Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-08-18 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CITY CIVIC CENTER MONDAY, JUNE 15, 1998 - 6:30 P,M. MEMBERS PRESENT.:: Dan Coleman, Denira Gadson, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch, Bill Stewart MEMBERS ABSENT: Jayne Moraski, Sandy Kuhlmann, Rick House STAFF PRESENT: Maurice Head, Steve Long, Steve Nasby, Maggie Grosvenor OTHERS PRESENT: Maryann Dennis, Charlie Eastham, Dana Christianson, Pat Christofferson, Art Webster, Michael Smith, Michael Richards PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY UPDATE: Grosvenor-said-that the waiting lists will be closed June 19 through August 1 because they are updating the waiting lists. She said the Council received a memo from the City Attorney regarding the preference of families with children, and they determined that it violates Iowa City' s Human Rights Ordinance. She passed out the occupancy levels for each of the programs the Housing Authority operates, and a copy of the Authority newsletter. She said that she has offered Housing Authority positions to five applicants, and is still waiting for an answer from the sixth applicant. She said the transitional period will begin July 2, and they will start the new employees and the new system on July 6. She said the offices will be shut down for about five days after July 6 for training, She said they are applying for various grants during the summer months. Stewart asked for the sale price, the first mortgage and the subsidy for each house closed in the Tenant to Ownership Program. FIRST HOME-DOWNPAYMENT ASSISTANCE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT: Long went over the report and noted the changes made on the guidelines and the applica- tion by'the subcommittee. Coleman noted that as the current language states, anyone eli- gible for this program cannot receive any other form of assistance, such as employer, governmental or church. He suggested adding the words "other governmental downpay- ment assistance programs"to clarify that statement. Long said that the form will be mailed out to lenders. Stewart asked if staff had considered charging lenders a one-time cost to participate in the program. Long said no. HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS PRESENTATION {CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS): Committee members went to the City Council informal work session in the Council Chambers for the Maxfield presentation. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 1998 Page 2 (Gadson arrived at 7:15 p.m.) CAI L TO ORDFR: Chairperson Schmuch called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. CONSIDERATION OF THF MAY 9, 1998. MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Renquiet moved to approve the meeting minutes as submitted. Stewart seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. HEARTLAND CANDLEWORKS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION: Long passed. out a timeline from the auditor charting the activities in the last year. Schmuch asked how long an agency audit usually took to complete. Head said around three months. Richards gave a three-minute informative presentation about Heartland. He said the main reason the audit is not complete is because Heartland experienced some internal problems and had a major buyer cut its order by 60 percent right after the audit began. Stewart said he thought that would have been a good time to complete the audit. Richards said that did not happen because he was traveling and searching for new clients. Stewart said he thought knowing a business' s financial situation was probably the most important aspect of the business. Richards went over the list from the auditors as to what is done and not done. Stewart said he was frustrated with the situation because the Committee has spent an inordinate amount of time on Candleworks. Head showed Richards the timeline from the auditor, and went over it. Richards said each time he met with the auditors, additional items were added to the list. Stewart asked for insight on the payroll situation. Richards said checks have bounced on payroll, and they have stopped work telling workers that they can only pay them when the money is collected from the customers. He said the last time they made a full payroll was 6-8 weeks ago, when they gave employees the option of going on layoff or staying on with the understanding that they would be paid when the company was going again. Stewart asked how Richards handled the withholding taxes. Richards said they are current on the federal withholding taxes and the reports. He said they owe $5,000-$6,000 to total payroll. He said they are trying to alleviate the problems by lining up major production agreements with new customers to create adequate cash flow. Schmuch asked how many full-time employees Candleworks currently has. Richards said they have had at least 20, if the entire two-year cycle is measured, but they currently have seven right now, and have lined up production agreements to start at the end of June. He said they have invented an all soybean wax, and that is allowing them to break into a new market. Heartland employee Art Webster explained why the equipment Heartland would like to purchase is more efficient. Richards said Heartland will complete the audit process whether the loan is granted or not, and he offered to take $5,000 from the loan if granted to hire the auditor or another accounting firm to provide technical assistance to install a thorough, detailed accounting system. Coleman asked what Heartland would do if the accounting Housing end Community Development Commission June 15, 1998 Page 3 system costs more than $5,000. Richard said it would be possible to cover any extra costs through internal operating funds since the company is back in operation, and they are committed to developing a system. Dana Christianson, an employee, spoke in favor of Heartland. Richards said Heartland purchased one of the machines through a value-added agriculture loan from the soybean project. Head said the current audit deadline is June 30, 1998, and Richards is asking for another extension to mid-August. Renquist said she thought that Richards should be able to meet the current deadline with the items left on the audit list. Head said that the final report should take about two weeks for the auditor to complete. MOTION: Stewart moved to maintain the June 30, 1998, audit deadline, unless there is a problem on the part of the auditor. Renquist seconded the motion. Coleman said he wanted to make sure that this was a reasonable request to make. He suggested that the Commission accept a letter from the auditor on June 30, 1998, saying that they have all the necessary information, and accept a final report on July 15, 1998. Stewart said the Commission could do that, but there needs to be set deadline. Renquist said she thought Richards could get the information to the auditor and the auditor could finish the report before the moved deadline. The motion Carried by a vote of 5-0. GREATFR IOWA CITY HOUSING FELLOWSHIP LOAN PROPOSAL: Head said that staff, along with Commission members, have often discussed the importance of providing affordable housing to people at 0-30% median income without having to use Section 8 vouchers or certificates. He said GICHF has developed two scenarios for this plan, and Eastham discussed those. Dennis said they could not turn a tenant down because they are receiving Section 8 assistance. She said they could probably help some people on the Housing Authority' s waiting list. Eastham said Scenario A puts seven units on the market with. rents reasonable for someone with 30% of median income, while Scenario B puts 12 units on the market at rents reasonable for someone with an income of 50% of median income. Head said the City would share in the equity with the project, like a limited partner. Nasby said that the project would also received reduced rents. Stewart asked what would happen if the project could not be refinanced in 30 years. Nasby said the risk is somewhat offset by the reduced rents. Dennis noted that the housing study found that there are no two- bedroom apartments in Iowa City for less than $400 and there are no three-bedroom apartments in Iowa City for $600. Eastham said that GICHF does not really have a preference between the two scenarios. REVIEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING POOL SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Schmuch noted that this is basically the same information the Commission saw at the last meeting. Long mentioned the two application periods of June and September. Commission members agreed to try out the two application periods and see how they work. Housing and Community Development Commission June 15, 1998 Page 4 MOTION: Stewart moved to approve the Affordable Housing Funding Pool Subcommittee Recommendations. Coleman seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. MONITORING REPORTS: SBDC-Microenterprise Training - StewartlGadson Gadson said that Katherine Kurth provided the financial summary, and Gadson gave the class demographics and income levels. The rest of the monitoring reports were moved until the next meeting. OI D BUSINESS: Long Said the Community Development Celebration subcommittee will meet in July, and more information will be available at that time. NEW BUSINFSS: Some Commission members chose FY99 HCDC Monitoring Reports, and the rest will be assigned by staff. Head said staff submitted an application for a Federal HOME Loan Bank Grant to .support the Housing Rehab program for $120,000. He said they should hear about that within the next week. He said that staff has also discussed Commission member training for next year, and he asked members to let him know if they would be interested in attending workshops on housing or something like that. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Gadson moved to adjourn the meeting. Renquist seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. ppdcdbg%mins%hcdc6-15.doc MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1998 - 5 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CIVIC CENTER PRELIMINARY Subject to approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Lowell Brandt, T.J. Brandt, Kate Corcoran MEMBERS ABSENT: William Haigh STAFF PRESENT: Melody Rockwell, John Yapp, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: David Full, Ellen Segar, Jeff Segar, Sue Licht, Deborah Krjeg, Tom Novak, Denise Britigan, Kathy Clark, Kay Bernau, Bill Bernau, Louise Wolf-Novak, Helen Ponseti, Ignacio Ponseti, Richard Valentine, Richard Murphy CAII TO ORDER Vice Chair Bender called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m. ROll CAll: All members were present for the roll call except for Haigh. CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 10, 1998. MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve the JUne 10, 1998, meeting minutes as submitted. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC98-0013. Public hearing on an application submitted by Full Image LLC for a special exception to permit a commercial recreational use and a special exception to permit a reduction in required off-street parking for property located in the Community Commercial |CC-2) zone at 1101 S. Riverside. Yapp said the applicant is proposing to locate a family entertainment center in a portion of the building formerly occupied by Jack' s department store in Gateway One Plaza on Riverside Drive. He said the proposed center would contain a number of activities, including Laser Tag, a rock climbing machine, a video and redemption arcade, a miniature golf course, batting cages, golf simulators, spaceball, two inflatables for small children, two party rooms and a snack bar. Yapp said the applicant is also requesting a reduction in the required number of off- street parking spaces by 50 percent, from 240 to 120 spaces. Yapp said the proposed facility is completely enclosed, so it would not directly cause nuisance factors, such as glare, dust, noise or smoke, to effect adjacent properties. Yapp said the applicant has also proposed occasional uses of the parking lot for, outdoor activities· He said the city requires a temporary use permit for uses that take place outdoors in areas normally devoted to parking. He said this gives the City review over whether the outdoor, temporary use will be designed not to cause a nuisance. He said staff recommends that if the Board approves a special exception to allow a commercial recreational use in the Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 2 CC-2 zone, it make clear that this approval does not constitute tacit approval of outdoor recreational uses in the parking lot. These uses will continue to require a temporary use permit. Yapp said in the current City Code, recreational or entertainment uses are required to have a number of parking spaces equal to two-thirds of the building's occupant load. This averages out to be 1.5 people per car visiting the use. He said staff feels with the proposed use, people will arrive in groups. He said staff researched parking requirements for similar types of uses in other cities. He said staff found the requirements were one parking space required per 200-250 square feet of building used. He said the applicant's request of 120 spaces is equal to one space per 200 square feet of building floor, which is identical to what the City requires for retail uses. Yapp said staff recommends that approval be subject to a temporary use permit being required for outdoor activities. He said if the Board is inclined to approve the special exception, they may also recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission that the parking requirement for participatory recreational uses be reviewed. L. Brandt noted that there have been several special exception applications from businesses wanting to move into Gateway One Plaza. He asked how the parking is matched 'with the business since the available parking is massed together. Yapp said there are approximately 600 total spaces available, and each time an occupancy permit is granted the required number of parking spaces is subtracted from the total. Public hearing opened. David Full. potential owner of Planet X, said there is a lack of free-time activities for area teenagers. He would like to develop a diverse group of activities. while keeping a family orientation and atmosphere. He said even though there were other, more economically feasible locations available to him, he chose this site in Gateway One Plaza, partly because it is on a bus route. He said he thought that Planet X is geared toward couples, families, parties and other groups, so the 120 parking spaces should be more than enough. Public hearing closed. MOTION: L. Brand~ moved to approve EXC98-0013, a special exception to allow a commercial recreation use, a family entertainment center know as Planet X, and a special exception to reduce the off-street parking requirement by 50 percent from 240 to 120 parking spaces for property located in the CC-2 zone at 1101 S. Riverside Ddve in the Gateway One Plaza, subject to a temporary use permit being required for any use besides parking and vehicle circulation. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion, L. Brandt said the applicant has demonstrated that the use being proposed is different than the usual commercial recreation use in terms of its impacts and its parking demand. He said except for the outdoor basketball games, which will require a permit, the majority of the activity would be in the interior of the building. He said it will be a beneficial use, not a nuisance, so he would support this motion. Corcoran said the facts of the case make it clear that Iowa City parking requirements for this type of use are more restrictive than needed. She thought that 120 parking Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 3 spaces would be sufficient. She agreed that requiring a temporary use permit for outdoor activities was needed. T.J. Brandt said he thought this use would be a benefit' for kids in Iowa City as an alternative place to go, the parking would not be a problem and it could increase bus ridership. Bender said she thought the proposed business would be a nice addition for young couples and families in Iowa City, and she liked the requirement comparison with other cities. She said nuisances such as dust, glare and noise are not an issue. The motion was carried by a vote of 4-0. EXC98-0014. Public hearing on an application submitted by Jeff and Ellen Segar for a special exception to permit a reduction in the front yard and side yard setback requirements for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 1 O0 Oakridge Avenue. Rockwell presented the Board with the original photos from the applicants, the Segars, and the neighboring property owners, the Ponsetis. She noted how both residences would spatially relate to one another with the proposed garage addition. Rockwell said the applicants would like to construct a 24-foot by 24-foot garage that would encroach 12 feet into the required 20-foot front yard along Oakridge Avenue, and one foot, three inches into the required five-foot west side yard. They are requesting a special exception for front and side yard modifications. Rockwell said the topography on this site precludes putting a garage to the rear or the side of the house. She noted that there would be 34 feet between the garage and the street paving, and in standard residential subdivisions today there are typically 31 feet between a residential structure and. street paving. She noted that the front yard modification requested is about 18 percent of the required front yard setback, and the side yard modification requested is about two percent. She said the visual effect of the garage addition as seen from the street is lessened due to the extra wide right-of-way between the street paving and the applicants' front property line, and the fact that the garage would be built at a lower elevation than the street and the garage roof is designed to be slightly lower in height than the existing garage roof. Rockwell said the impact of the requested property owner to the west, the Ponsetis, lower in elevation than the Segar property. yard modification is mainly falling on the whose property is approximately six feet She said the garage plus the retaining wall will be 19 feet high from grade to ridge line, and will extend 12 feet closer to the street than the Ponseti residence, creating a high wall effect. She said the effect of the wall would be softened to some extent by the windows and a door planned for the west wall of the garage. Rockwell said the proposal will not cause a substantial change or detriment to the neighborhood's character, and the residential addition should serve to upgrade the use and value of the subject property and have a general, positive effect for the neighborhood. She said there is unlikely to be a sense of overcrowding from a neighborhood perspective; the major impact will be on the neighboring property to the west, not on the neighborhood-at-large. Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 4 Rockwell said the only reasonable location for the addition appears to be on the south, street side of the residence. She said the new garage could potentially be minimized by reducing the dimensions to 22 feet by 22 feet, which could work architecturally, allow for some indoor storage area and possibly eliminate the need for a side yard modification. She noted that this alternative would make little change in the effect of the garage on the neighboring property to the west. Rockwell said the Ponsetis have also expressed serious concerns about the stability of the retaining wall between the two properties. The applicants' architect has indicated that a structural engineer will be employed by the Segars to ensure that the structural integrity of the wall will be maintained during and following the garage construction. Rockwell said there are numerous factors for the Board to consider in judging the merits of the case concerning EXC98-0014, a request for a special exception to reduce the front yard requirement along Oakridge Avenue from 20 feet to 8 feet for the 24- foot width of the garage and reduce the side yard requirement from five feet to three feet, nine inches for the length of the west wall of the garage to allow a two-stall garage to be constructed on property located in the RS-5 zone at 100 Oakridge Avenue. On one side, the Board is being asked to con. sider the topographical constraints of the property, the ameliorating factors of the 34-foot setback the garage would be from the street paving, and the improvement of the use and value of the subject property. On the other side, the Board is asked to weigh the extent to which the special exception may be detrimental to the use and value of the neighboring property to the west. Rockwell said if the Board is inclined to approve the requested special exception, it may want to consider certain conditions to minimize the effect of the garage construction on the neighboring property, including requiring that the garage be reduced in size, the applicants provide certification by a structural engineer that the structural integrity of the retaining wall will not be compromised by the proposed garage addition and driveway improvements, and evergreen shrubbery be installed along the west side of the garage to soften the appearance of the structure and to prevent outdoor storage of materials on that side of the garage. She said if the Board finds that the proposed garage addition would have intrusive impacts on the neighboring property that cannot be ameliorated through conditions of approval, it is staff's view that the application should be denied. Rockwell said on June 29, 1998, she received a phone call from Mimi Gormezano, who felt that the City should not allow buildings to be constructed on setback areaS. She said Ms. Gormezano felt this could lead to a sense of overcrowding and a lowering of property values, and emphasized that .setbacks should not be changed without a compelling reason to do so. Rockwell noted the letters to the Board from Dick Kruse, the Ponsetis and Mimi Gormezano in opposition to the special exception request. Public hearing opened. Fllen Segar. 