Statement Subcommittee that would work on a mission statement and bring something to the next meeting for the rest of the Committee to review. Purington and Galbraith volunteered for the Mission Statement Subcommittee. Wright said while it would be ideal to wait until all the procedures, objectives and mission statement are in place, the Committee needs to get going on a project for FY99. Franklin noted that members could work on procedural items and make project decisions at the same time. MOTION: Purington moved that the Committee not decide on a project until a mission statement has been approved by Committee members. Wright suggested changing the work program to allow members to discuss procedural and organizational items until March, and have May as the month to decide on a project. She said she thought that choosing a project in March would be premature. Franklin noted that FY99 begins July 1, 1998. Swan seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. Wright suggested adding "Creating a Mission Statement" to the work program schedule. Purington suggested adding the prices of each public art piece on both inventories that the Committee received so they could defend what they would be spending in the future and have some figures to compare proposed prices with. Carroll said that information should be available Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes February 4, 1998 Page 3 with the University pieces because they are paid for with state dollars. Galbraith said she would call David Dennis for that information. Hanick asked how much the Snelson piece cost. Franklin said the total for the Snelson and the Field pieces was $88,000, which included the art work, preparing the site, and $8,000 in administrative costs. She estimated that the Snelson piece cost $20,000 and the Field piece cost $60,000. She noted that those were purchased over 20 years ago. Franklin said there is one more piece of public art that was a gift from a former City employee that was not included in the inventory. Carroll said it is entitled, "One's Reality" and was donated in 1982 by Philip Miller. Fosse said the employee was driving a truck with a cherry picker attached, and drove it underneath a bridge. He said the employee took the pieces that came off the truck and made some artwork out of it. Galbraith noted that some of the docents would be taking a tour of all the University-owned public art on April 27. She said that Holly Cone, who did the research for the University inventory, would be leading the tour. Pudngton asked what the BRW Company had given to Council. Franklin said they had just given prices. She said that some projects for FY99 that could be priorities for the group would be the new fountain in the downtown area, and the renovation of the downtown streetscape. MOTION: Wright moved to set up a Policy Subcommittee that would create policies for receiving gifts and loans, maintenance and disposition of the public art and art acquisition. Purington seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. Wright, Pudngton, Galbraith and Fosse volunteered for the Policy Subcommittee. Purington asked if the public art was to be for permanent display, or would the pieces be changed. Franklin said she was under the impression that sculptures were to be permanently placed, and not be a changing display. She said that the consultant hired for the renovation of the Iowa Avenue Streetscape noted that the sculpture pads in the plan could hold changing displays. She said she thought that was a Policy Subcommittee issue, but it would have to be decided because it would in part determine what sculpture pads they used and how much weight they could hold. Wright said that Cedar Rapids has a changing public art display. Hanick asked if the mission statement and policies would be made available for public discussion. Franklin said yes, and she suggested sending the mission statement and a broad version of the policies to the City Council. She said the Committee needed to decide if it wanted a recommendation from the Council, or if it would just be providing the two things for the Council's information. Purington said that she had done some qualitative research as part of the Downtown Streetscape Committee, and said she had some good insight into what types of art the downtown community wanted. Hanick suggested sending the mission statement and policies to the Council as a proposal for their recommendation so the item is available for public discussion. Purington thought that the Council meeting would be a good place for everyone to discuss those items. Hanick suggested that the entire Committee meet for a separate work session to create the mission statement. Swan suggested letting Purington and Galbraith come up with something on Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes February 4, 1998 Page 4 their own, and then the entire Committee work on it from there. Galbraith read the mission statement she had worked on, and said she and Purington would work on it together for the next meeting. Hanick said he thought creating the mission statement should be the focus of the next Committee meeting. PRFSF:NTATION OF CAPITAL PROJI=CT PROC!