Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-02 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CITY CIVIC CENTER THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1999 -6:30 P.M. ,zl. U I,.-,L~ HAY 2 0 Iggc-j MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Bob Elliott, Denita Gadson, Jayne Moraski, Lucia-Mai Page, Gretchen Schmuch MEMBERS ABSENT: Rick House, Kathleen Renquist, Bill Stewart STAFF PRESENT: Maurice Head, Steve Long OTHERS PRESENT: Trevor Maxwell CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM MARCH 24. 1999: Chairperson Schmuch called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. MOTION: Coleman moved to approve the March 24, 1999, meeting minutes as submitted. Gadson seconded the motion. The motion carded by a vote of 6-0. PUBLIC/MEMBER DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Therewas none. DISCUSSION OF THE FY00 CDBG/HOME FUNDING PROCESS: Coleman said he had a concern about the question of anonymity in each member's individual rankings. Coleman said he thought there were three benefits to having the rankings not be anonymous, first, it would give additional opportunities for members to discuss how they ranked things. Second, it could give the applicants the opportunity to lobby the Commission members who ranked their projects poorly and he thought that would be valuable and appropriate. Third, it would give some additional measure of accountability for each Commission member in their work. He said if the City Council was considering a Commission members reappointment they could look at the values of that person. He said in his own case, his Commission reappointment was denied last summer with some speculation that his values might be out of line, where as in fact he thought he generally voted like everyone else on the Commission. He said he did not see any advantages to keep the rankings anonymous. Elliott said there was nothing anonymous about each Commission member's vote for each project. Coleman said he was talking in terms of the ranking sheets and the meeting where the ranking sheets are discussed. He said at that meeting he was interested in being able to address some of those differences, and a couple of people expressed some discomfort with wanting it to be known which rankings belonged to which person. Schmuch said that was the first time that the rankings were not lined up by each individual. Long said that it was his understanding that Stewart brought the issue up because if he had a potential conflict of interest, he would have a zero in the spot and did not feel comfortable having everyone know how he rated each project. Coleman asked if anyone else had expressed that same discomfort, and suggested that this be discussed when Stewart was in attendance. Elliott said he liked how the averages where shown for each project. He said since the Commission voted on each project he never thought about it being anonymous. He said he didn't care about having the ranking sheets be anonymous. Head said he thought the Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 2 Commission could still get the discussion Coleman is talking about because when they look at the rankings sheet, they would know if someone has scored the project low or high. He said the Commission could still have the discussion to get that viewpoint, and as long as members discuss and express their viewpoints he didn't see the advantage for the person to be identified in all their rankings. Coleman said he thought that was part of the problem, in that everyone is not necessarily very talkative in terms of expressing feelings about the projects. He said he thought that created an imbalance toward the Commission members who are more expressive. Page said since this was her first time it was kind of nice to be anonymous to see where she ranked projects in comparison to the other members. She said she did not really have a preference either way now that she has been through the process once. Moraski said she has heard other people express concerns that even though there may not be a conflict of interest, a certain Commission member may know an applicant well so they may want to have anonymity to buffer them. She said she did not know if she agreed with that, and said she did not have a problem with her rankings being identified. Gadson said she agreed with Head, in that amongst the Commission members they know how people are basically voting. She said she abstained the past two years from voting on some projects because of the appearance of conflict of interest. She said she thought the Commission would have a sense of how people are lining up with issues. She said the public and the applicants might not know how they are going to vote, so it would not give the applicants the chance to lobby individual Commission members. Coleman said during the process last month there were times when he would have liked to ask individual Commission members why they ranked projects the way they did. He said he thought that kind of deliberation would help the Commission make some better decisions. Gadson said she thought that happened to some extent. Long said the Commission members saw the low score, but not who ranked it there. Gadson said the Commission had a discussion about the low ranking, and she thought that was the value even if the members could not identify who ranked the project there. Elliott asked about the philosophy and ethics of having the rankings be anonymous when the Commission is dealing with public funds. He said he would hate to have the Council vote on issues like that anonymously, and it seemed like if the Commission is voting on allocating public funds there should not be anonymity to it. Coleman said if