1 O0 Oakridge, said their family has grown and they need a larger kitchen and more storage space, so they would like to move their kitchen into the current garage space and build the new garage. She said they like the Oakridge neighborhood, and did not want to move in order to have a house with a two-car garage. She addressed the Ponsetis concerns regarding shade, planrings, the retaining wall and Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 5 aesthetics. She said that most of the shade that is generated comes from the Ponsetis ornamental tree and the retaining wall. She said she thought the Ponsetis would be pleased that they were building a garage so they would not have to look at the parked car and the basketball hoop in the Segar driveway that the Ponsetis have complained about in the past. She said the proposed garage will be lower, and hopefully, more aesthetically pleasing than the present garage. She said the Ponsetis view of the garage will be limited to when they enter and exit their home, because they have stained glass windows that face the proposed garage location.' She submitted photos of the Ponsetis' house. Segar said regarding the retaining wall, excavation needs to be done to repair the driveway, and she noted that it is in their best interest to preserve the retaining wall, because it will help with reinforcement of the driveway. She noted that she spoke with Dick Kruse, and he told her that the foundation of the proposed garage would actually help stabilize the retaining wall. She noted other neighbors, who have constructed two- car garages that were approved with special exceptions. She said without the special exception, they might have a difficult time selling their five-bedroom home. She-said she felt they could successfully deal with the Ponsetis' concerns. L. Brandt asked how the Segars felt about reducing the garage size. E. Segar said they would like the requested space for indoor storage, because the Ponsetis are currently worried about items stored along the side of the garage. Jeff Segar said they added on a second-level porch at the back of their house, and many items are stored underneath that area. He said if the proposed garage is built, they can make the area back of their house-more aesthetically pleasing. Corcoran noted Kruse's letter said there is an option of placing the garage door facing east. J. Segar said that it would be difficult to go down the slope and turn into a garage that would be oriented in that way. Sue Licht the applicants' architect, said it would be difficult to make the L-shaped turn and come down the slope if the garage was in any other place. She said she is trying to avoid changing the house's internal configuration, and they have looked at a lot of alternatives. She noted that Kruse has not been on the inside of the house. She said the proposed plan is the best one. L. Brandt asked how the retaining wall could cast a shadow farther than the proposed structure. Licht said that it depends on the time of day. She said at 6 a.m., the garage casts a long shadow, and at 10 a.m., the retaining wall casts a shadow. She said the proposed roof slopes back, and its shadow will not be encroaching far beyond the retaining wall shadow. Deborah Krieg. 890 Park Place, said a house next door to her had a one-car garage, and was converted into rental units. She said more homeowners would probably stay in the neighborhood if they were allowed to have two-car garages. Tom Novak. 609 Manor Drive, said they put a large addition, including a two-car garage, on their house about five years ago. He said he thought the Segars' was a reasonable request, and is in keeping with what had been done in the neighborhood, as well as enhancing the neighborhood's value. r~enise Rritigan. I Oakridge Avenue, said their neighborhood does not have a neighborhood association or any covenants to dictate building actions. She said they rely on respect and tolerance for each other, and a realistic expectation for what others can do with their properties. She noted the other additions and renovations in the Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 6 neighborhood, and said overall, the neighbors have been pleased with them. She said she thought a Two-car garage would have a positive impact and help The resale value of the Segars' house. She said she was curious to know how neighbors feel about the Ponsetis' addition, because due to that addition, she no longer sees sunsets from her residence. Kathy Clark. 150 Oakridge Avenue. said she wanted to speak in support of the garage addition and echo all that had been said in support. She said the remodel would be an attractive addition to the Segars' current house, and in keeping with The neighbOrhood's character. She said she and her husband were granted a special exception for a similar addition to the west of the Ponsetis' property. She said the Poneerie would just have a different view if the garage was built. She said when the Ponsetis added an addition on their house, she got used to The new view of a three-story wall from some of the bedrooms in her house. She said she does not even remember what the Poneerie' house looked like before the addition. L. Brandt asked Clark what renovations they made on their house. Clark said they moved the garage forward, so they had a front yard modification. She said they are farther from their side neighbors than in this situation. Kay Bernau. 10 Oakridge Avenue, said they live in a wonderful neighborhood and she just wanted to say that everyone loves the Ponsetis even if they don't all agree with their views on this issue. She said it was important to keep the integrity of the old neighborhoods. She said she has seen older neighborhoods go downhill very fast. She said approval of the garage will help upgrade the neighborhood. Bill Bernau. 10 Oakridge Avenue, said he lives immediately to the east of the Segars and he feels they are proposing a nice, simple addition that would improve the use and enjoyment of their property. He said he would encourage this kind of construction in the whole neighbor. hood. louise Wolf-Novak. 609 Manor Drive, said in her view, home improvements beget home improvements. She said the area needs people to Try to improve their homes. She said the Segars have taken a difficult situation and created innovative solutions. She said this type of renovation would encourage longevity of families in neighborhoods. Helena Ponseti. 110 Oakridge Avenue, said many of the neighborhood additions are lovely, but they have had large yards To work with and have not disturbed their neighbors. She described her yard and the origins of the houses, and said that they could have built their addition in the front of the house, but since they are so close to their neighboring property (the Clark-Valentine's) they chose to build up instead. She noted that the proposed garage will cast a shadow on their front yard in the winter time, and during the days throughout the rest of the year. She said the arbor vitae were planted to protect their privacy. Ponseti said that the garage will tower from their viewpoint, and their visibility will be somewhat impaired by what will be in The driveway and by parked cars on the street. She said cars come and go, but walls stay. She said The garage is not an improvement for them, and while she would like the Segars To stay next door, she would prefer that they live with a one-car garage until They can find a better solution. Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 7 Ignacio Ponseti.. 110 Oakridge Avere,e, said he was concerned with construction work on a very sloping street, and much more cement being added to the current structures. He said an engineer should investigate this situation. He said there will be more shadow cast on their lawn than is represented in Licht's drawings. He said he is fearful that their front yard planrings by the retaining wall will suffer, because their planrings in the back.yard died when the Segars built their second-floor porch addition. He said the garage is proposed to be twelve feet closer to the street than their home, and will rise 19 feet above the ground level of their front yard. Richard Valentine. 150. Oakridge Avenue, said he was amazed that the Ponsetis did not build a garage when they built their addition. He thought it probably would have looked better. He noted that his remodeling cost more than he paid for the house. He said being able to have a two-car garage while staying in the neighborhood was an important factor for him to invest in the remodel instead of finding another house. I. Ponseti said he built their addition upwards, because they needed to replace their' roof. He said he did not build a garage, because he did not want to put too much shadow in the neighbors' yard. Public hearing closed. T.J. Brandt commented that he felt staff's suggestion for screening could prove damaging to the drainage situation, and create more hassle down the road. He hoped the applicants and their neighbors could find a suitable compromise. He said perhaps screening could be provided by the Segars in the Ponsetis' yard. Motion: Corcoran moved to approve EXC98-0014, a request for a special exception to permit a reduction in the front yard along Oakridge Avenue from 20 feet to eight feet for the 24-foot width of the garage, and reduce the side yard setback requirement from five feet to three feet, nine inches from the length of the west wall of the garage to allow a two-stall garage to be constructed on property located in the RS-5 zone at 100 Oakridge Avenue, subject to the applicants providing certification by a structural engineer that the structural integrity of the retaining wall will not be cornpromised by the .proposed garage addition and driveway improvements. L. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said the issue at hand is not whether the garage is a good idea, but the issue involves the two setback reduction requests. He said he is concerned because of the proximity of the proposed garage structure to the other residence. He said allowing this level of a setback raises questions about the impact on the other property. He said even the view from the street will be changed by projection of the garage into the required front yard, but the impact is most felt by the property owner to the west. He said the size of the garage and how close it is to the lot line is of concern to him. Bender said reducing the proposed garage by two feet would not make enough of a difference. She said the request is not excessive by today's standards. Corcoran said the proposed garage is not an enormous structure, and it is still 34 feet from the street, which is a larger setback than is standard in many subdivisions. She thanked all who had come to present information to the Board. She said the Board had to balance the rights of the Segars' use and enjoyment of their home versus the Ponsetis' rights to the use and enjoyment of their home, their privacy and light. She said she believes the Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 8 architect's statement that the garage foundation will help support the retaining wall. She said the reduction involved is 18% in the front yard and two percent in the side yard. She saw no detriment to the neighborhood and no feasible alternative for building the garage. She said she felt it would be in the interests of justice to grant the exception as long as the approval was conditioned on requiring certification by a structural engineer for the retaining wall. She said she would support the motion. T.J. Brandt said this is a tough decision. He said he is familiar with Oakridge Avenue and the whole area in question is extremely shaded. He said it seemed the Oakridge neighborhood was close-knit, and a compatible solution should be able to be worked out between the Poneerie and the Segars. He said he would support the motion with the condition attached concerning the structural engineer. He said let the Poneerie have additional vegetation and let the Segars enjoy their addition. Bender said that she would support the motion. She said the setbacks are not that substantial, and the garage should not create a sense of overcrowding of the streetscape, safety-related issues or an increase in density. She noted that there is no feasible alternative for the applicants. She felt not granting the special exception would be tying the Segars' hands if they wanted to sell their house. She also said a precedent for yard modifications had been set for other residents on this street. The motion carried by a vote of 3-1. with L. Brandt voting no. 3. EXC98-0015. Public hearing on an application submitted by Richard Murphy for a special exception to permit a reduction in the front yard setback requirement along Sixth Avenue for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential {RS-5) zone at 1804 F Street. Rockwell said Murphy would like to construct a 12-foot by 12-foot screened-in porch addition at the rear of his residence with a four-foot wide deck along the east side of the. proposed porch. The entire 144-square foot porch would be within the required front yard setback area along-Sixth' Avenue. She said the uncovered deck does not require a special exception; it is permitted as long as it is set back at least 12 feet from the right-of-way line, which is what is proposed.:- She said this is an unusual situation because the existing residence is located at the west edge of the lot with a portion of the house extending into the Sixth Avenue right-of-way. She said the way in which the house is situated on the lot combined with the orientation of the rooms within the house are factors peculiar to the property in question. According to the applicant, these factors constrain the construction of the porch in the proposed location so that it will be in line with the existing residence and can have access through the kitchen instead of through a more private bedroom or bath area of the residence. She said Sixth Avenue has an extra-wide right-of-way, which means this addition would be placed further from the neighbor across the street. Rockwell said the front yard reduction would represent eight percent of the total front yard setback requirement, and the porch will be set five feet further back from the street than the main portion of the existing residence, so it is unlikely to have an obtrusive appearance from the street. She said the porch addition should upgrade the use and value of the subject property while having very little, if any impact on the neighborhood. This would particularly be the case if the existing vegetative screening Board of Adjuetment July 15. 1998 Page 9 (bushes) between the proposed porch and the sidewalk is enhanced and maintained. She said there appears to be a fair amount of pedestrian traffic in this neighborhood, but pedestrians would not be impeded by the porch addition and it should not obscure visibility. Rockwell said there appears to be no practical alternative for constructing a screened-in porch to the rear of the home without requesting a special exception, because almost the entire residence is located within the 20-foot setback area. She said it may be possible to reduce the porch size or shift the location to the east, but it is unlikely to actually minimize the amount and appearance of the encroachment in any noticeable way. overall, she said it appears the interests of justice would be served by granting the yard modification request. Rockwell said staff views EXC98-O015. an application for a special exception to reduce the front yard requirement along Sixth Avenue by 144 square feet or eight percent to allow construction of a 12-foot by 12-foot screened-in porch for property located in the RS-5 zone at 1804 F Street to be a reasonable request for a modest home improvement. Public hearing opened. Richard Murphy. 1804 F Street, said this plan is for an improvement neighborhood, and noted that The tree to the east is no longer a problem. Public hearing closed. in his MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC98-0015, an application for a special exception to reduce the front yard requirement along Sixth Avenue by 144 square feet or eight percent to allow construction of a 12-foot by 12-foot screened-in porch for property located in the R$-5 zone at 1804 F Street. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt said he would support the motion because it is a small-scale project and there is sufficient distance between the proposed porch and the adjoining properties. Corcoran noted that this is a modest proposal, and the addition should be a nice one. T.J. Brandt said he would support the motion. He said the addition would enhance the value of Murphy's property. Bender said she would also support the motion because the reduction is a small percentage of the total front yard requirement, and there will be no detriment to the neighborhood. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0. OTHFR: ' There was none. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Rockwell said that staff is planning to put out larger notification signs for Board of Adjustment and Planning and Zoning items and to send out notice letters to owners of property within 300 feet of the affected area. She said that Mimi Gormezano requested that staff be more specific when notifying neighbors about potential modifications. Board of Adjustment July 15, 1998 Page 10 ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Corcoran moved to adjourn the meeting. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. William Haigh, Chairperson Minutes submitted by Traci Wagner. I t c d Secre ary IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 1998- 5 P.M. Civic Center Council Chambers Name Address e 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 1Z 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Phone :-3 ,TI.2 3fr /'~,F_--~, 20. MINUTES IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CIVIC CENTER, COUNCIL CHAMBERS JUNE 10, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lyra Dickerson, Michael Kennedy STAFF PRESENT: Dale Helling, Sarah Holecek, Sylvia Mejia, Machele Wiebel, R.J. Winkelhake GUESTS PRESENT: David Brucher, Dan Dreckman, Davis Foster RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Commissioners recommended that Council accept the certified list for the position of Fire Lieutenant. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: Chairperson Kennedy called the meeting to order at 8:15 AM. The first order of business was the hearing on the motion to dismiss the Brucher appeal and the resistance thereto. Pdor't0 receiving evidence, Kennedy acknowledged that counsel had a stipulation they wanted entered into the record. Holecek stipulated that Officer Brucher was terminated on April 14, 1998, and given notice thereof both verbally and in writing and was also given notice of the charges against him at that time which was the basis for the termination and that on May 8, 1998 he filed a notice of appeal with the City Clerk's office which was 24 calendar days subsequent to the date of termination. Foster so stipulated on the behalf of Officer Brucher. Holecek called Linda White, administrative assistant to the Police Chief, to testify before the commission. White testffied that part of her duties involve dissemination of information to police officers and described the procedure for distributing informational materials to each individual police officer. White indicated that she distributes information to officers by placing the documents in the officers individual mail slot at the Police Department. Per Holecek's request, White read aloud section 5, subparagraph b, (which referred to Civil Service Coverage) of the City of Iowa City Personnel Policies handbook. When asked, White answered that she recalled disseminating a booklet like this to all police officers through the procedure previously described. Foster asked White if she had information regarding the date the Personnel Policies booklet would have been distributed to police officers and she answered that it was shortly after March 1997. Foster asked White if the department was still issuing the Iowa City Police Department Rules and Regulations and she indicated that they were. Holecek( entered the Personnel Policies of the City of Iowa City into the record as exhibit A as testified to by Ms. White. Exhibit A was received. Holecek called Ralph J. Winkelhake, Police Chief for the City of Iowa City as her next witness. Chairperson Kennedy swore in Winkelhake. Holecek handed Winkelhake a memorandum and asked him to verify that it stated that he acknowledged that the employees listed on the memorandum had received a copy of the City of Iowa City's Personnel Policies as revised in March 1997. Winkelhake verified the document and his signature on it, dated June 10, 1997. Winkelhake also verffied that David Brucher's name was on the list which indicate that Brucher had received a copy of the Personnel Policies. Foster handed Winkelhake a packet of documents representing forms used in part of the internal investigation and asked him to identify them. Winkelhake said one was the Iowa City Police Department Rules and Regulations, one was the General Order for Intemal Affairs Investigation and one was labeled Issues and Facts, which was a summary of an internal affairs document that Captain Hamey prepared. Foster asked Winkelhake if the packet which contained General Order 9203 contained the documentation that is given to an individual who is subject to an investigation and Winkelhake answered that there are different forms, depending on the administrative proceeding. Foster referred to an Administrative Proceeding Notice, a document called Administrative Proceeding Rights, a Notification of Complaint/Investigation form, a Waiver of Counsel/Representation/Request to Secure Counsel Representation form and a memorandum to David Brucher dated Maroh 31, 1998, from Chief Winkelhake and asked if there was anything in the documents that told David Brucher that it was a Civil Service proceeding or that he had any Civil Service Rights. Winkelhake responded that there was not. Foster asked if Winkelhake was aware of anything that notified David Brucher that the investigation process he was going through was a matter that was subject to Civil Service procedures or appeals. Winkelhake stated that he did not believe any documents of the internal affairs order stated that. Foster asked Winkelhake if he would agree that from the point where the initial memorandum went to David Brucher telling him that he was a subject of the investigation to the point where he received a notice of termination, no documentation told him that this was a Civil Service matter or identified it as being anything other than an intemal affairs investigation disciplinary matter. Winkelhake responded that all of the documents referred to the intemal affairs investigation. Holecek entered the listing showing that Personnel policies had been distributed and showing Officer Brucher's name was on that list, as testified to by Winkelhake, as Exhibit B. Exhibit B was received. Holecek asked Winkelhake to explain at what point the Civil Service Commission gets jurisdiction. Winkelhake answered that the Commission gets jurisdiction once an appeal had been made to a disciplinary action he has taken. Holecek asked if it was accurate that until an intemal affairs investigation results in some sort of disciplinary action, it is not a Civil Service matter. Winkelhake indicated that that was his understanding. Holecek asked if there were intemal affairs