=SS: Franklin said she asked Fosse and Trueblood to present this item because she wanted all Committee members to be aware how public art could fit into the capital project process. Fosse said that with the overall project process, staff tries to look five to seven years ahead and layout what they want to accomplish. He said his department works with infrastructure, Trueblood's department works with parks, and both departments work with buildings. Fosse said what he would like to do, once the Committee gets going, is to select projects three years before it is be programmed for construction so the public art component could be a part of the early planning process instead of incorporating or superimposing public art pieces after construction is complete. Fosse said the first step in incorporating public art into the engineering process would be to participate in a project pre-design meeting with staff members, members of the neighborhood in which the project would be placed, the artistJdesigner and any other interested parties. He said that these meetings usually occur about one year before construction on the project would start. He said that staff must take a very clear project design definition with them to the meeting so they can explain the project to all the interested parties. He said he thought that it would be good to blend in art components with engineering projects, and it was important that the project "dress appropriately" so that it fit with the neighborhood because if the project is a building, a bddge or part of the infrastructure, it will likely be there for a long time. Trueblood said that public art could be incorporated into Parks and Recreation projects at any point during the development and construction process, and even after construction. He noted that there is plenty of space for public art at the new Kickers Soccer Field. He listed four examples of ongoing Parks and Recreation projects that could have public art component added. The first example was Kiwanis Park, which was a more complex project because representatives from two neighborhood associations and three Kiwanis Clubs all wanted to have input during the park's development. He said that staff hired a consultant for the park design, and got everyone involved in the decision making process. The second example was the Kickers Soccer Field where the Kickers Soccer Organization had some involvement with planning and development, but most of the decisions were made by the Parks and Recreation Department and the Public Works Department. The third example was the Weatherby Park expansion project where the neighborhood organization basically told the Parks and Recreation Department what they wanted done, and the department did the work in-house. The fourth example was the development of Ned Ashton Park, which could easily incorporate an art component. Hanick said that Ned Ashton Park could be an important place if the river trail system is completed. Trueblood said if that trail system is complete, the park would become a trail head. He said staff has hired Steve Ford as the landscape architect. Wright asked if the Committee would be working with new park development or the expansion and renovation of existing parks. Trueblood said they could work with both. He said he would Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes February 4, 1998 Page 5 like to have public art in every park, and that some parks are more conducive to public art than others. He said the Parks and Recreation Commission may also have to get involved in the decision making process with regards to placing public art in the parks. He said that entryways into the City could be prime locations for public art pieces. Fosse said that since the Committee does not have the luxury of extra planning time for FY99, he could suggest a project that was already in the planning process and that would be completed anyway. He said that project #251, which was constructing an eight-foot wide sidewalk along Scott Boulevard in Scott Park, would be one the Committee could consider. He said that the sidewalk would be about 1,500 feet long, and said he had seen examples of sidewalks with artistic components that he thought were interesting. Franklin said that the Mercer Park Gymnasium could be another project to consider. Trueblood noted the building construction for that project was to begin in April, so while no public art could be planned into the building design, some public art could be placed on the 'inside or outside of the gym. Galbraith asked if the proposed funding of one percent of the building cost would be used for public art. Franklin said that the City Council decided to give the Committee a lump sum budget of $100,000 to simplify things instead of using the one percent of building cost formula. She noted that in some years, the lump sum would actually provide more money for projects and be more flexible so that funds could be used to place art around existing buildings and areas,-as well as newly constructed projects. Hanick asked where the line would be drawn between the cost of completing a project before the public art was added and the addition of the art into the project. He said that he wanted to make sure that the City's departments could not use the Committee's budget for their own projects. Fosse said in the example of the Scott Park sidewalk, the Committee would be responsible for paying an artist or designer and the difference between what it costs to pour 1,500 square feet of plain sidewalk and the cost of the artistic sidewalk. Purington said that issue is one the Committee could elaborate on in their objectives. Fosse said he thought