the Council went through this type of ranking process on any matter that record would be public by law. Schmuch asked how the Commission ended up doing the rankings anonymously this time. Long said Stewart requested it. Moraski said people are not going to speak if they don't want to, so she did not think having it be open would put people on the spot more, EIliott suggested putting initials next to the rankings. He said he thought the process went better than he imagined it would. Long said that one of the former Commission chairs who sat in the audience told him that it was one of the best allocation processes she had ever seen. Coleman said his other concern dealt with the fact that it is a known likelihood that everyone who applies and scores more than 60 points in the ranking system gets partial funding. He said an applicant could get a copy of the ranking sheet and try to rank themselves to see where they are going to fall. Long said they often do that. Coleman said regarding Bob Burns' application for the two housing projects, during the allocation process he was thinking that if the Commission didn't fund phase III, they could fully fund phase I, and later he asked himself if he would have voted to fully fund phase I if phase III would not have also been applied for. He said when another project asked for funding for many renovations, had prioritized them and those were the ones the Commission awarded funding for. He said he did not think that people would be dishonest, but they could put everything they needed on their application and if they broke the 60-point barrier they would get funding for the things that they told the Commission were the most important. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 3 Head said that the Commission could consider putting a maximum funding cap that a project could apply for. Moraski said to use Burns as an example, he has partnerships everywhere, so he could potentially bring in another person to apply for funding for his projects if more restrictions are put in to the process. She said people who are long-time applicants could play that game. Coleman said he did not think that most other applicants were in the same position as Burns. Elliott said that is why they ask the applicants to prioritize their requests. He said he would rather not have funding caps. Coleman said one way to approach it is to have something on the application dealing with the immediacy or priority of the need, so if something does not have to be done this year it would get a lower score. Schmuch said the Commission does have funding caps in terms of guidelines because the allocations are based by CITY STEPS, but since the Commission doesn't get equal numbers of proposals in those categories the Commission is not able to follow them. She said in a way the Commission has tried to build that in by spreading out projects by priorities. She said she was reluctant to start talking about funding caps until she sees the next CITY STEPS. She said the Commission might be revisiting these issues in light of some new priorities on the whole plan on which they are supposed to be basing their recommendations on next year. Moraski said she liked the idea of asking the question of immediacy, but that would probably be used as a general guide. Coleman said he thought there was a tendency to want to give a higher-scoring project more money without looking at that question, and that it was only when things got tight that the Commission broke things down that way. Schmuch said they tried to get at that by requesting an itemized budget as part of the application. Coleman suggested asking the question, "If you don't get funded for this item this year what are you going to do?" in the line-item budget section. Moraski said she thought that was a good idea. Elliott said his only concern to adding more information was that there is already a lot of information to go through, and he was afraid if they got more information the Commission members might not read as thoroughly. Moraski said maybe it wouldn't be asking for more information, it would be asking a question that is already there better or more effectively. The Commission decided to look at the wording of the partial funding and the budget pdoritization questions to get something more clear. Schmuch said she appreciated everyone's input and discussion during the allocation process. OLD BUSINESS: Swenson and Associates Head said Swenson has executed contracts with local subcontractors and she will use Pentacrest Homes, a provider of modular housing, after the foundations are completed. Head said she also had contracts with someone to do the excavating and the foundation walls. He said she plans to have the first house in place by June 10 and every three weeks thereafter a home will come and be set on a foundation. Long said there will be three homes. Moraski said it doesn't take long to set up the house, but it may take some time to get the plumbing going, etc. Head said all three homes would be completed by October 1. Long said one modular house that the City sponsored is located at 1109 Fifth Avenue. Head said Swenson has complied with the Commission's letter and they will keep the Commission updated on her progress. First Home Program Update Long said that we got Fannie Mae's approval of the program and its new guidelines today, so we will send the revised program information out to lenders tomorrow. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 4 Community Housing Forum Update Head said the three significant programs are the Combination Modgage and Rehabilitation Program, the Low Interest General Obligation Bond Program and the Affordable Housing Funding Pool. For the first program, Head said they have been meeting with lenders for the past three months and have asked them to make a commitment in writing to participate in the program. He said they have heard back from two of the financial institutions, and have received financial commitments of $1.5 million for the program. He said they have not heard from four of the financial institutions, although three of the four have indicated that they are interested in participating, but have not sent anything in writing yet. He said staff has committed to doing a brochure for the program and that should be ready by April or May. Coleman asked what the participant criteria were for the program. Head said the participant must be below 125% of median income. He said since the financing is private there is more flexibility for the banks trying to reach a wider range of income levels. Long said the more people the banks help at or below 80% of median income the more credits they get for their CRA requirements, so it is kind of an incentive for them to target that income range. Head said the house being purchased must be over 15 years old to qualify for the program. He said in staff's discussion with the lenders, they want staff to help in terms of providing some assistance to low-income buyers with appraisal costs and cost-estimating fees. He said those costs would be reimbursed back to the City at the time of the loan closing. He said they estimated about $1,500 to come out of their administrative budget for this effort, and he wanted to make the Commission aware that they had planned to do that. Staff will also provide a list of contractors, subcontractors and cost estimators that the City Rehab program uses to the banks. He said the buyer has to be somewhat knowledgeable about wanting to have repair work done, but the City and/or bank will have a cost estimator walk through the house with them to tell them what needs to be done. He said the older housing stock is the most affordable in town, and they plan to approach realtors to get them aboard so they have prospective homebuyers looking at older properties. Head said that Council approved up to $1,400,000 for the Low Interest General Obligation Bond Program. He said most of the developers in town had already made their building commitments for 1999 last fall, so the City missed the cycle in their first attempt to get the program out, but he said they will be talking to developers over the summer and they hope that they can get commitments for people to participate for the fall. He said the program requires that 20% of the units in the project be affordable to households earning below 30% of median income without using any Section 8 assistance. He said they have talked to some developers who have indicated interest in the program, but they need to get them more information on the program and get their commitments in the fall. Page asked if there were any incentives for developers to participate. Head said the program would provide permanent financing at below market rate and that is a big incentive for them. Head said the third program is the Affordable Housing Funding Pool, for which the Commission has allocated $50,000. He said they want to make the program year-round with a blackout period from December to April during the allocation process. He said they are putting together a media packet with information about all the housing programs to promote and advertise them over the next few months. Coleman asked what Head's sense of the use of the Development and Regulatory Measures strategies in the peninsula properties was and when the review would take place. Head said the Planning Department is putting together a request for qualifications, and that will go out to try to identify consulting services that can do code diagnostics by looking at the existing code and Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 5 seeing if and where there are any barriers to affordable housing in the requirements and regulations. He said they hope to have the RFQ ready to go out in April or May and they hope to identify a consultant in the summer. He said the first phase would be to look at the current situation and identify any problems, the second phase would include a detailed analysis and code amendments. He said the second part of the analysis may benefit the peninsula project, which is probably two years away. In reference to getting the Peninsula Project started, he said the final detailed proposals would be submitted by development teams in June, and staff would review those and identify which developer would be chosen for the development. He said they have a problem with the Foster Road extension that may delay the project, so they are looking at the two-year time frame. Coleman asked if the first few items in that section, such as Small Lot Zoning and Reduction of Lot Widths, were tied to a specific commitment to build affordable housing by the developer. Head said the idea was that those items in the section taken together would provide some cost savings in a development, and that could serve as a prototype for other developers to look at and emulate. He said one thing discussed was to have some type of regulation that would incorporate those items in the peninsula or in other developments. He said those items are intended to be taken together as a whole, not separately. Moraski asked if there could be cost savings for this development to help create affordable housing, but if there are no regulations to pass it on it could be just like any other development where they can charge an arm and a leg because it is in an attractive area. Schmuch said in the discussions she noticed that anything that came close to regulations was vehemently opposed