investigations that never result in disciplinary action and Winkelhake said that was correct. Holecek questioned whether characterizing the investigative process as a Civil Service matter pdor to any result coming there from would be premature and Winkelhake responded that he thought so. Foster offered Exhibits C-H. Exhibits C-H were admitted and made part of the record. Foster called David Brucher as a witness. Chairperson Kennedy swore in Brucher. Foster asked David Brucher if he had received any documentation dudng the course of the investigation and termination other than exhibits C-H. Brucher answered that he did not believe so. Foster asked Brucher if there was any documentation he had received telling him he had the right to a Civil Service appeal or appeal to the Civil Service Commission. Brucher said not dudng that time. Foster asked Brucher if he had received any information telling him what the time pedod was for appealing to the Civil Service Commission or if he had received any information telling him that this was a matter subject to Chapter 400 of the Iowa Code, specifically sections 400.18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23. Brucher answered no. When asked if it was his intention to appeal the termination of his employment dudng the relevant appeal pedod and exercise his rights of appeal, Brucher answered yes. Holecek asked Brucher if he had met with attorney Matt Glasson shortly after the time of his termination and he responded that he had met with him on Apdl 22. Holecek asked if that would have been within the relevant appeal pedod and Brucher indicated yes. Holecek asked Brucher if Glasson had advised him of his right to a Civil Service appeal and Brucher answered no. Holecek asked Brucher if he was generally aware that he was under Civil Service status as a police officer for Iowa City and if he was aware that there was an appeal process as part of that Civil Service status and Brucher answered yes. When asked if he merely miscounted between business and calendar days, Brucher responded that he had asked Mr. Glasson about the appeal process and at that point Foster interrupted to tell Brucher that he had a dght to an attomey/client privilege with Mr. Glasson about the specific topics of their discussion, so he didn't have to tell Holecek what those specific discussions were, only what the topics were. Foster recommended that Brucher assert his attorney/client privileges. Brucher told Holecek that they discussed the appeal process. Holecek asked Brucher if they discussed relevant time periods and Brucher said there were questions about it but the time period was not brought up. When asked if Brucher had met with counsel prior to the running of the time period for his appeal rights under Civil Service status, he answered yes. Brucher acknowledged that he had filed a grievance within the applicable 5 day period subsequent to his termination because he had been informed by one of his Union stewards about that time frame but had not discussed the Civil Service appeal process with the Union steward. Foster and Holecek stated that this concluded the presentation of witnesses and both requested closing arguments. Holecek's closing argument follows: "Under Chapter 400, as well as the Policies and Procedures for the Police Dept., there is no affirmative duty on the part of the City to provide a person under Civil Service status notice of their appeal rights. As entered into the record, an intemal affairs investigation does not come under the auspices or jurisdiction of, or even the potential auspices or jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission until such time that there is disciplinary action taken as the result of the findings of such an investigation. I find that it's irrelevant as to whether notice was given in those documents as there may not be any basis for an appeal during that process. I think also the record reflects that many intemal affairs investigations do not result in any disciplinary proceedings and there is no jurisdiction of the Civil Service commission there. Secondly, I believe that the resistance to the motion to dismiss is based on equitable grounds of estoppel that requires an affirmative action to mislead on the part of the City with regard to the appeal rights. There was no statements made regarding the appeal rights upon which Officer Brucher was mislead. In fact, he met with his counsel and unfortunately the communication process didn't protect him. With regard to his intent as to whether to appeal, thars irrelevant, because he hag to exercise his appeal dghts within 14 days, 14 calendar days, as stated within the Civil Service chapter, or this commission is without jurisdiction to hear it. It is a statutory requirement that can not be extended. I think it's clear that he was outside that appeal pedod and the reasoning behind that is rather irrelevant. Again, attempting to create an affirmative duty on the part of the City to provide notice, there is no affirmative duty in the Civil Service chapter or in any procedural rules adopted there under to create the requirement of the City to give notice to a disciplined employee as to their appeal rights. And there were also no grounds upon which the City can be estopped or said to have been mislead Officer Brucher as to those rights. It appears to be a failure of communication with his attorney or his Union rep or a failure in timing on his part which cannot now be attributed to the City in any way. In conclusion, this Commission is without jurisdiction or authority to hear this matter on its merits. Before proceeding to Mr. Fosters argument, Kennedy questioned Holecek regarding her mention of procedural rules adopted under Chapter 400. He asked if Holecek was aware of any procedural rules adopted under that Chapter. Holecek answered that she was not, not by this Commission. She stated that there are procedural rules adopted by the Commission as revised in November 1989 that outline complaints and notice of appeal and charges which merely mirrors that which is in Chapter 400 and doesn't go beyond Chapter 400 by creating an affirmative duty to provide notice on the part of the City to a disciplined employee. Kennedy stated that he would like these entered into the record if there was no objection from Mr. Foster. Mr. Foster did not object. Foster's closing argument follows: "1 apologize to the Commission for not providing a written legal argument. I'd certainly be willing to do so if you would like one. What we are arguing here is that there is a due process dght to a notice which tells the terminated employee what his rights of appeal are. I have reseamhed and found no specific case in point which states that in a Civil Service setting the employer's required to set out notice of appeal. I haven't found a case either way. What I have found are cases that say that the right of employment when an individual is a Civil Service employee is a property right. Then when you go to the cases that deal with property dghts, you find the case in Iowa of the Chicago and Northwestem Railroad vs. the Iowa Transportation Regulation Board, which is at 322 Northwest Second 273. What that case says is that when a headng is'afforded by constitution or statute due process demands that the contestants be given notice thereof, sufficient to permit a reasonable opportunity to appear and assert their rights. And in that case the Iov~a Supreme court cited a United States Supreme court case which was called Memphis Light Gas and Water Division vs Kraft which is at 436 US I 98 Supreme Court 1554, 1978 case, that said when a utility customer is having his power terminated and there's no notification to him of anything other than his power is being terminated, in other words there's not notice to him of his right to file an appeal procedure to go through a dispute resolution process, that that is a violation of his due process rights. So in that.case the United States Supreme court said that when you're depriving a party of a property right, you have a specific obligation to giving notice of what their fights are or they can be deprived of that right. And that has been adopted by the Iowa Supreme court in the Chicago and Northwestem case. In another case the Iowa Supreme court ruled in the estate of Weidman, which is at 476 Northwest Second 357, that when property rights are involved, notice must reasonably appraise the parties of their dght to be heard. And, so, I can't come before this Commission and say that · David. Brucher didn't know he had a right to appeal, obviously he did. The question is whether, when there is a notice of termination which just basically says you are terminated, and doesn't say that this is a Civil Service termination, doesn't say here's what your rights of appeal are, doesn't say here's what the time period for filing a notice of appeal, that that notice violates due process rights. The notice in this case, dated April 14, 1998, simply says, 'Based on the findings of Intemal Affairs Investigation 98-5, and our discussion of this morning, I have determined that your employment with the Iowa City Police Department is terminated immediately. You are to surrender all department property under your control to Captain Hamey before your departure from the building'. Thars the extent of the notice. Our argument is that that violates the due process rights of David Brucher because of property interest in his Civil Service employment with the City of Iowa City. And to clarify one matter, Ms Holecek, we are not contending that the City made some affirmative act which mislead Officer Brucher. We're just contending that the notice, in and of itself, is insufficient and violates due process." Kennedy stated that the evidence had been received and he and Dickerson would need to talk about it and review the documents. During the discussion Kennedy asked if Officer Brucher was on probation during this matter. Mejia responded that Brucher had completed his period of probation on August 12, 1992. Following their discussion, Kennedy stated that he and Dickerson reviewed the evidence presented and reviewed the exhibits and testimony. Based on the evidence 'presented they made the following findings of fact: "We find by clear and convincing evidence that David Brucher was terminated from employment at the Iowa City Police Department by Iowa City Police Chief R.J. Winkelhake on April 14, 1998 pursuant to a wdtten memorandum dated Aprii 14, 1998. We further find that Officer Brucher was informed of his termination of employment on April 14, 1998, verbally and in writing. We also find, based on the evidence presented, that Officer Brucher filed a notice of appeal from the April 14, 1998, termination of employment with the Iowa City Clerk's office pursuant to a notice of appeal which was filed May 8, 1998. We find that said notice of appeal was filed 24 days after Officer Brucher was presented with notice of termination on Apdl 14, 1998. We also find by clear and convincing evidence that Officer Brucher received, at some time prior to June 10, 1997, the City of Iowa City Personnel Policies which are in evidence as exhibit A and we find that said City of Iowa City Personnel Policies clearly provide on page 5 thereof that following completion of probation an employee covered by Civil Service who is discharged may appeal the disciplinary action to the Civil Service Commission and that appeals must be filed with the City Clerk within 14 days after the termination. We find that, although there is no direct evidence from Officer Brucher or any. other witness that Officer Brucher indeed was personally handed this exhibit, we find that there is sufficient evidence to show that this information was made available to Officer Brucher by being placed in his mailbox pursuant to department policies by Linda White pursuant to the direction of R.J. Winkelhake. We also find by clear and convincing evidence that Officer Brucher had the opportunity to consult with his union steward subject to his termination and that he also had an opportunity to consult with counsel within the appeal time. We, therefore, find that Officer Brucher had opportunities presented to him to be informed of and fully advised of his appeal rights, both through the written materials that were presented to him in the course of his employment with the City of Iowa City and also in the course of his interactions with and/or conversations with his union steward or his attomey. Based on those findings of fact, we as a commission make the following conclusions of law: We find that Iowa Code Section 400.20 provides that the suspension, demotion or discharge of a person holding Civil Service rights may be appealed to the Civil Service Commission within 14 calendar days after discharge. As is indicated in our findings of fact we find that Officer Brucher's notice of appeal was filed 24 days after his termination of employment which is beyond the statutory 14 day period. We also find as a matter of law that the notice of termination that was presented to Officer Brucher by Police Chief R.J. Winkelhake did not have to inform him of his appeal dghts. We see no authority in the Iowa Code nor have we been presented with compelling common law authority which would require us to require as a matter of law that a notice of termination given to a Civil Service employee contain a recitation of the employee's appeal dghts as a result of the suspension, demotion or termination. We believe that if that was a requirement for a Civil Service employee the legislature would have imposed that as a requirement in Chapter 400 so we can not conclude as a matter of law that the notice of termination given to Officer Brucher on Apdl 14, 1998, violated equitable principals in any way nor did it violate Chapter 400 of the Iowa Code. Based on these findings of fact and conclusions of law, we hereby sustain the City's motion to dismiss Officer Brucher's appeal. We find that because the notice of appeal was filed beyond the 14 day calendar pedod required by Iowa Code Section 400.20, this Civil Service Commission lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this matter and as such any ruling that this Commission might attempt to enter in connection with the medts of this matter would be void. Consequently, it is indicated the appeal in this matter by Officer David Brucher is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on behalf of the Iowa City Civil Service Commission. That will close the record on this matter." Kennedy asked that those in favor of this ruling say aye; Kennedy and Dickerson say aye. Opposed; None. Motion cardes unanimously, with Kennedy and Dickerson voting yes. Kennedy stated that the meeting would move on to the second item on the agenda. Mejia reported that the assessment centers for Fire Lieutenant had been completed and all candidates had met with the consultant to determine' how they had done. Mejia said that the Chiefs and Assistant Chiefs who participated as assessors in the assessment centers were very complimentary of our staff and of our candidates and indicated that we have a good group. Dickerson made a motion to accept the eligibility list for the position of Fire Lieutenant as presented to on June 10, 1998. Kennedy seconded the motion. All in favor; Kennedy and Dickerson say aye. Opposed; None. Motion cardes unanimously, with Kennedy and Dickerson voting yes. Old' Business Mejia said that Fire Chief Rocca wants the opportunity to come in and discuss his intentions of implementing guidelines for promotion, including educational requirements, with the Commission. The Commission will be contacted to set a meeting time. New Business Mejia explained that there has been some discussion about board and commission members having ownership in businesses and doing business with the City. She gave each Commissioner a form that was developed by the City Attomey's office and asked them to complete it, explaining that it will go on file so there is a record of what businesses the commissioners might be involved in and if it would have any impact on their ability to serve as a Civil Service commissioner. Kennedy moved to adjoum, Dickerson seconded. Motion carried unanimously. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES co June 1998 Meeting ~-~ (held July 6, 1998 due to inclement weather) Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey, Joan Jehle, tS'mrles~4ajor;~ Vincent, Jan Warren STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank, Kaci Carolan CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey Called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Vincent asked for clarification of a few points in the May minutes. Vincent asked who had relayed gubernatorial candidate McCormick's stance on adding sexual orientation to the state code. Shank indicated she had, and that she later learned that Vilsack had made similar statements. Vincent asked Major to elaborate on the "cool attitude" he perceived from other commissioners at the training session in Des Moines. Vincent echoed Major's sentiment, based on Vincent's own attendance in Des Moines. Warren moved to approve the minutes as amended; Thomopulos seconded. All in favor;, no opposed. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. BY-LAW APPROVAL: Two proposed revisions to the Iowa City Human Rights Commission By- Laws were reviewed and discussed. One revision was to include in the by-laws the administrative closure provisions previously added to the ordinance. The other revision was to change the Commission Team decision from "consensus" to "majority." In preparing the administrative closure provisions, Carolan had noted that the by-laws used the term consensus. Shank indicated that this appears to have been an oversight from a previous revision, since she has a dmt't copy which in fact utilizes "majority." Harvey pointed out that for her entire 5 year tenure on the Commission, the actual practice has been to utilize a majority decision. This change would bring the by-laws into alignment with the Commission's actual practice. Martin moved to accept the changes to the By-Laws as proposed; Shires seconded. All in favor; no opposed. The amendments to the by-laws were approve& This will become a Recommendation to Council (specifically to the By-Law Comminee} on the July agenda. IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION JULY MEETING - For the sake of new Commissson members, Harvey explained that each July or August, the Iowa. Civil Rights Commission decides which topics they will be addressing at their Fall Retreat. Since 1994, the Iowa City Htunan Rights Commission has appeared at the ICRC meeting to ask them to consider recommending that sexual orientation be added as a protected category to the state civil fights law. This year's meeting is July 24, 1998, and Harvey will be going to represent the ICHRC. She has asked Shank and Carolan to attend with her, to address any legal questions that may be raised regarding Iowa City' s ordinance, its history, its implementation, etc. IOWA LEAGUE OF CITIES PROPOSAL - Dee Vanderhoef approached Shank, who relayed the Human Rights Commission June, 1998 Minutes Page 2 following information to Harvey. The Iowa League of Cities is looking for proposal of possible items to support/present to the legislature. The League's next meeting is July 14, and Vanderhoef would need any suggestions prior to that date. Harvey inquired of the Commission whether they wished to put forth the addition of sexual orientation as a protected class via this route as well. Discussion followed, with Warren requesting additional information about the Iowa League of Cities. Warren also asked whether Vanderhoef would be relaying our proposal to the League or actually advocating for it. Martin (who had spoken to Vanderhoef on this topic) said she didn't know. The Commission indicated their approval. Harvey will draft such a proposal and a copy will be included in the July packet. OLD BUSINESS: Letter to ICRC on Sexual Orientation: Warren asked about the status of this letter, which had been signed by the Commission in May. Carolan indicated that it has been sent to ICRC and to all the other local Commissions. She had not yet sent it to local media; the Commission reiterated their desire that she do so. The Commission had also said they wanted the letter sent to state legislators. Carolan asked whether they meant all state legislators, or just the ones representing the Iowa City/Coralville area. Warren noted that the Commission pretty much already has the support of the local legislators. Therefore, Carolan indicated she would mail the letter to all the state legislators. She will include a copy of the final letter in the July packet. Keynote Speaker for '98 Breakfast: Shank reported that Pastor Reginald Blount has agreed to be the keynote .speaker. Shank has requested biographical information from him, but he' s out of town for perhaps a month. Carolan has already drafted the nomination/ticket letter, and that will be ready to be mailed this month. Jehle volunteered to help with the mailing. Accessible Caucus Sites: Martin has spoken with AI Stroh, the University contact person. He strongly indicated that caucuses should primarily be held in IMU, which is accessible. Student groups may use the Union free of charge, so if a UI student is involved in the caucus, the room is free. Otherwise, there is a rental fee. Stroh did provide a list of other buildings, many of which are accessible, but the buildings are not geared for public meetings and therefore reservations are more difficult. Stroh said the Commission could list his office as a contact for reserving rooms in other buildings beside IMU. Martin will get the school principals list from Marion Coleman, but suggested that the actual mailing wait until August, since many of the principals are gone during July. Warren will get copies made of the letter and form. Martin asked if we could provide SASEs for responses; Carolan agreed to do that as soon as Martin gets her a total number. Shank indicated she has a meeting planned ivith Sarah Holecek from the City Attomey's Office to try to establish a uniform policy for City buildings. Once the information is compiled, it will be provided to the two political parties and a copy will be available at the library. It may also be sent to the newspaper, in an effort to discourage people from holding caucuses in their (generally inaccessible) homes. Human Rights Commission June, 1998 Minutes Page 3 NEW BUSINESS Posters for Jonathan Wilson: Vincent distributed a handout he prepared which described homophobic graffiti he had seen on the Wilson posters CHomos Suck!" and "Gay people DIE!") and the fact that some of the posters had been removed. He said he had never encountered this problem with other fiyers, and asked the Commission to consider their response. Specifically, he asked the Commission to: recommend to the City Council that the Council go on record, at public