it would be nice to have public art placed in locations where more pedestrians would enjoy it. Purington suggested that Fosse and Trueblood compile a list of projects they thought were appropriate to review for FY99 and bring it to the next meeting. Trueblood noted that even though some projects are ready to begin construction or are already developed, the Committee should not assume that it would be too late to include public art in them. Carroll said that there are vadous ways to integrate public art into a project without being a part of the development process. She noted that since the Committee's budget is flexible, the art placement does not necessarily have to be tied to a new, specific project. Hanick asked where the Council and staff were in the downtown revitalization process. Franklin said that the Council would look at the Downtown Streetscape and Iowa Avenue Revitalization Plans at their work session on Monday, Feb. 9. She said that they would be looking at the proposal for the Library Cultural Center on Feb. 23. Hanick asked what was planned for the Plaza fountain, and would the Committee have a part in the decision making process. Franklin said the current proposal calls for moving the fountain and designing a new, flat, interactive one, and for the Committee to determine the design. Purington asked if the Committee would be responsible for paying for the fountain and the artist's fees. Franklin said no, that the funding Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes February 4, 1998 Page 6 for construction was included in the project budget for the streetscape redesign. She said that the proposal requests $1 million for Phase I and the fountain is part of Phase II. She said that staff would add the fountain to the list of projects for the Committee to consider. Franklin said that the Committee will work on the mission statement and the project priodty list at their next meeting. She asked Fosse and Trueblood to have the project lists ready so they could be included in the next meeting agenda packet. SFT RFGU! AR MFFTING TI'MF: Members tentatively decided that their regular meeting time would be the first Thursday of each month at 4 p.m. They scheduled their next meeting time for Thursday, February 26 at 4 p.m. to work on the mission statement. Franklin reminded the Committee members that they needed to select a chairperson. ADJOURNMI=NT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:03 p.m. Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. IN3~dir/mir',/ar tO2~4 .~1~c BY-LAWS Public Art Advisory Committee Approved by PAAC February 4, 1998 ARTICLE I. AUTHORITY The Public Art Advisory Committee shall have that authority as established by Resolution 97- 326 passed by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa and through the adoption of these by-laws stated herein. ARTICLE II. PURPOSE The purpose of the by-laws stated herein is to provide for the administration of a public art program by establishing a Public Art Advisory Committee to develop the Iowa City Public Art Program and to administer said program. ARTICLE III. MEMBERSHIP Section 1. Qualifications. The Public Art Advisory Committee shall consist of seven (7) members, four (4) of whom shall be appointed by the City Council. The remaining three (3) members shall be one (1) staff representative from each of the Departments of Public Works and Parks & Recreation, and one (1) representative from the Design Review Committee. All members of the Committee shall be qualified electors of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. Section 2. Compensation. Members shall serve without compensation. Section 3. Orientation for New Members. Pdor to the first regular meeting following their appointment, new members shall be given an orientation briefing by the City staff and the Committee as is deemed appropriate. Section 4. Absences. Three consecutive unexplained absences of a Committee member from regular meetings may result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Committee to discharge said member and appoint a new Committee member. Section 5. Vacancies. Any vacancy on the Committee because of death, resignation, long- terns.-illness, disqualification or removal shall be filled by the City Council after at least 30 days public notice of the vacancy, or filled by the appropriate agency in the case of representative members. Section 6. Terms. Appointed members shall be appointed for terms of three years, with terms expidng on January 1. No more than one-third of the terms may expire in any one year. If a position becomes vacant by reason of resignation or otherwise, and results in an unexpired term of six months or less, the City Council may choose to fill the unexpired term in such a manner that the appointee shall continue in the position not only through the unexpired term, but also through a subsequent regular term. Section 7. Resi.~nation. Resignations shall be submitted in wdting to the Mayor with a copy to the City Manager, Director of Planning and Community Development, and Chairperson of the Public Art Advisory Committee at least 60 days pdor to the date of intended departure. ARTICLE IV. OFFICERS Section 1. Number. The officers of this Committee shall be a Chairperson and a Vice- Chairperson, each of whom shall be elected by the members of the Committee from those Committee members appointed by the City Council. Section 2. Election and Term of Office. Officers of the Committee shall be elected annually at the first regular meeting in February each year; if the election of officers shall not be held at such meeting, such election shall be held as soon thereafter as is convenient. Section 3. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office because of death, resignation, removal, disqualification or other cause shall be filled by the City Council for the unexpired portion of the term, except as provided in Article III, Section 6, above. Section 4. Chairperson. The Chairperson shall, when present, preside at all meetings, appoint committees, call special meetings and in general perform all duties incident to the office of the Chairperson, and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. 2 Section 5. Vice-Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson, or in the event of death, inability or refusal to act, the Vice-Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and when so acting, shall have all powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. ARTICLE V. MEETINGS Section 1. ReQular MeetinQs. Regular meetings of this Committee shall be held monthly. Section 2. SI3ecial Meetings. Special meetings of the members may be called by the Chairperson and shall be called by the Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson at the request of three or more members of the Committee. Section 3. Place of Meetings. Regular meetings shall be in a place accessible to persons with disabilities. Section 4. Notice of Meetincas. Notice of regular and special meetings shall be required; meetings may be called upon notice not less than twenty-four (24) hours before the meeting. Section 5. Quorum. A majodty of all the members of the Committee shall constitute a quorum at any meeting. Section 6. Proxies. There shall be no vote by proxy. Section 7. Public Discussion. Time shall be made available dudng all regular meetings for open public discussion. Section 8. Motions. Motions may be made or seconded by any member of the Committee except the Chairperson. Section 9. Conflict of Interest. A member who believes they have a conflict of interest on a matter about to come before the Committee shall state the reason for the conflict of interest, leave the room before the discussion begins, and return after the vote. If there is a question of whether or not a conflict exists, the City Attorney or City Attorney's designee will decide. All questions should be referred to the City Attorney or designee. Decisions of the City Attomey or designee are binding. 3 Section 10. Voting. A majority (but not less than three) of votes cast at any meeting at which a quorum is present shall be decisive of any motion or election. Upon request of any Committee member, voting will be by roll call and will be recorded by "ayes" and "nays". Every member of the'Committee, including the Chairperson, is required to cast a vote upon each motion. A member who abstains shall state the reason for abstention. Section 11. Roberts Rules of Order. Except as otherwise provided herein, Roberts Rules of Order as amended shall be used where applicable. ARTICLE Vl. POWERS AND DUTIES The Public Art Advisory Committee possesses the following powers: Section 1. To develop by-laws and procedures for the Iowa City Public Art Program. Section 2. To determine the placement of public art and the type of art to be used in a specific project. Section 3. To commission artists or to purchase art works, as appropriate. Section 4. To accept or reject gifts and loans of art. Section 5. To develop policies and procedures for the maintenance and disposition of publ,c art. Section 6. To determine and oversee expenditures of the Public Art Program budget. Section 7. To develop a Public Art Plan for the City of Iowa City. Section 8. To develop and maintain an inventory of public art. ARTICLE VII. CONDUCT OF COMMITTEE BUSINESS Section 1. Agenda. The Chairperson, or a designated representative, together with the staff assistant, shall prepare an agenda for all regular Committee meetings. Agendas are to be 4 posted at least 24 hours before the meeting and shall be sent to Committee members and the media prior to regular meetings. Copies will be available to the public at the meeting. Section 2. Minutes. Minutes of all meetings are to be prepared, reviewed by the Chairperson, and distributed to the Committee and City Council Members. Specific recommendations requiring Council action are to be set off from the main body of the minutes and appropriately identified. Section 3. Review Policy. The Committee shall review all policies and programs of the City, relating to the Committee's duties as stated herein, and makes such recommendations to the City Council as are deemed appropriate. Section 4. Annual Report. An annual report detailing the activities of the Committee shall be prepared by the Chairperson, approved by the Committee and submitted to the City Council at the end of each calendar year. ARTICLE VIII. SUBCOMMITTEES The subcommittees of this Committee including composition, duties, and terms shall be designated by the Chairperson. ARTICLE IX. AMENDMENTS These by-laws may be altered, amended or repealed, and new by-laws adopted by an affirmative vote of not less than four members of the Committee at any regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose. Amendments shall be approved by the City Council to become effective. ppddi~by~awart doc 5