meeting and in proclamation form, as strongly opposing such sentiments; appoint a citizen panel to explore the extent of such sentiment in the community; and seek to provide greater legal penalties for such actions. Harvey's initial response was to parallel the situation to the homophobic graffiti which appeared at the Public Library last year, and the display that the Commission prepared in response. Harvey recapped this incident for the benefit of the new Commissioners. Harvey said her first concern in responding to the current incident is that we don't have the actual posters or any physical evidence. Shank added that without the posters, you have nothing to prove that a criminal act was committed. Several Commissioners expressed the view that they couldn't ask the Council to denounce something of which they had no demonstrable proof. Major also added that he felt the hate crimes statute was very strong, and the Commission shouldn't-go past that. Warren added that she didn't believe writing "homos suck" was criminal behavior---she doesn't like it and wouldn't advocate for it, but felt it was someone expressing their opinion. Carolan briefly reviewed the hate crimes law. Shank said she wasn't chastising Vincent for not keeping the posters, but she couldn't stress enough how important it was to keep evidence of incidents like this. She also related one time in the past where a Commissioner wanted to go to Council regarding a racist incident, and it later turned out that the incident was a false claim. Warren said she thought it was always good for the Commission to .make educational responses, but she didn't see what we would really gain by going to Council. Harvey felt that the "flow" actually went the other way-the Council has charged and empowered the Commission to deal with these matters, and it is inappropriate and backward for the Commission to then mm back to the Council and ask them to respond. Vincent then asked, if there was no proof positive that this graffiti existed, why a policeman was secured for Wilson's speech. Shank indicated that her contract with Wilson required her to provide security if there was a threat of any kind. Vincent had relayed these messages, one was right outside the library, and Shank felt that it was more important to procure the security than to have the poster in hand pwving the threat. Vincent asked why this wasn't sufficient to go forward to Council. Shank and Warren asked why he wanted to go to Council. Vincent indicated that Council is the governing body in this city and he felt they needed to make some stand. Shank indicated that she felt the safety of an individual in the face of a potential threat was vastly different from asking Council to make a statement against something we can't show them or pwve. Vincent asked about his suggestion for a citizen panel. Harvey said she thought this was a perfect example of the kind of thing the DiverseCities Team should be doing. Shank also pointed out that there's discrimination in Iowa City, there's racism there are other events and graftiti in Iowa City that target other protected classes. Harvey said this could also be a topic for a panel presentation and that suggestion could be made to the D-Team. Warren said she felt it was essential to remember how important the educational aspect of the Commission's mission is--whether through letters to the editor, writing to the state Commission, having booths and information at gatherings, etc. Vincent Human Rights Commission June, 1998 Minutes Page 4 asked when the next D-Team meeting was scheduled. Shank indicated that Diane Finnerty at OAA was organizing the next one, and a date had not yet been set. Harvey reiterated that if the D-Team isn't able to continue these meetings and groups, the Commission can always reclaim them. Vincent asked whether any other Commissioners had experienced any similar incidents with other posters they'd put up. Several Commissioners said that they didn't really check back with posters they'd already put up. Jehle said she had seen posters defaced and removed. Several Commissioners had noted posters missing in the past. Shank said that they had been told that people liked the tacks we used (and therefore would take our posters down to steal our tacks). Carolan said she'd bring a staple gun next time. Warren said she'd seen racist grafitti, homophobic graffiti everywhere--posters, park benches, bathrooms. Thomopulos said she'd seen it on churches. Vincent asked for clarification: Given the reality of what he had observed, given that it caused us to provide security for Wilson's speech, and owing to the great amount of grafitti all the Commissioners said they'd seen, they still felt this wasn't sufficient to ask the Council to say something in an official capacity to the citizens of the City? Warren said she didn't feel it was sufficient. Harvey asked why single out sexual orientation, when the Commission's charge covered all protected categories? Vincent said then make it a blanket proclamation that covered all forms of such grafitti. Warren indicated she felt we already had that in the Human Rights Ordinance. Harvey said again she felt that the Council had charged the Commission to respond to these matters, rather than the Commission turning to Council for a response. Jehle said she didn't want Vincent to feel the other Commissioners were not concerned, because they were--but that she felt they needed to pick their battles. Warren cited some other recent examples of protected category motivated conduct. Vincent said he felt that we had an oppommity here to say something positive to counteract the negativity of that sort of sentiment. If not a recommendation to the Council, what about a public statement from the Commission itself?. Shank said she felt we would encounter the same problem, in that we didn't have the posters themselves. Jehle suggested the Commission write Jonathan Wilson indicating they were sorry things had happened that required security. Warren also noted that the Commission has in the past felt that media coverage/letters to the editor seem more effective when they promote the positive, as opposed to calling attention to the negative. She felt it would give the negative sentiments extra "advertising" to repeat them in the media. Harvey concluded by saying that she felt the Commission needed to work with that with which they were charged. If Diverse-Cities does not pick up this issue, then the Commission should pick it back up and perhaps have a panel discussion or other public event. Annual Report: A draft copy of the Human Rights Commission annual report was included in the packer. Commissioners offered changes and additions. Carolan noted that the draft did not reflect final complaint intake and resolution numbers for the fiscal year. Martin asked how our protected category breakdown compared to other commissions. Carolan indicated that the state figures wouldn't be available for probably another month. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Jehle: Asked if the senior center panel had actually been taped, because she had not seen it on the Government Channel yet, and she had some concerns about what the sound quality would have been like. Shank said she would look into this. Commissioners indicated that they felt a video Human Rights Commission June, 1998 Minutes Page 5 of this information would be very helpful; if there was not a tape of the senior center presentation, perhaps a similar panel should be done solely for video. Harvey reminded the group that the Commission had talked about doing a similar but expanded panel at the library one evening in the fail. If this is still under consideration, this panel would certainly be taped. ' Jehle: Said this was the first year she had observed or participated in the Gay Pride festivities and she thought it was great. She particularly noted Dee Norton's positive comments about the Commission (following his reading of the Gay Pride month proclamation). At the Commission's request, Jehle and Dickerson agreed to write a brief thank you note to Norton (since they were the two Commissioners actually present to hear the comments). Jehle: The Police Citizen Review Board public hearing has been rescheduled for Tuesday, July 14, at 7:00 p.m. at the ICPL. The PCRB is very interested in public comment, and is encouraging the public to either attend, or submit comments/questions in advance through the City Clerk's Office. Warren: Cailed attention to a guest opinion that appeared in ICON regarding racism at West High. Among other things, the article noted that there were no students of color honored at the awards ceremony this year. The article aiso reviewed the Daie Allender situation at West High. Warren recapped what has appeared in the media regarding this incident (harassing e-mail). Major: had been on a mental heaith/developmentai disabilities board, but his appointment expired in June. In April, this group started polling individuals with mental heaith/developmental disabilities. Major reported that a number of people responded that they were angered over discrimination. He intends to follow up on this and find out more details/specifics. He will report back to the Commission when he has more information. Vincent: Asked who beside the Commission members receive copies of the packet. Shank and Carolan indicated no one; the agenda itself is posted and distributed to the media, but the packet is not. He asked about the inclusion of two editoriais written by Commission members. Shank said she just includes whatever she happens to see that she thinks would be of interest or benefit to the Commission, but she can certainly omit them in the future. After some discussion, it was agreed that editoriais/articles by Commission members will not be included in future packets. The Commission requested that articles by other individuals that might be of interest continue to be included. It is understood that there isn't a lot of picking and choosing in terms of content; it's just materiai on pertinent topics that Shank or Carolan happen to see. Martin: urged any Commissioners who haven't yet seen the Jonathan Wilson speech to make an effort to do so. She asked for clarification on one point. Had Wilson actually said that 80% of the American public believe that sexual orientation is already protected? Other Commissioners indicated they believed this was the correct figure. Martin said she had begun taking an informai poll among her friends, and most of them believe it's protected nationaily. Shank: Stressed again that Shank and Carolan need to devote their time to the cases. They need to cut back on their involvement in other outside programs which take them away from investigation. Case processing has to be the priority. The Commission is free to continue outside projects, but staff must focus on the case investigations. Martin asked that Shank make requests of the Commission. Martin believes that sometimes it's simply lack of communication or knowledge that keeps Commissioners from taking on certain projects. Warren: in light of the prior topic, Warren noted that fail is fast approaching, and the Human Rights Commission June, 1998 Minutes Page 6 Commission needs to decide if it wishes to continue the film series. Martin noted that the films have generally not been very well artended. Commissioners are asked to consider ideas and projects and be ready to discuss them at the next meeting. It was decided that outreach activities in general will be placed on the agenda for July. STATUS OF CASES: Team C has a case; Team B has a case. There is a case currently in Legal that will go to Team A. There is one case awaiting transfer to Legal. We are awaiting final paperwork in two mediations. There is one additional mediation scheduled next week. Them is still a conciliation in process. Them is a predetennination seffiement underway. There was one administrative closure. The pending appeal was concluded and the case transferred to ICRC. Harvey asked for clarification on a pending mediation agreement. Vincent asked for clarification on the usage of "race" as opposed to "ethnicity" NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: The July meeting will be July 27, 1998, 7:00 p.m., in the Civic Center Lobby Conference Room. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m. Vincent/Jehle. 07/13/98 transcribed by kkc fl, AFT' IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES July 27, 1998 Meeting COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Harvey, Joan Jehle, Diane Martin, Ann Shires, Mettie Thomopulos, Art Vincent COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Dickerson, Charles Major, Jan Warren STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank, Kaci Carolan PUBLIC PRESENT: Eva Fasseinder, Michael Knock, Kirk Murray CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: in favor; no opposed. Shires moved to approve the June minutes; Jehle seconded. All RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Martin moved to forward the recommended changes to the By-Laws to the Rules Committee of the Iowa City City Council. Shires seconded. All in favor; no opposed. Harvey noted that the Rules Committee just met in June, and they don't necessarily meet monthly. Shank will advise the Commission as to when the Rules Committee will next meet. (See attachment Substantive discussion of changes in June 1998 meeting minutes.) OLD BUSINESS: Iowa Civil Rights Commission Meeting on Fall Retreat: Harvey, Shank, and Carolan went to Des Moines on July 24, where Harvey addressed the Iowa Civil Rights Commission during their regular monthly meeting. Harvey conveyed the Iowa City Human Rights Commission's request that the ICRC discuss adding sexual orientation as a protected category under the state law during their Fall Retreat. Flora Lee, one of the ICHRC Commissioners, made a motion that the matter be put on the agenda for the ICHRC's regular August meeting. Harvey indicated this did not mean that the issue would be included as a topic for the Fall Retreat (during which the ICHRC decides what legislation they're going to propose to the legislature), only that the ICHRC will discuss the possibility. Vincent asked fithere had been any feedback on the ICHRC's prior letter. Harvey said there was virtually no feedback of any kind. Harvey intends to write a note to Ms. Lee to thank her for her initiative. Vincent asked if there was any indication of how many of the ICHRC Commissioners might be in sympathy with actually recommending this change to the legislature. Harvey indicated that when Ms. Lee first made her motion, the vote was 2-2 (only 4 of the state Commissioners were present). It was only after further discussion, when Ms. Lee made clear that she was only intended the topic go on the August agenda and not immediately to the Fall Retreat agenda, that all 4 Commissioners voted in favor of doing so. Harvey asked if Shank would call Don Grove after the ICHRC' s August meeting to check the outcome of the discussion. Harvey also clarified that in her letter to Ms. Lee, she will stress her belief that this issue needs to be discussed even if all 7 Commissioners are not present at the August meeting. Harvey explained that the ICRC Commissioners had said they felt this needed to be discussed by the full Commission, which concerned her because rarely if ever are all 7 Commissioners Human Rights Commission July, 1998 Minutes Page 2 in attendance. Mailing - Human Rights Breakfast: Carolan reported that close to 1000 nomination/ticket forms have been mailed out. Tremendous thanks go to Jehle and Shires for their work in getting this done. Forms were passed out to the Commissioners for them to distribute. Accessible Caucus Sites: Martin spoke to the school board office, who told her that there may be one individual who can provide information for all the school buildings. This would alleviate having to try to get replies from 16 different principals. Martin still needs the actual form. Shank said Warren's supposed to e-mail her the form, and she'll send it to Martin as soon as she gets it. Shank indicated that Sarah Holeeek is in the process of drafting separate meeting policies for the four relevant City buildings. Martin briefly mapped this project for the benefit of the public present. This item will go back on the agenda for next month. Iowa League of Cities: Harvey reported that she had provided a proposal to the Iowa League of Cities and had also written to the League president, offering a copy of the transgender video for the League's use during their fall retreat NEW BUSINESS - Friends of Iowa Civil Rights Awards: In response to a question from Harvey, Shank explained that these axe ICRC awards similar to the ones we give at the FIR Breakfast. Martin asked whether it would be appropriate to nominate a past ICHRC winner. Shank said that would be fine. Hate Crime: Harvey reported to the Commission that an assault had allegeally occurred the previous weekend outside the 620 Club, During the conversation prior to the alleged assault, homophobic comments were made. The police have charged the individual with two counts of assault. In response.to this event, Harvey proposed a letter to local media. Harvey read a draft letter she had prepared, in an attempt to speed the Commission's response. One minor change was proposed, removing the name of the business as it's immaterial. Harvey pointed out that although this item was placed on the agenda as "hate crime," it has not been criminally charged as one so she didn't want to define the incident as such. With this one change, the Commission indicated their approval of the letter. The letter will be sent over Harvey's signature as chair, however, .since without full attendance and approval, it would be inappropriate to represent it as being from the full Commission. Commtmity Outreach: This was on the agenda for Commission discussion of future projects and programs (movies, panels, education, etc.) Harvey suggested that this item be deferred tmul the August meeting, when hopefully the full Commission will be in attendance. Harvey indicated belief that full Commission involvement is needed to determine exactly what's feasible and efforts should be focused. This item will be placed back on the agenda for August. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Jehle: passed around a number of newspaper clippings she'd seen, most from Cedar Rapids, involving their discussions of adding sexual orientation to their human rights ordinance. There was also an article about Morris Dees winning a $37.8 million jury award against the Klu Klux Klan. Vincent asked if copies of these articles could be made for the Commissioners; Carolan agreed to do SO. Jehle: reported on the Police Citizen Review Board's public forum. 35-50 people artended. Jehle found it very moving. Human Rights Commission July, 1998 Minutes Page 3 Carolan: raised an issue by proxy at Warren's request. Warren will be out of town the 4th Monday in October, .and asks that the other Commission members consider whether they'd be willing to move the October meeting up one week. It was noted that this would make the October meeting just prior to the HR Breakfast as opposed to just after, which might be beneficial. Vincent: asked if anyone knew where Cedar Rapids was in the process of trying to add sexual orientation to their ordinance. He asked Shank to find out. STATUS OF CASES: Team A just finished a case. Notice letters have gone out in two other cases. Them were two administrative closures for non-compliance of Complainants. There are two predetermination settlements pending. Then are still two mediations awaiting final paperwork. One other mediation broke down. NEXT COMMISSION MEETING: The August meeting will be August 24, 1998, 7:00 p.m., in the Civic Center Lobby Conference Room. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:.3 1 p.m. Vincent/Martin. 07/28/98 transcribed by kkc IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES June 1998 Meeting (held July 6, 1998 due to inclement weather) COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Dickerson, Pat Harvey, Joan Jehle, Charles Major, Diane Martin, Ann Shires, Mettie Thomopulos, Art Vincent, Jan Warren STAFF PRESENT: Heather Shank, Kaci Carolan CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Vincent Eked for clarification of a few points in the May minutes. Vincent asked who had relayed gubernatorial candidate McCormick's stance on adding sexual orientation to the state code. Shank indicated she had, and that she later learned that Vilsack had made similar statements. Vincent asked Major to elaborate on the "cool attitude" he perceived from other commissioners at the training session in Des Moines. Vincent echoed Major's sentiment, based on Vincent's own attendance in Des Moines. Warren moved to approve the minutes as amended. Thomopulos seconded. All in favor; no opposed. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None. BY-LAW APPROVAL: Two proposed revisions to the Iowa City Human Rights Commission By- Laws were reviewed and discussed. One revision was to include in the by-laws the administrative closure provisions previously added to the ordinance. The other revision was to change the Commission Team decision from "consensus" to "majority." In preparing the administrative closure provisions, Carolan had noted that the by-laws used the term consensus. Shank indicated that this appears to have been an oversight from a previous revision, since she has a draft copy which in fact utilizes "majority." Harvey pointed out that for her entire 5 year tenure on the Commission, the actual practice has been to utilize a majority decision. This change would bring the by-laws into alignment with the Commission's actual practice. Martin moved to accept the changes to the By-Laws as proposed; Shires seconded. All in favor; no opposed. The amendments to the by-laws were approved. This will become a Recommendation to Council (specifically to the By-Law Committee) on the July agenda. IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION JULY MEETING - For the sake of new Commission members; Harvey explained that each July or August, the Iowa Civil Rights Commission decides whi. ch topics they will be addressing at their Fall Retreat. Since 1994, the Iowa City Human Rights Commission has appeared at the ICRC meeting to ask them to consider recommending that sexual orientation be added as a protected category to the state civil rights law. This year's meeting is July 24, 1998, and Harvey will be going to represent the ICHRC. She has asked Shank and Carolan to attend with her, to address any legal questions that my be raised regarding Iowa City's ordinance, its history, its implementation, etc. IOWA LEAGUE OF CITIES PROPOSAL - Dee Vanderhoef approached Shank, who relayed the the local ordinance; the right to retain a private attorney; the Commission's duty to forward a copy of the complaint to the Iowa Civil Rights Commission. Initiation of complaint investigation The Investigator will establish a file for each discrimination complaint. Each file will be assigned a Human Rights case number. The Investigator shall maintain a current flow chart tracking the progress of each complaint. It will also be the responsibility of the Investigator to notify appropriate parties within twenty (20) days of filing date. The InvesUg'ator shall draft and mail a questionnaire/document request to the Respondent (and to the Complainant where appropriate). Answers and documents are to be received by the Investigator within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the request, unless an extension has been granted by the Investigator. After reviewing the materials. responsive to the questionnaire/document request, the Investigator shall determine whether the Complaint warrants further investigation. If the Investigator rinds there is a reasonable possibility of a probable cause determination, or that the legal issues presented in the complaint need further devdopment, the case shall be Investigated by an authorized member of the Commi~ion's staff. If the Investigator determines that a complaint does not warrant further processing, the case f'~e shall be reviewed by the City Attorney and a Human Rights Commission team. If the Commition team determines that the complaint does not warrant further investigation, the complaint shall be administratively dosed. Notice of such closure shall be promptly served upon the Complainant, and shall state the reasons for adminisWative closure. A Complainant may'object to the administrative closure, and request review within ten (10) days of receipt of the written notice. If a Complainant makes such a timely request for review, the Investigator, City Attorney, and Human Rights Commition team shall promptly review the Complainant's request and all relevant material. If, after review, the Human Rights Commission team determines that the complaint does not warrant further processing, the Commition shall close the file and notify the Complainant and Respondent of the final decision of administrative closure. If, after review, the Commission team determines that there is a reasonable possibility of a probable cause determination or that the legal issues presented in the complaint need further development, the complaint shall be investigated. Chair, an extension of time to submit a probable cause determination. The extension will be granted with a showing of good cause. A majority of the Team is required to make a recommendation to the Commission. After a probable cause determination has been made, the Investigator shall notif~ all appropriate parties by certified mail of the finding and the masons for the finding. If a no probable cause determination has been reached, the Complainant will have a right to appeal the decision within 10 days of receipt of the written notice. The Complainant should be advised to present all new information and corroborating material to support the appeal at the hearing. The Human Rights Commission Team shall hear the Complainant' s evidence within thirty (30) days of the request for review. b, If it has been determined that there is probable cause to believe discrimination took place, the Human Rights Commission Team assumes the responsibility of conciliation. The team is, thereafter, referred to as the Conciliation Team. Conciliation Team responsibility - 1. The Conciliation Team shall seek to resolve a discrimination complaint through · ' conciliation. Human Rights Ordinance, Section 24-4. If the Conciliation Team is unable to effectuate a disposition within ninety (90) days after the :finding of probable cause the Commission may order the conciliation conference procedure to be bypassed. The Conciliation Team shall state in writing the reasons for bypassing further conciliation efforts. The statement should include a summary of the conciliation effort, the principal facts as disclosed in the investigation and other relevant masons for the recommendation. Human Rights Ordinance, Section 2-44( A ). If the Conciliation Team reaches a disposition agreeable to the complainant and respondent, the agreement shall be reduced to written agreement. If the Conciliation Team is unable to reach a disposition agreeable to the parties, the team shall notify the Commission of the result. The Team may recommend: a. No further action be taken and the ~e be closed. 8 MINUTES ' IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING MEETING ROOM A THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 1998 - 5:00 PM Agenda item 3A Members Present: Linda Dellsperger, Mary McMurray, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Anne Spencer, Jim Swaim, Chuck Traw Staff Present: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols Others: CAII TO ORDER: President Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:10 pm APPROVAl OF MINUTES: The minutes of the regular meeting of May 28, 1998 were approved unanimously after a motion by Martin/Swaim. In response to Craig's request to move into closed session for the purpose of personnel review, a motion was made to consider Executive Session. A roll call vote was taken. All were in favor. At 5:30 pm the meeting was resumed. For the record an executive session was held to discuss the Director's evaluation. NEW BUSINESS A. Nominating Committee: The nominating committee presented the following slate: Singerman as President, Martin as Vice-president, McMurray as Secretary. Swaim made a motion that we approve the slate as presented. Dellsperger seconded. All in favor. The issue of institutionalizing the stepping up of vice-president to president was raised again. Singerman asked that the nominating committee look at amending the procedures and make a recom. mendation in July. Swaim asked for comments. For continuity's sake it is good. However, Executive Board does not get together regularly enough to provide a training ground. The question is one of supporting the desire of people who want to serve as Vice President but not take on the Presidency. Craig mentioned that recently there has been a cycle of presidents serving two years. If the President cannot finish out the term for some reason, the Vice President would be expected to complete the term. Some liked the idea of maintaining flexibility. However, without the continuity, the role of Vice President is meaningless compared to that of President-elect. There is something to be said for mixing up things since the terms of office are 6 years. Singerman asked the committee to discuss and report back to Board next month. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 31, 1994 PAGE 2 Agenda item 3A B. Regional Contract This contract is for the office space and use of our collection. They employ a librarian and clerical assistant. There has been some decrease in their activity 'due to internet access at small libraries. They are less busy and have reduced their full time person to 27 hours week. For this reason, Craig proposes not raising the contract fees. A motion to approve the contract was made by Swaim/Martin. It was unanimously approved. C. Set Director's salary for FY99 It is the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee to increase Craig's salary by 5.5% on June 30, 1998 followed by a 2% increase on December 31, 1998. This is in keeping with City guidelines for similar positions. A motion was made to approve this recommendation SwaimlDe!lsperger. It was passed unanimously. On behalf of the Board, Singerman thanked Craig for her efforts over the past year and stated it was great to work with her. Draft FY98 accomplishments and FY99 goals. This draft is for the Board's Annual Report which becomes part of both the Library and the City Annual Report. The following were listed as accomplishments in FY98. Internet campaign. Grants. Start of the Kiosk. Assisted with the first Spelling Bee. Met regularly with Community. Done several things to build support for a combined facility. Worked with Council and CenterSpace. Conducted Focus Groups. A lot of effort to understanding the notion of children's access to the Web. Improve facilities - new roof, etc. PATV vacating their space was well coordinated. Some goals suggested for FY99 were: suppo~ for downtown library expansion. work withTransitDepartment to facilitate easily accessible Parking. Drop off sites. Continue to explore possibilities for accessibility. Board members to take an active role in planning strategy regarding how to provide information about the needs of the library. Although Board can not be part of the campaign, they can adopt a position in support of the campaign when the time comes. (Swaim asked if in the future, some one from the legal department could walk us through the process of campaigning does and donts so that Board members know what is appropriate.) ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 31, 1994 PAGE 3 Agenda item 3A Implement public drop off sites. Ongoing education on the use of the Web in the library for kids and parents. Start Strategic Planning cycle. Support state efforts to increase public aid to libraries in Iowa. Install the ICN Room. Look at policies in light of the ICN and how it fits into the Meeting Room policy. New computer system. Craig will write a draft for the next meeting. E. Access Plus (Interlibrary Loan) Usually we have Access Plus and Open access contracts to approve at the same time. However, some changes are planned toOpen Access and the contract will not be ready until September. This contract has essentially remained the same. Reimbursement and process are the same. Funds were added to the program and we have been reimbursed for almost the entire year. Craig recommends approval. A motion to approve the contract for Access Plus was made and seconded. Dellsperger/McMurray It was approved unanimously. STAFF RFPORTS Craig reported on the status of the park and read proposal. Although the City Manager felt it was a good idea, several department heads had concerns. Parking and Transit worried about the loss of revenue. Senior Cente~ had concerns about equity. City Manager deferred for the time being. Craig did work with Joe Fowler to implement a bus pass or free parking arrangement for the six weeks of the Summer reading Program for people who come to the library on Thursdays and check out children's materials. Swaim suggested finding a way of tracking feedback on this issue. The Board is anxious to let Parking & Transit know how pleased they are and asked Craig to convey thanks and copy Atkins and Council. It was suggested that perhaps coming up with a method to determine if this increased use of the library or made it easier for a family to use the library would be informative. Articles were included regarding the possible closure of Cedar Rapids branch libraries. Nothing has be~n decided yet, but it is interesting to note they are considering closing branches and putting resources into the central library. Craig distributed a revised version of the FAQ of the building. She asked that Trustees take it with them and call Lubaroff or Craig or e-mail us with additions, corrections or questions that you get asked frequently. She did not include information about the sales tax, etc. It was suggested that perhaps two versions would be helpful; one for the Board that is lengthy and inclusive and one that would be used for a handout. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 31, 1994 PAGE 4 Agenda item 3A Dellsperger felt it is important to address the question of why not a branch. The public wants to know why a branch would not remedy the space problem at ICPL. She urged for some clarification end expansion of the issue. For example, we need more detail on the costs of a branch. The initial project cost estimates were made awhile ago. Some escalation costs were built in but we are one year behind. Most of the Board members have not been here since the initial discussions took place. A suggestion was made that a notebook be prepared that pulls together a history of the building project. Some Board members feel the need for a refresher course about space in the library. The availability of more information in order to respond to the public would be helpful. It was suggested that we prepare several items and pamphlets; for example, one on just branches, one on why we need more space. Singerman wants it to be more clear about in what direction we are going. We need to look at the results of the Focus groups. Craig will get background information for Dellsperger and Parker. In July we will start the process of looking at the focus groups and decide what additional information we need to put out there. Swaim wants to be sure that we include information on parking in whatever publications we produce. Craig and Singerman will discuss how to proceed.. Development Office report: The report was included in the packet. There were no questions. Eckholt had some additional information about the used book store. By the time it opens, the step will be replaced with a ramp for wheelchair access. Eckholt thought that the Centennial campaign helped with fund raising. It captured previous donors. An overall drop was because we did not have many memorial gifts. We were down about 100 donors but no change to any dollars for any category except memorial gifts. PRESIDENT'S REPORT Singerman reported on the unveiling of the Kiosk at Sycamore Mall. It will track the number of visits it gets. The new Coralville mall will have kiosks, however not the same kind. We are trying to stay informed on that through JCCN. Board does want to have their annual dinner in July. ANNOUNCFMFNT FROM MEMBERS Traw announced his resignation as of the July meeting. He stated that he appreciated all the help of the staff, and had enjoyed his time on the Board, but he has served six years, a full term, and thinks it's time to give someone else a chance. COMMITTEE REPORTS Building Committee: Singerman reported that the committee met on June 17. They discussed possibilities for a different name for the project. The general description that a committee recommended for use in a referendum is the Public Library expansion and Center for Community Culture and Events. They also discussed the formation of a campaign committee. A list of names was generated. Gelman will co-chair but described having to educate people as he solicited their participation. Strategies were laid out to deal with the issue of education of potential supporters. Dellsperger's concern is that the average citizen be included in this ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 31, 1994 PAGE 5 Agenda item 3A effort. Singerman explained that during this initial effort we are seeking people highly recognized in the community, to serve in a coalescing effort. It would not be the intent of the committee to exclude anyone. Martin agrees that we need to do some canvassing in an effort to broaden the list. We need to study the failure of the Cedar Rapids effort and use their experience to assist our effort. Parker gave a report on information she had received regarding some perceptions of the failure of the CR effort. Economic models are being calculated and information regarding numbers of visitors to Iowa City will be gathered for use during a campaign. COMMUNICATIONS Letter to City Council from Downtown Association voicing their support for the proposed Library/Centerspace project. DISRURSFMFNTS: Vise expenditures for May were reviewed. Disbursements for May were approved unanimously after a motion. Traw/Martin. ADJOURNMFNT Meeting was adjourned at 6:45 pm after a motion. Minutes taken and submitted by Martha Lubaroff Dellsperger/Martin MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING 2ND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM THURSDAY, JULY 23, 1998 Agenda item 3A Members Present: Stephen Greenleaf, Mary McMurray, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Anne Spencer, Jim Swaim Chuck Traw Members Absent: Linda Dellsperger. Staff Present:  Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, MaRha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, ..,..,. ':.. Jesse President Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. .. '.. ,.. ,~:., The minutes of the regular meeting of June 25, 1998 were approved with no corrections. McMurray/Martin Singerman thanked Traw for his delightful, dedicated, diligent, delicate, and dutiful service to UNFINISHED BUSINFSS A. Board Annual Report. The Board approved this document once minor corrections were made, for inclusion in the City's annual reports of Boards and Commissions. This report will also be included in the library's annual report for FY98. B. President/Vice President duties. Swaim reported that the committee had not met due to scheduling difficulties. A meeting is scheduled for next week and they will have a recommendation by the next meeting. NEW BUSINeSS A. FY98 Ran progress report. There were several questions about some of the objectives and strategies from 98 which did not appear in the FY99 plan. Craig pointed out that once a proces~ becomes institutionalized it would no longer appear in subsequent plans. Board members engaged in a discussion with questions and suggestions concerning such matters as Web classes, and customer service workshops. Another question concerned promotion of the reference service that responds to questions from businesses by fax. Clark responded that this is a service difficult to promote to just Iowa City businesses and there is a concern about respecting boundaries of other libraries in the area. Information Service, in general, is one of the most expensive services we offer. Singerman suggested promoting it in the WINDOW. Craig suggested perhaps we could include information in the utility bills that go to businesses. Clark will follow up. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 23, 1998 PAGE 2 Agenda item 3A Singerman asked about joint meetings, promotions and projects with the Public Libraries of Johnson County~ She felt that 'the plan did not demonstrate much in the way of combined programming. It was explained that book discussion series are often done with other libraries like Coralville. We have combined resources with other libraries at the 4H County fair and the business fair. Singerman felt that although a booth is a visible attraction, perhaps more programming type activities could be done; especially during this upcoming year. B. FY99 Plan Review: The corrected version of the FY99 plan was distributed at the meeting. Craig moved through the plan pointing out objectives that were added and explaining some that were dropped. Goal III, Objective A2 sounded weak to Singerman. Swaim wants the library's role as a community center promoted especially during this year. Singerman wants the strategy of fostering the library as a community center to be put back in for 99. An analysis over a period of time to study the makeup of population that attends the programs we sponsor was suggested, in an effort to be sure that the programs provide a wider range of ages and groups. Sin'~e~m~'aSl~d if trustees agreed that this concept should be retained. Craig will make sure it is done.:--A public-relations campaign that answered the question of what the library does for you was suggested. In Goal V, Singerman asked about the objective calling for studying vacation benefits for hourly staff employed longer than five years. Craig will check with Personnel and Legal Departments and work it up as a budget issue. Trustees supported this objective. Goal X. A strategy calling for the development of positive relationships with schools was dropped. We felt that we had nothing new to add to the work we have been doing with schools for several years. The strategy calling for the support of economic vitality was also dropped for similar reasons. The Board asked about participation in some community wide cultural events. Some current examples are the Irving Weber Day committee and the Downtown programming on the plaza. Swaim is not comfortable with dropping the strategy about working with schools. He feels it is important to coordinate with schools on issues like Internet policies. Trustees felt that the support of local economic vitality strategy should stay in also. Craig suggested leaving it in and writing an objective that indicated we would respond or maintain ongoing programs. Craig asked for a motion to approve the FY99 plan with the Board suggested changes. A motior~ was made by Swaim/McMurray. It was approved unanimously. C. FYO0. Singerman asked about Objective III. 3.B.3. which calls for studying readers advisory in an expanded facility. A new building plan calls for moving Information up to the second floor. We need staff on the first floor to help with assisting people with books, videos, etc. That function now takes place at the Info Desk and when we physically separate and create a new service point we have to think about training and how people will staff it. Trustees were in favor of some objectives that included the jazz festival and book discussion groups. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 23, 1998 PAGE 3 Agenda item 3A Martin asked for clarification about increasing the budget to create and maintain deposit collections.' There'was a discussion regarding the future, and the best way to put forth information about library services in conjunction with a new building and the additional space available with CenterSpace. Craig asked for a motion to adopt the FY00 plan. Motion was made and seconded. Martin/Greenleaf All in favor. Adopt NOBU budget. Craig wants to increase the amount of furniture from $30,000 to $45,000 making the total budget $165,000. Swaim moved to adopt with amendment. Traw seconded. All in favor. Library Art Advisory Committee Appointments. In response to Ijnda Dyer's memo, Traw moved to approve Lowenberg and McCray. Martin seconded. The motion was carried unanimously. Contract between Library and Innovative Interfaces. Craig asked for a motion to approve the contract pending final review by the City Attorney's office and some minor changes in the contract the staff and consultant are ~ecommending. Our consultant helped draft the contract. The City 'Attorney' has'reViewed~'qui~kly and did not see anything alarming but will go through it again more carefully. We have the funds in CIP budget, replacement funds and an additional $60,000 from the Carver grant. .Traw moved that the Board authorizes Craig to sign and negotiate-the. contract with Innovative Interfaces, Inc. to replace the library's automated system;-.-$ubject to the-City Attorney's approval, for a total expense of approximately $425,000. Greenleaf seconded. All approved. STAFF RFPORTS We have a vacancy on the Board that will be filled at the August 25 Council Meeting. Craig asked Trustees to encourage interested persons to get their applications in by August 14. Applications will be accepted up to August 25. Building Committee continues to meet and City Council tentatively has the sales tax on their informal agenda on August 24. Craig will inform the Board of the time. The Kiosk is up and functioning. A report will be forthcoming. Summer Reading Program was very successful with 1700 children signed up. Development Office report was included in the packet. Phone System Request for Proposal is in the mail and out to vendors. A walk through was scheduled and proposals are due by August 14. PATV has moved out and remodeling of the space will begin soon. The memo to Joe Fowler from the Board regarding the Parking passes for the Summer Reading Program was included. Agenda item 3A ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 23, 1998 PAGE 4 Two management jobs open. Bridget Quinn-Carey, Circulation Coordinator, resigned to move back to the East Coast. Laura Morton, Technical Services Coordinator, left her position. We hope to have the Circulation Coordinator position filled very soon and the Technical Services position filled by early September: Book drops. Craig has an appointment next week to meet with Harry Wolf from Southgate Enterprises to look at commercial property on the west side of town. On the east side of town, we plan on talking to the First Avenue HyVee. Readings from Cedar Bapids Gazette and the Minneapolis Tribune papers about building woes. Craig reported that the Senate and HOuse may pass a bill that says anyone who gets the e-rate discount for telecommunications will have to put filtering on computers. Craig says that there are mixed messages about this and how it. will_really affect libraries. The situation will be monitored. - PRFSIDFNT'S RFPORT NOne ~. - - COMMITTFF RFPORTS -. · - ......... Building Committee. They are developing a strategy to recruit people for meetings to be held in people's homes with hopes to get 40 people to come for the purpose of learning more about the project. This will be the beginning of a campaign committee and no City resources may be used to. campaign for an issue. Informational materials may be prepared. A diverse group of people is being asked to participate. The proposed name for the CenterSpace portion is now "Center for Community Events". The Chamber will be putting together a list of criteria drawn from the Chamber's mission that will be used to evaluate sales tax initiatives. The timing still seems to be an issue. Craig developed a list of materials that Trustees may need in terms of the history of the project. She asked for additiQna! .suggestions and will put a packet together for anyone who requests materials. ANNOUNCFMFNT FROM MFMBFRS Swaim-reported that the ADA parade in celebration of the anniversary of the passage of the ADA bill is scheduled for Saturday. They need volunteers to help push people in wheelchairs and would welcome people supporting the parade celebrating people with disabilities. Building Committee report was covered elsewhere. DISBURSFMFNTS VISA expenditures for June were reviewed. Approve disbursements for June approved. Martin/Spencer. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 23, 1998 PAGE 5 Agenda item 3A SET AGENDA ORDER FOR MEETING Due to a conflict in the Meeting Room, the televised meeting will not take place in August but will be rescheduled. ADJOURNMFNT: Adjourned after a motion by Traw/Parker at 6:50 pm. -- - - MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16, 1998 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Dick Gibson, Dean Shannon, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: Parn Ehrhardt, Phil Shive STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Cortney Daniels, Joel Wilcox, Carol Seydel, Cecile Kuenzli, John Shaw, Eleanor Steele, Ruedi Kuenzli CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended denial, by a vote of 4-1, with Shannon voting no, of REZ98-0009, an application submitted by Riverview Place Partners, L.P. to rezone 9.27 acres of land from Low Density-Singel Family Residential (RS-5) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Residential (OSA-8) to allow-a 72-unit residential development on property located on the south side of Taft Speedway west 'of Dubuque Street. Recommended, by a vote of 5-0, that the City Council send a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending denial of CZ983I, an application submitted by Gerald Milder to-rezone 20.4 acres of land from Rural (A1) to Suburban Residential (RS-10), for property located at 4820 American Legion Road. Recommended approval. by a vote of 5-0, of SUB98-0015, a final plat of Green Mountain Meadow. a 6.53 acre,'15-1ot residential subdivision located between Green Mountain Ddve and Rochester Avenue. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0, of SUB98-0016, a preliminary and final plat of Donohoe Fifth Subdivision, a 8.55 acre. 2-lot commercial subdivision located on the south side of Highway 1 at Landon Avenue. Recommended approval, by a vote of 5-0. of an amendment to the 28E agreement between the City of Coralville and the City of Iowa City regarding future annexations and extraterritorial review of subdivision plats. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 2 ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: Supple said there are severel vacancies on City boards and Commissions. She said that members of the Planning and Zoning Commission are all volunteers and are appointed by the City Council. Supple asked those at the meeting to consider applying for one of the vacancies, in order to help make a better City and to give them an opportunity to previde input to City decisions. REZONING ITEMS: REZ98-0009. Public discussion of an application submitted by Riverview Place Partners, L.P. to rezone 9.27 acres of land from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Residential (OSA-8) to allow a 72-unit residential development on preperty located on the south side of Taft Speedway west of Dubuque Street. Kugler said this item was discussed and deferred at the Commission's July 2 meeting. He said that questions were reised by.the Commission at that meeting that staff has attempted to addresS. Regarding previous greding and ~iing activities on the property, Kugler said he talked with the Army Corps of Engineers, and they have indicated that there were some unauthorized filling activities on the site in the 1980s. He stated that;mitigation that was required as a result of that filling of a wetland area has been taken care of, and there are no longer any requirements with' the:Corps; Kugle~-said the:additional fill that has occurred within the last 12 months or so has been placed on top of the previous fill, and the Corps. has also reviewed that and has okayed the filling. He said that at-the lest meeting, the Commission was shown a preposed 100- year floodplain map revision, which is to be adopted later this year and is an update of the eadier version. Kugler said that map was not the most up-to-date version of the proposed changes. He said the map that- is-~e be presented -for adoption later this year has a 100-year flood elevation that is slightly lower than what was shown on the other map; therefore a little bit more of the property is now shown :as being out~ofthe floodplain, although a majority of the property is still within the 100-year floodplain. Kugler discussed the Housing and Community Development Commission's tenking of this project in its Community Development and Block Grent and Home Funding process eadier this year. He said the information was provided in the packets distributed to Commission members. Kugler said the fact that the property is in the floodplain was not considered, as those types of zoning and development issues are left up to the Planning and Zoning Commission or other commissions that have purview over those issues. He said the Housing and Community Development Commission instead looks at the feasibility of the project, how well it meets the City's n{~eds for affordable housing, etc. Kugler said questions were reised about whether, regardless of the floodplain issue, Taft Speedway is constructed to an adequate standard to handle development such as this. He stated that typically, if there were no floodplain issue, staff would probably require the upgrede of that roadway, or, given that this is an affordable housing development, perhaps the City would be involved in the upgrede of that roadway. Kugler said that in this situation, that would not make sense because the roadway is well below the floodplain and at some point in the future will be upgreded. He said it does not make sense to put that kind of money into the roadway now, unless it is elevated. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 3 Regarding the likelihood of another flood that will cut off the roadway here, Kugler said the applicant suggested solutions, such as allowing residents to stay on the property but to bdng supplies to them. Kugler said this does not address the emergency vehicle access problem, and there could also be other problems with utilities, sanitary sewer surcharging, the interruption of electricity, and phone service interruption. He said the potential for problems increases when there is a long-term flood, and the response time to correct those problems is much greater. Kugler said that, as reported at the last meeting, a revised sensitive areas development plan was submitted. He said there are still a number of problems with that plan that have been passed on to the developer. Kugler said that the plan is not ready to be approved, and if the Commission is inclined to consider the project favorably, the project should be deferred at the present time to allow the applicant to address those issues. He said that if the Commission agrees with staff that the floodplain issue is a real concem and that a multi-family development should not be approved in this situation, then the better route might be to deal with it through a motion to approve or deny. Kugler said the applicant can then decide whether he wants to send this on to City Council. He said that, should the Commission recommend denial, if the applicant sends this on to the City Council, the development plan would have to be revised and corrected before the City Council could approve it. Kugler said a copy of the staff report was sent to the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission. He said that commission discussed_this item at its July 15 meeting and would be sending a letter-with comments and recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. Kugler said they were concemed about the fact that storm water runoff from this development was being drained directly into the wetland and about erosion and changing the quality of the wetland.-He-said ,the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission also expressed some concerns about the safety issues and the flooding of Taft Speedway and indicated that there certainly could be a long-term flood there that would block access to this site. Kugier said that commission felt that this potential use of the property was perhaps too dense and that something on a lesser scale might be more appropriate, given the environmentally sensitive features on and surrounding this site. He said that commission was also concerned about the precedent that would be set with approving a higher density development in such an area. Kugler said-the members felt that although a site plan could probably be designed that met the letter of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance, it would really not meet the spidt of the law in trying to preserve these features. John Hayek, said he represented the applicant. He said he had no additional comments to add to those he gave at previous meetings and to the wdtten material the applicant had provided. but he ~as available to answer questions. Hayek said this gets down the philosophical question of whether staff's recommendation, in so far as the flood issue is concerned, is appropriate. He said it was far too conservative and would deny Iowa City very valuable, affordable housing for elderly that Iowa City needs. Hayek said it gets down to how much protection from infrequent events of relatively short duration is needed. He stated that the people who would live in this project are in a position to make their decisions about whether they want to live there or not. Hayek said this is a valuable project and should be approved. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 4 Public discussion: ' Cortney Daniels, 53 Arnhurst, said she is the chair of the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission. She said this is a conservative approach, but her commission feels it is trying to conserve a certain area of the city. Daniels said this would be one of the first major developments in the Iowa River Corrioder since the Sensitive Areas Ordinance was adopted and would set a precedent for development all over Iowa City. She said this particular development touches the limit of a wetland and is close to the Iowa River buffer zone. Daniels said the RNAC 'feels that it would be encroaching enough so that in heavy rains, runoff would come down and impact the wetland in a negative way. She said that the Sensitive Areas Ordinance mentions negative impact several times,. and this would negatively impact the weUand area. Daniels said her commission does not want to see development that does that kind of thing. Daniels said the RNAC, as a commission, does not want to set a precedent for development of thisnature but would like to have an approach so that development in these areas is very low density and low use. She said that this development would not represent that kind of use. Daniels said that everyone on the RNAC felt that this type of project was a very good project. She said that one of the questions asked by the RNAC was if other sites were looked at pdor to choosing this one, and Kugler responded that the applicant had looked at nine different sites. Daniels said the RNAC wanted to know why the applicant chose a site close to a sensitive feature-and :*not any of the other' sites. Daniels said she did not know if there was a busline running through there, although there probably would be eventually. She said that RNAC had conoems aboutSEATS coming into that area having to go dght up to doors to pick people up. Daniels said she believed that road was recently flooded, and the RNAC thought that was probably'anotherTeason why this would not be the proper setting for this development. Daniels said the RNAC does not feel this "would be an appropriate use of this space. She said that in a straw poll, everyone on the RNAC voted, and not one member felt this would be a good idea. Daniels said her commission would be wdting a letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission with supporting documents to show why this impacts negatively on the wetland. Joel Wilcox, 119 Taft Speedway, said he has lived in the area since June of 1992. He said that since the flood of 1993, he thinks about the area as a vulnerable area. Wilcox said residents have to think in terms of what they would have to do if the river came up again or if water came over the spillway and where they would move their families, whether it would be for a short pedod of time or for long term. He said his family was out of their house for 2 ~ months that summer. Wilcox said it took the better part of a year before his family could live in the main part of the house again. Wilcox said he certainly had no problem welcoming people into the neighborhood. He said, however, that this is a vulnerable area, and he could not imagine putting 70 eldedy people at risk of that kind of potential displacement. Wilcox said the potential displacement is a significant issue to consider, and he certainly would not want his parents in such a situation. Wilcox said it was hard to imagine that the wetland would remain intact as a wetland should this be developed. He said he suspected people living in the area would view it as a nuisance and begin to wish to have it filled up and made "nice". Wilcox said irs nice when it is what it is but is Plannin. g & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 5 not a nice place to live next to because of the insects and the smell from the wet soil. He said it would be best to keep it the way it is as much as possible. Carol Seydel, 125 Taft Speedway, said she owns a summer home on Taft Speedway and has lived on Taft Speedway since 1942. She said the wetlands originally extended all the way to Dubuque Street until they were filled in. Seydel said that at the time of the Idyllwild confrontation, she called the Rock Island Engineers to look at the area. She said the engineers determined that these were wetlands. Seydel said that after Glasgow filled this in, he was told to remove it all by the DNR. Seydel said that because she owns a home in Iowa City, she has a place to go if the area should flood. Seydel said she would not want to live on this site and said the City should not allow this many people out there at a disadvantage. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Shannon moved to defer REZ98-0009, an application submitted by Riverview Place Partners, L.P. to rezone 9.27 acres of land from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Residential (OSA-8) to allow a 72-unit residential development on property located on the south side of Taft Speedway west of Dubuque Street. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Chait moved to approve REZ98-O009~ an application submitted by Riverview Place Partners, L.P. to rezone 9.27 acres of land from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Residential (OSA-8) to allow a 72-uFtit residential development on property located on the south side of Taft Speedway west of Dubuque Street subject to resolution of the deficiencies and discrepancies as stated in the staff report. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. ' Bovbjerg said the Commission has received a great ideal of information from both the staff and the applicant, verbally as well as in writing. She stated that she sees what would happen in emergency times to the people in the apartments as a result of flooding as a question of apartment management and not a question of land use and so discounted it in her thinking. Bovbjerg said that construction of this in Iowa City versus other cities was a business decision and not a land use issue and also did not go into her thinking. She said these are apartments for low to moderate income well eldedy and the idea is that they would not be driving cars so that the condition of Taft Speedway would not be a problem. Bovbjerg said that whether that is exactly true or not is up to the people who will live there and is not a land use issue. She said the Housing and Community Development Commission rated this project 5t~ based on public and pdv~te financing. Bovbjerg said those financial certainties were based upon the project and not upon the site. She said all of that is relative to the project itself and not to the site, so she also discarded that issue in her thinking. Bovbjerg said two items that are very site specific are Taft Speedway and the land itself. She said that Taft Speedway is not a fully constructed heavy-duty read as would be needed for something like this. Bovbjerg added that the crossover from Taft to Dubuque Street is at an angle, and a car in the crossover precludes any other car from going in. She said that Taft Speedway's structure and the way it intersects with Dubuque Street sets up a very dangerous traffic situation. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16. 1998 Page 6 Bovbjerg said the' land itself is wet and there is probably sand, gravel, clay, peat, other vegetation, and soil that has been thrown on the bank dudng the normal course of events, underneath it. She said that the ground itself, subject to dver water table and subject to whatever will happen to that soil over time, is too unstable to put a structure and parking lots of this size on the site. Bovbjerg said that because she feels the readway is unsafe and the land is not suitable for this kind of massive structure, she could not support this. Chait said that, in terms of the subsoil conditions, the developer has represented that he would do whatever it took to construct a solid building on this site. Chait said those conditions need to be analyzed and that is part of the building process. He said buildings can be built virtually anywhere given whatever the cost is and the type of foundation that might be required. Chait said he does not feel that comes into play before the Planning and Zoning Commission but is a building requirement. - Chait said his experience with a project like this is that the City has a lot of ability to negotiate the conditions of satisfying the development of this site. He said the City can .place requirements on the development of this property with regard to Taft Speedway. Chait said he had great respect for City staff's ability to evaluate the specific terms and conditions by which this site can be developed. He said he was amazed about the attitude around evaluating this project. Chait said the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is in place and is faidy clear as to what types of analysis are required to develop a property that falls within the sensitive areas. He said that the Commission needs to assume that the fill .placed on this site is not going anywhere. Chait said the altemative would be to restore it, which he could support. He said it is what it is, and it is an eyesore in his opinion. Chait said the analysis of the site will disclose how this property can be developed, and that would be one of the terms and conditions of getting this approved. He added that an analysis of the site will tell what the costs are of preparing the site and what available :land .there is .to build on.- Chait said he would prefer to see a proactive involvement between the City and the developer in terms of how the site can be developed and still comply with all the regulations and all the ordinances and other things that are in place to guide that process. With regard to the location, Chait said he had a real problem With the fact that the City Council chose not tO'do anything to Dubuque Street. He said the entire population of the City is at risk coming into town on Dubuque Street when Dubuque Street next gets flooded. Chait said that if the City did not do anything to make Dubuque Street accessible for the entire population, that means a lot in terms of how they feel about Dubuque Street. He said that if the intersection is a problem, the Foster Road intersection is also a problem, and it has been on the work list for a number of years and is finally approaching having that work be done. Chait said he did not dispute the comments that have been made. He said the concerns having to do with developing the site should be evaluated on what it will take to develop the site. Chait said he was not in favor of subsidizing pdvate development, and if this project will cost X number of dollars because of the terms and conditions that the City staff places on development of this property, that may or may not include costs for making improvements to Taft Speedway, all of those concems and issues can be analyzed by the developer to see if this is a viable project. Chait said he wanted to address everyone's concerns. He speculated that Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 7 given the analysis, due diligence, subsoil conditions, and. other factors, it is possible that the developer would decide that-this plan is not cost effective but would have the opportunity to do whatever it takes to comply with the conditions. Gibson 'said he has misgivings about this project that Chait had touched on. He said that a site on the dver should take advantage of that amenity and should face the river. Gibson said garages should not be built up against the river. He stated that apparently the costs of developing this project are high, even though this is relatively low cost land compared to other sites,-andthis has forced the applicant into what he considers to possibly not even be a viable project. Gibson said the only way the developer can get out of that is to jam a whole lot morn development on the site. He said the applicants have ignored the river amenity, have pushed right up against a wetland, and have developed an extraordinarily undistinguished set of architectural plans. Gibson said this has probably occurred because the applicant needs 72 units to make this site pay off. He said this is pushing the site far too hard and is not taking the approach that Chair has suggested in taking an honest look at the.site to decide whether this development is economically feasible. Gibson said he sees no reason to-reward eadier behavior, even though the current developer has no responsibility for what occurred on that site, by conferring a higher density on the property in order to permit something to be built on it. Shannon said he was in favor of this project and said it was something that the city does need in the future. He said the site may ~ot ~e~exactly perfect and there were other problems, but that was why he wanted to defer this to see if some of the things could be straightened out. Shannon-said it was not mentioned that this was-not always a wetland but was the Iowa River until 1940. He also said he did agree with Gibson's point that the developer should try to use the dver_.as a focal point. Chait said that deferring this item-will get the Commission nowhere. He said the Commission has to send a message to this developer. Chait said, regarding the Bums project that was developed on the west side, the Commission got very involved in the architecture, massing, and orientation of the buildings. He said ~hat .would be reasonable to do hem. Chait said he was in favor of this project. He said he did not necessarily like the orientation of the buildings, the garages, or the view, but in terms of being open to the possibility of this piece of land being developed, he was in favor of looking at the possibility that .staff can work with the developer and his architect to come up with-structures that meet the requirements the City has been setting down in recent yearn. Chait said he was morn in favor of denying the application at this point, subject to having morn involvement with staff in the design of what is built here based on the analysis of the property. He said the fact that this is off Dubuque Street and it floods is not a good enough mason for him to vote no. Supple:agreed that this is valuable senior-housing affordable to those of low to moderate income and felt this would be a groat project to have in Iowa City. She said she was concerned about the site and believed that the problems with the fill and the wetland are challenges that could be overcome with good engineering and consciousness regarding the sensitive area. Supple said she was concerned about Taft Speedway and the possibility of flooding and having 100 or morn people living in this area who may be morn likely to need emergency vehicles who will be unable to get emergency vehicles. She said she was concerned that so many people could be displaced. Supple said she was concerned about the appearance of the building as this is an entry into the City. She said that for a variety of reasons, she would be voting no. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 8 The motion failed on a vote of 1-4, with Bovbjerg, Chait, Gibson, and Supple voting no. Chait said he would ;be in favor of the project if it were better designed and more analyzed. He asked if the design review and the site plan were part of the conditions. Kugler said the building elevations were -.provided for the previous meeting. He said staff received a revised development plan, and in reviewing the first complete sensitive areas plan that was submitted, staff identified a number of other deficiencies and raised questions about the impact, etc. Kugler said staff then requested revised building elevations because the applicant made some changes, and staff is waiting for those. He said staff has been working with the applicant, despite its-recommendation, to come up with a plan that complies with the sensitive areas ordinance. Kugler said staff is waiting for the last set of revisions to the plan to get it to comply. He said that if the 16 corrections to the plan are made, then the site plan could be approvable. Kugler said staff's position is still, despite the fact that the plan could meet the criteda of the sensitive areas ordinance, that them is an overriding public health, safety, and welfare issue of the floodplain that would cause staff to recommend denial. Chait said he was not seeing the compromising here that there was on the BUms project. Kugler responded that them was probably a little more concern with that project because its potential impact on the surrounding neighborhood was much stronger, given that it was across the street from single-family residential development, sat up on a hill, and was much more visible. He said .the-buildings in .this case would stand out less. Kugler said staff did ask the applicant to address the view of the building from the street and avoid the strip of garage doors being planned; Miklo said staff-atso:_asked the applicant to position the buildings to take advantage of the river view, and the developer chose not to do that. :, Gibson s~id' the Commission is struggling with several issues, some substantive and some procedural. He said the Commission passed an opportunity when there was not a second to the motion to defer. Gibson said that may have resulted from legal advice that said that if the Commission was not interested in pursuing this project, it should not vote to defer. He said he was not personally opposed to development of this site. He said it is sitting out there and something will have to happen to it sometime, although he did not think this was the solution. Gibson said the discussion has involved what the Commission does and does not want to see there and has sent a strong message to the applicant, and Chait has outlined a procedure for trying to define what would be acceptable. Gibson asked if there was a procedure whereby, since the project has not been denied, the developer would be given an opportunity to withdraw the application, and if he chooses, could come back with some modifications after additional time with the staff to try to solve some of these problems. Chait suggested the Commission might want to consider another motion to defer. Miklo s~id Chait seems to be indicating that an increase in density would be appropriate here. Miklo said that it is staff's position that because of concerns about access to this property, both for emergency vehicles and residents, an increase in density would not be appropriate, even if these design, sensitive areas, and wetland issues could be resolved. He said that if the Commission is going to give direction to the applicant, staff would need to know what kind of density the Commission would consider appropriate. Miklo said staff has discussed this for several weeks with several departments and believes that an increase in density in an area where there is a possibility that it could not be provided with emergency access or general day- to-day access is not appropriate. He said staff would want direction as to the number of units the Commission would find acceptable here. Chait said his position is that he is not saying no to Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 9 the project but wants to look further at the configuration, the density, the access concerns, the restrictions, and the requirements that the City might want. Miklo said the staff did discuss and offer some options to the developer, one of which was raising Taft Speedway to the west or working with the church to get a flood free access through their parking lot. He said those options were not feasible, but there were options in terms of access that were examined. Gibson asked if the applicant now had a different attitude about spending money to raise Taft SpeedWay. He said this strikes him as being an absolutely low dollar approach to a project of this sort. Gibson said the Commission typically, when dealing with these things, tries to get an amenity out of it for the community. He said the message to the developer may now be that he cannotget 'by with this but will have to put more money into the project to make it work. Gibson said the message may be that the developer will have to solve the access problems and there may be some other considerations involving the wetland as well. Miklo said that staff has told the applicant that staff could recommend approval of this if the access problem could be solved. Miklo said the developers took some time but were not able to do that. He said staff's recommendation would be to deny this, and the applicant could take the denial as a message to find another access. Chait said the piece of property might be worth so muchper unit, and if there has to be fewer units, it might be worth less money and there might be economic viability issues there that are not the Commission's concern, He said that in terms of being complete with-denying this, he was comfortable with having this conversation on the Supple said the Commission could rescind the past motion or could also move again to defer the motion. Holecek said that if the Commission denies this application, there is still the opportunity for the applicant to ask for a reconsideration at the next meeting. Supple added that if the Commission should deny this item, the applicant could go straight to the City Council. MOTION: Chait moved to deny REZ98-0009, an application submitted by Riverview Place Partners, L.P. to reZone 9.27 acres of land from Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Residential (OSA-8) to allow a 72-unit residential development On property located on the south side of Taft Speedway west of Dubuque Street. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 4-1, with Shannon voting no. Supple said this application was just denied, although there are still many opportunities for the developer, one of which is to go straight to the City Council to ask for approval there and one of which is to revise the application and ask for a reconsideration for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Miklo said that if this does go on to City Council, the public hearing would be held on Aug _ust 25. REZ98-0010. Public discussion of an application submitted by Cecile Kuenzli et al to rezone approximately 22 acres of land from Medium density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) for property located in the Summit Street Historic District. Miklo said the current RS-8 zoning on this property is medium density, single-family, allowing single-family homes on lots of 5,000 square feet or greater or duplexes on lotsof 8,700 square Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 10 feet or greater. He said the RS-5 zone which is proposed is low-density single-family and would allow single-family homes on lots of 8,000 square feet or greater and would not allow duplexes, except for those that are legally non-conforming. Miklo said that, in essence, the two zones are the same except for the duplex provision and the minimum lot size provision. He said there are a few uses allowed by special exception in the RS-8 zone that are not allowed in the RS-5 zone under any circumstances, and those are private schools, adult daycare, and eldedy congregate housing. Miklo said there are uses that are allowed as long as they meet certain provisions, in both zones, and those uses include family care facilities, accessory apartments, eider family homes, and eider group homes. He added that the number of roomers or boarders allowed in each zone is the same, allowing one roomer in addition to the family that lives at the residence. Miklo said this property was zoned RS-8 in 1983 when the City did a comprehensive City-wide rezoning. He said staff believes :the..property was grouped in with the larger Longfellow Neighborhood when it was zoned R~-8~'~and the larger Longfellow Neighborhood has the characteristics of that zone, whereas Summit Street, when looked at individually and separate from the larger Longfellow Neighborhood, is more characteristic of the RS-5 zone in terms of lot area, lot size, and usage. Miklo showed a map of the current uses on Summit Street within the area requested for rezoning. He said that if the RS-8 zoning is retained on the property, 34 of the lots that currently contain single-family homes could be converted to duplexes or the existing houses could be removed and replaced with duplexes. Miklo added that this is an historic distdct so that any exterior renovation or alteration of a building that would require a building permit would also require design review by the Historic Preservation Commission. He said that would also apply to demolition so that the threat of removal of a building is not quite as streng as in other districts. Miklo said there are some properties in the district that would become non-conforming. He said that if thi~" 'i;e'Z*~i~'g' iS'appr0v'ed: those properties would continue their status as legal non- conforming uses and. continue their status as duplexes; however, they could not add habitable square footage. Miklo showed two lots that are currently vacant and owned by the adjacent property owner. He said that under the non-conforming lot status, those lots would have to be combined with the adjacent lots to form a conforming lot. Miklo said there is an option for a special exception that would allow single-family homes to be built on the lots if approved by the Board of Adjustment and the Historic Preservation Commission, but they would lose the ability to construct a duplex that would be grented in the RS-8 zone. Miklo sffited that the Comprehensive Plan has two policies that speak directly to this rezoning. He said one policy states that there should be efforts to conserve existing histodc neighborhoods. Miklo said the other policy is the land use policy, which encourages a mix of housing types and uses in neighborhoods. He said staff feels that this rezoning would be supportive of the preservation goals of conserving the neighborhood as a generally single- family neighborhood. Miklo said rezoning this to RS-5 would not be contradictory to the land use policies of encouraging mixed use neighborhoods, in that there are a number of duplexes already within this neighborhood. He said also that in the larger Longfellow Neighborhood there are some commercial uses and are a vadety of sizes of single-family homes. He said there are also duplexes and multi-family uses in close proximity. Miklo said that although the rezoning Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 11 would remove the possibility of additional duplexes in this area, staff feels that the area currently has ~ a mixed characteristic. Miklo said, given that the characteristics of Summit Street are more th0*S~; of an RS-5 zone than an RS-8 zone, the goals of the preservation plan are to conserve older, historic neighborhoods, and the fact that the larger neighborhood does represent the mix encouraged by the Comprehensive Plan, staff is recommending approval of this rezoning. Miklo said the application initially included the lot at 304 South Summit Street and two other lots on the west side of the street, one containing a sorority, and one building originally constructed as a single-family house and later converted to a three-family apartment building. He said the two buildings on the west side of the street am currently zoned RNC-20, a medium density conservation zone, and the property on the east is zoned RS-8. Miklo said staff suggested the applicants remove those properties from the rezoning, and they did consent to this. He said the applicants then submitted a letter raising questions about the three-plex property at 325 South Summit. Miklo said one of the applicants, Ruedi Kuenzli had notified him that they would not want that property included in the rezoning request, and Miklo added that Kuenzli may want to speak to that issue. · Supple asked about a discrepancy on two different maps between the lines drawn to designate the areas:in question. Miklo said that one lot was excluded on one map. He said he would clarify this forthe next meeting. Bovbjerg said that one of the applicants called her eadier in the week to thank the Commission for their discussion at the Monday meeting, including the discussion of duplexes, subdivisions, and legal non-conformities. Cecile-Kuenzli, 705 South Summit, Street, said this request comes as a sort of correction/modification to the 1983 comprehensive zoning of the Longfellow Neighborhood as a whole. She said that 94% of the lots in the histodc distdct meet the 8,000 square foot requirements for the RS-5 category, and 75% meet the minimum square footage requirements. Kuenzli said that 79% of the homes are of a single-family character, although there are multi- family buildings, duplexes, and a commerdal use already within the distdct that would all stay there in a down-zoning. Kuenzli said this mix is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, which encourages both conservation of older neighborhoods and a mix of housing types within neighborhoods. She said that making the historic district RS-5 would preserve that mix and yet prevent the balance from being disrupted. Kuenzli said that it has been stated repeatedly that histodc districts are a question of zoning. She said the zoning allows what is to be preserved for the future. Kuenzli said that rezoning this area would support the intent of the histodc district designation conferred by the City in 1973. She quoted from the Historic Preservation Plan of 1992 that states, "where the-historic resources are predominantly single-family residences, and the City wants to maintain this use, zoning must be implemented to encourage continued single-family uses." Kuenzli said a question was raised at the Monday meeting about the property at 430 South Summit Street, where the owner owns the lot next door, but both lots are less than 60 feet. Kuenzli said she spoke with the owner who said he had no problem with this zoning, had no plans to do anything with the vacant lot, and felt it was important to the character of the house that the lot remain vacant. She said the owner stated he would never have any intention of putting anything on the lot and certainly nothing more than a single-family residence, if that. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 12 Kuenzli said that, as Miklo pointed out, there are 34 lots in the distdct that have the potential to be duplexed because of their size. She said neighbors think in term of long-term planning. Kuenzli said this is an historic distdct and if the City wants to keep it that way and preserve the ch.-~m'~'~'of'the district, which is predominantly single-family, this rezoning is warranted. Public discussion: John Shaw, 437 South Summit Street, said he owns the duplex at 435-437 South Summit Street and resides in the 437 side. Shaw said he has a good resume when it comes to historic preservation and was the chair of the Histodc Preservation Commission up until April. He said he is in philosophic agreement with this move and feels that .stabilization of this neighborhood is important. Shaw said that when the area at 803 South Summit was subdivided, one of the points that he tried to make to the Historic Preservation Commission was that this was an underlying zoning issue and not an historic preservation issue. He said the fact that the area was zoned RS-8 is what allowed that subdivision to proceed. Shaw said he believed this rezoning would be a good move. Shaw said the duplex he owns was built in 1927 as a duplex and architecturally speaks of itself as a duplex. He said he was concemed that this rezoning wodld limit what he could do. Shaw said he has no restrooms on the ground floor, but he has always planned to put some there. Shaw said that as his Downs' Syndrome sister who visits him ages, he has always contemplated puffing a residential elevator in to accommodate her needs, as well as a one- story addition. He said this rezoning would give him problems, as he would not be able to change anything about this duplex. Shaw added that this rezoning says he could not add any more habitable square footage. He said he could live with that, but should this property bum down, he would not be allowed to rebuild as a duplex and therefore would not be able to afford to live in that property. Miklo said that actually the non-conforming provisions would allow the residence to be rebuilt as a duplex but agreed that Shaw could not add more square footage. Miklo said there is a provision that says that in an histodc district, a building can, even if it is non-conforming, be rebuilt to its previous status, should it bum down. Shaw said he was not aware of that provision, which would address his major concern. He said he did support what this rezoning would offer as a stabilizing force in the neighborhood. Shaw said he still had some minor concerns about not being able to take full advantage of what is there but philosophically supports what the neighbors would like to do. Eleanor Steele, 710 South Summit, said she supports the downzoning. She said she discussed with Mil~lo the possibility of dealing with a situation like Shaw's. Steele said Miklo told her there is potential to put something on the books that addresses the issue of an historic non- conforming property. She said that the fact that this property was built as a duplex and its best use is as a duplex rather than single-family would suggest that it be allowed the same rights as a single-family home within its district. Steele said she believed in the argument that the best use for an historic domicile is its odginal use. Ruedi Kuenzli, 705 South Summit, said that there has been a discussion about 325 South Summit Street. He said that house looks different from the sorority next door and looks like any other historic house on a street of historic houses. Kuenzli said he talked to the property owner Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 13 and asked him how he felt about the RNC-20 zoning. He said the owner did not plan to do anything to the house in the next 20 years and felt that the downzoning really did not matter too much to him, but if he had a choice, he felt he had a little more flexibility with RNC-20 zoning. Kuenzli said .th~is .~_h_y_ he felt that property might be better excluded from the rezoning and added that it is separated from the other properties by a parking lot and by a hedge of trees. Cecile Kuenzli, said, regarding the property at 325 South Summit, that while the current owner has no plans to change it in the near future, the Commission could avoid having neighbors coming in 20 years from now saying it ought to be downzoned, if the Commission included it in the area to be downzoned now. She asked if RNC-20 would be the right designation for this, saying it is a great leap from 20 to 5, and something in between might be a good compromise. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Chait moved to defer REZ98-0010, an application submitted by Cecile Kuenzli et al to rezone approximately 22 acres of land from Medium density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) for property located in the Summit Street Historic District. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Gibson said it would be helpful to have a clarification regarding the property at 325 South Summit Street before the next meeting. He referred to Miklo's point that the Comprehensive Plan's objectives concerning historic character and land use issues may be at odds and said that to have these two policies opposed to each other in certain circumstances does not make any sense. Gibson said he regards Summit Street as the quintessential historic distdct in the city. He said that for the Commission to mess with that because it wants mixed uses in there would not make any sense. Gibson said he agreed with neighbors that if the Commission wants to preserve this area, it should take steps to do so and not be concerned with the mixed use cdteda in this particular small area of the city. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. CZ9831. Public discussion of an application submitted by Gerald Milder to rezone 20.4 acres of land from Rural (A1) to Suburban Residential (RS-10), for property located at 4820 Amedcan Legion Road. Miklo said staff initially recommended approval of this item, recognizing that the Fringe Area Agreement indicates that agricultural uses are preferred and that there was a concept plan showing a cluster plan with two existing dwellings along Amedcan Legion Road as well as an 18-acre outlot to be used for agricultural purposes. He said the County zoning staff has recomr~ended against this rezoning because their current subdivision and zoning codes would not allow the outlot to remain agricultural. He said that if this is rezoned, the County staff would see this becoming two 1 O-acre parcels, which is counter to the Fringe Area Agreement that encourages continued agricultural uses in this area. Miklo said the County staff also pointed out that the second house on the property was constructed as a second farm dwelling, and they advised the applicant that rezoning it was probably not possible at that time. Based on this new information from the County, Miklo said staff is recommending that this application be denied because it cannot conform with the Fringe Area Agreement according to the County's interpretation of their subdivision and zoning regulations. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 14 Public discussion: There WaS none. Publi{~'diScussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend that the City Council send a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors recommending denial of CZ9831, an application submitted by Gerald Milder to rezone 20.4 acres of land from Rural (AI) to Suburban Residential (RS-10), for property located at 4820 American Legion Road. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. REZONINGIDEVELOPMENT ITEM: REZ98-0007/SUB98-O013. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Development, for a rezoning from Intedm Development/Multi-Family Residential (ID-RM) to Sensitive Areas OvedaylMedium Density Single-Family Residential (OSA-8), and a preliminary plat of Pepperwood Addition, Part 12, a 39.30 acre, 26-1ot residential subdivision located west of Cherry Avenue between Sandusky Ddve and S. Gilbert Street. Miklo said the applicant has requested that this item be deferred to the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Public discussion: Therewas none, Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer REZ98-0007/SUB98-0013, an application submitted by Southgate Development, for a rezoning from Interim Development/Multi-Family Residential (ID-RM) to Sensitive Areas Overlay/Medium Density Single-Family Residential (OSA-8), and a preliminary plat of Pepperwood Addition, Part 12, a 39.30 acre, 26-1ot residential subdivision located west of Cherry Avenue between Sandusky Drive and S. Gilbert Street. Chait seconded the motion. Gibson said he was tired of some of the proposals for parkland that the Commission has been seeing as well as the recommendation that undevelopable land be given to the City Icy parkland_. He said it is totally not within the spidt of the intention of the ordinance that was passed: Bovbjerg said she was in favor of non-developable land being put in some kind of designation so that people do not try to build something there and thinks it is an amenity. She agreed that if the City is looking for playground space, this is not it, The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 15 DEVELOPMENT ITEMS: SUB98-0015. Public discussion of an application submitted by HBH Development for a final plat of Green Mountain Meadow, a 6.53 acre, 15-lot residential subdivision located between Green Mountain Ddve an~l Rochester Avenue. Miklo said the final plat is in order for approval, and staff is recommending approval subject to approval of legal papers and construction drawings pdor to City Council consideration. Public discussion: There was norle. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Gibson moved to approve SUB98-0015, a final plat of Green Mountain Meadow, a 6.53 acre, 15-1ot residential subdivision located between Green Mountain Drive and Rochester Avenue subject to the approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to City Council consideration of the plat. Chait seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. SUB98-0016. Public discussion of an application submitted by Apex Construction Company for a preliminary and final plat of Donohoe Fifth Subdivision, a 8.55 acre, 2-lot commercial subdivision located on the south side of Highway 1 at Landon Avenue. Miklo said this was in order for approval, and staff recommended approval subject to approval of legal papers pdor to City Coundl consideration. Public discussion: There was none. Public discussion closed. MOTION: BovbJerg moved to approve SUB98-0016, a preliminary and final plat of Donohoe Fifth Subdivision, a 8.55 acre, 2-lot commercial subdivision located on the south side of Highway 1 at Landon Avenue. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. COMPI~EHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Public discussion of amending the Comprehensive Plan by incorporating a South Central District Plan. Supple said the Commission would set a date soon for public discussion on this item. Gibson asked for advice regarding his status on this item. Holecek said she believed the analysis is basically that since Gibson has expressed himself as having a very strong point of view and even though he would not techaically be in a conflict position, he would be serving two Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 16 masters. OTHER BUSINESS: Public discussion of an amendment to the 28E agreement between the City of Coralville and the City of Iowa City regarding future annexations and extraterritorial review of subdivision plats. Miklo said the 28E agreement was first adopted in 1994, and pdor to that the City did not have an agreement with Coralville; it was simply recognized that there was an ovedap in the extraterTitodal jurisdiction, and if there was a subdivision, the closest city would review it. He said this agreement was drafted acknowledging that given the sanitary sewer service area, there were areas that, even though closer to Iowa City, were not likely to be annexed into the City; therefore, it made sense for Coralville to review them. Miklo said the reverse was true for Coralville. Miklo said the major change proposed now is for the new line to be drawn along the Iowa River, and subdivisions on the area west of the dver would be reviewed by Coralville, although not necessarily annexed into Coralville. He added that the area to the east would be reviewed by Iowa City, although not necessarily annexed at a future date. Miklo said staff recommends adoption of this new 28E agreement, and the City of Coralville has already approved it. Shannon asked if this included the River Heights area and all of the other subdivisions out by Stuart Road, and Miklo confirmed this. Shannon asked about the tax base the City may potentially be concoding at some future date with regard to this property. Miklo responded that the expense of providing service to those areas would probably outweigh the tax base. He stated that this is not about annexation but is about subdivision review. Miklo said the agreement indicates that the City has no intention of annexing these areas, and' it would be very difficult for either City to serve those existing subdivisions. Supple asked what kind of vote would be required to annex such an area. Holecek replied that voluntary annexation would require a vote of 80%. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to recommend approval of an amendment to the 28E agreement between the City of Coralville and the City of Iowa City regarding future annexations and extraterritorial review of subdivision plats. Chait seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 20 1998 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the minutes of the July 2, 1998 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as written. Gibson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS: Miklo said there is now a draft plan of the Peninsula and staff would be meeting with the City Council to review it on July 27. He said the City Coundl would like the Planning and Zoning Planning & Zoning Commission July 16, 1998 Page 17 Commission to attend that meeting. Miklo said he would provide Commission members with drafts of the plan and the exact time of the meeting as soon as it has been established. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Bovi~jerg;~;eferred to two interesting articles in the Planning News magazine, one on page 4 about the Orlando Naval Base that is being redone, and also an interesting viewpoint at the end of the magazine discussing technology and telecommunications. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Pam Ehrh~ai~tt; ~ Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadmin~mins~&z0716.doc SIGN IN SHFFT 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. -' 17. 18. 19, 20. IOWA CITY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDA Y, JULY 16, 1998 - 7:30 P.M. Civic Center Council Chambers Address Phone POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - July 2,8, 1998 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair P. Hoffey called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, M. Raymond, and P. Hoffey. Board member absent: J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel D. Russell and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by M. Raymond to adopt the 7/9/98 minutes, as amended by L. Cohen: BOARD INFORMATION - third paragraph, delete '...and whether they're detrimental to the community,... * Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Hoffey to adopt the 7/14/98 Community Forum minutes. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL None COMPLAINT FORM Committee Chair, P. Farrant, distributed PCRB Complaint Form, Draft 7/27/98, which encompasses discussion points from the last board meeting. She also reported on her research regarding the form used by Berkeley. Legal Counsel reported that he made inquiry with the Ordinance drafters through the City Attorney's Office about the demographic information on the complaint form. The statute states the requirement to report demographic information about complainants in the annual report - which includes all the protected classes in the City's Human Rights Ordinance. If the Board considers this too cumbersome on the form, then he suggests that it be requested on a separate sheet of paper. It is the duty of the Board to give the 2 complainant the opportunity to answer the demographic information if he chooses to. Discussion continued regarding the draft complaint form. The Complaint Form Committee was directed by the Chair to have a draft of the actual form at the next meeting. STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES Distribution of D. Russell Memorandum of 7/27/98, which are additional entries to be considered in the PCRB Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines. These two documents provide a working draft for a manual for the Board. It was the Board's consensus to submit the PCRB Standard Operating Procedures and Guidelines with their annual report to the City Council for approval. Chair requested that the Board be prepared to review and edit the proposed SOP's at a meeting after the next regular meeting. PUBUC DISCUSSION Shawna Quigley and Eva Fassbinder in attendance for a class project. No public discussion. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by L. Cohen and seconded by M. Raymond to adjourn into Executive' Session based on Section 21.5(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to ~be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11 ) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 7:55 P.M. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by L. Cohen that the Board approve the Chief's second request for extension on PCRB Complaint//98-11 with the understanding that the Chair is authorized to send a letter expressing serious MEETING SCHEDULE BOARD INFORMATION concern regarding a continued delay in meeting the extension of today's deadline. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Regular Meeting August 11, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. (Community Forum Follow-up Discussion) Chair will not be present. · Special Meeting August 18, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting August 25, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting September 1, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting September 8, 1998 - 7:00 P.M. Scheduling matters relating to the annual report and the October community forum were discussed. M. Raymond distributed a form letter to be sent to the complainant if a complaint appears to be untimely. The Board concurred with this form, which shall be put into effect immediately. P. Farrant stated she recently became aware of a National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement, which is a national and international organization dealing with a wide range of issues involving civilian involvement and law enforcement. A national conference will be held in October in Indianapolis, and the international conference will be held in Seattle later that month. S. Bauer was directed to find out of the City would fund a board member(s) to attend one of these conferences. M. Raymond reported a telephone contact from a citizen who appeared at the Community Forum who stated that after the Forum he was contacted by an individual who had filed complaints with us before and asked him if after he filed his complaint he had been intimidated as she had been. He explained that he, in fact, had not actually filed a complaint, but if she would want to tell him about her experience, he would be glad to listen. Ms. Raymond had no follow- up regarding this call. 4 FUTURE AGENDA Chair collected members' lists of forum issues, which will be put in priority order to facilitate the discussion on the community forum on August 11, 1998. A handout with these items shall be made available at the meeting. · It was the consensus of the Board that the annual report discussion shall appear on the agenda for the meeting on August 18, 1998. After discussion, Chair P. Hoffey, Vice Chair Lo Cohen and Administrative Ass't. S. Bauer shall then prepare an annual report draft to submit to the Board for further comment and review before final approval. · The Standard Operating Procedures shall appear on the agenda for the August 18, 1998 meeting. STAFF INFORMATION None ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by L. Cohen and seconded by P. Farram. Motion carried, 4/0, Watson absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:35 P.M. MINUTES SPECIAL BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 1998 CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Hoch, Betty McKray, Steve Pusack, Cordell Jeppsen, ,.~athy Weingeist ~ co STAFF PRESENT: Shaffer, Hardy, Matthews, Helling OTHERS PRESENT: Denis Martel, Henry Royer, Rob Smith, Brian Sharp:~' --~ RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL ~- r,~ The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council that they adopt the proposed franchise with McLeod Communications with minor changes in language regarding access services and noted that a trigger mechanism for annual payments for telecommunica- tions-related uses needs to be determined and included. CONSIDERATION OF MCLEOD CABLE TV FRANCHISE Shaffer referred to the memo from Helling to the Commission and the City Council included in the meeting packet which outlined the differences between the TCI franchise and the proposed McLeod franchise. Shaffer also distributed a letter from Matthews regarding the proposed local access channel position and faxed response from McLeod. Helling said that if the franchise is to make the November election it needs to be submitted to the County Auditor by August 26th. The City Council will hold a public hearing on August 18 and presumably adopt the ordinance on August 25. Matthews reported there has been a change in the channel position of the local access chan- nels. PATV would be on channel 23, the government channel on 11, the University of Iowa on 104, the library on 20, and the ECC on 105. Shaffer said the City would have liked for the access channels to have the same channel assignments on both systems. If that was not pos- sible the City requested that those access channels which have higher viewership be placed on as low a channel position as possible. Pusack asked if a on-screen channel guide would be available to all subscribers. Rob Smith responded that any subscriber who has a free converter box will receive the on-screen channel guide. Hoch said he is less concerned with the local access channel positions as proposed given the availability of the channel guide. Hoch suggested that language covering negative option billing should include a reference to state law, as well as federal law. It was state law which was relevant when TCI instigated a negative billing system for some services and the State Attorney General who took action. Hoch suggested that the section dealing with access services (p. 11 ) be modified to make the use of the $162,365.95 as broad as possible. Rather than the draft language "Franchisee agrees to provide the City and/or other entities designated by the City to carry out the day to day operations of pubic access and community programming, or any other telecommunication related need or interest ...", Hoch suggested that language be changed to "Franchisee agrees to provide the City and/or other entities designated by the City to further any telecommunica- tions related need or interest..." Pusack asked how the $161,365.95 figure was derived. Shaffer said it was based on the costs Heritage Cablevision incurred in the operation of the public access facility prior to the creation of PATV. Special Broadband Telecommunications Commission August 17, 1998 Page 2 Weingeist said she doesn't see the need for the alternative language. Matthews said there had been no indication from the Commission or the City Council that there was a desire to make changes in how that money was expended. Weingeist said the existing language merely spells out how the money is being used. Hoch said he didn't want to contribute to any misun- derstanding among organizations who might feel they should be entitled to those funds. Hoch moved an amendment adopting the alternative language on the $162,365.95. Pusack sec- onded. The motion passed 3-2 with Hoch, Pusack, and Jeppsen voting yes, and Weingeist and McKray voting no. Pusack noted that the word "rebuild" needs to be changed to "system" in one section. The Commission agreed and Matthews will make the change. Hoch asked when McLeod would need to start making annual payments of $161,365.95. Royer said that if TCI and McLeod were talking that the costs of operating a public access facility might have been split. Royer said that twice as much money will be available and asked how those funds will be used. Hoch said he, as well as many others, think that the local pro- gramruing needs and interests of the community are not being met. With the new infusion of funds there comes an opportunity to address some of those needs and interests. Hoch said the change in, the language he offered reflects his concern with the way funds have been used and allocated. Helling noted that according to McLeod's estimates some subscribers will be served in 1999. Pusack said that if that were the case, then on the following January 1 McLeod should commence payments. Royer offered to initiate payments on January 1, 2000 as McLeod will likely have a few hundred subscribers by the end of 1999. Helling said the issue does not need to be resolved at this meeting. Hoch said if that were the case TCI would make ten payments and it is unclear how many payments McLeod would make. Shaffer said a trigger mechanism needs to be included, but the exact method does not need to be determined at this time. The motion to recommend the draft franchise agreement with McLeod Communications, as amended, passed 5-0 ADJOURNMENT Hoch moved and McKray moved to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Wm. Drew Shaffer Cable TV Administrator