by the developers. Moraski said other developments where there is a required percentage of affordable housing has worked well. Schmuch said they discussed different incentives. Head said there may be a requirement for the developer to have a certain percent of the development be affordable in the Peninsula Project. Elliott asked for the definition of "affordable", and noted that affordable housing hurts Iowa City if it is not affordable on the entire economic range. Head said for the peninsula project concept there were two layers, 1) for people who can afford houses between $120,000-$140,000 and 2) for people who can afford much less which would be more of the rental aspect of the project. Head said they have discussed density bonuses, but have not worked out the details for that yet. Page asked what other communities doing similar developments have found. Head said other communities offer density bonuses or include a required percentage of affordable housing for developments when land is annexed to the City, but each community is unique. Elliott said he hoped that some creative and innovative thinking goes into the incentive process. Head said something might come out of the code diagnostics this summer that may help affordable housing projects in general going through the development process. Elliott asked how the downpayment plan was working. Long said it had not been working well, and that is why they are now working with Fannie Mae. Elliott asked if there were not enough people who qualified or did people just not know about the program. Long said the state has a program that is a grant so people try to take advantage of that first because the City program is a loan with interest. NEW BUSINESS: 1999 Community Development Celebration Long said Torus Technologies agreed to host the event. Commission members decided on June 17 as the celebration date. Long said the national celebration theme is "Twenty-five years of strengthening America's communities." Long said that he would check with Torus on a time for the event. Page, Gadson and Schmuch volunteered to be on the event planning committee. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 6 Long said any suggestions or nominations of individuals, organizations, etc., for awards should be passed along to staff. Review Proposal for Rental Unit Market Analysis Head said this rental survey has been done for the last few years by East Iowa Commercial Real Estate Appraisers. He said last year they indicated that they would no longer do the rental survey, and he said he thought this survey provided some valuable information for the community regarding rental properties and fair market rates. He said the cost to update the. survey is $3,000. He said when a survey like this is done for the City it is made available to the public for the cost of copying the material. Schmuch asked what information this survey would provide that the Housing Market Analysis did not. Long said this would be to keep that information updated since that survey would be two years old when this would be ready. Head said this information is used by people in the housing business, like realtors and developers. Elliott asked who would pay for the survey. Head said the City. Elliott asked why the realtors and developers using the information could not pay for it. Head said this started a few years ago and the City helped fund the survey initially. He said that the City wants to make sure that this information is updated and available to the public. Elliott asked how often the City is required to do this survey. Head said they are not required to do this, and said they receive some information from the Section 8 program regarding fair market rental rates that the Housing Authority uses, but this survey would provide more detailed and broader information. Elliott suggested that the builders and developers pay a portion of the survey cost. Long said that builders and developers hire firms such as East Iowa Commercial Real Estate Appraisers to do their own surveys for projects because they want to be specific to their project. Head said this survey would be made available to the entire public. Moraski said she did not feel comfortable speaking on the issue if the Commission was voting on it, but since this discussion was for information and input she would share her point of view. She said that everyone has told the company that they want this survey and it is a historic trend that no one else has provided. She said she thought that the information was more detailed and they got a better response rate than the other study. She said if it was a problem for any Commission member discussing this item in front of her to let her know and she would excuse herself from the meeting during that time. She said the response rates have been getting worse in the past few years so they have had to do a lot more tracking and that is more time consuming, so it is not as cost effective. Coleman said his only concern was the idea that the information would be for internal use only, and that he thought the information needed to be made available to the entire community. Moraski said she did not think that was a problem, but staff should talk with Casey since he sent the letter. There was a general consensus from the Commission for the City to pay for the survey and sign the agreement. Schmuch said that Riverview Place's zoning goes to the Council on April 20. She said that the neighbors are now upset about the facility being built up there so that has slowed the process down considerably. Coleman asked if there had been any other Council comments regarding the FY00 CDBG/HOME fund recommendations by the Commission. Head said some comments came up regarding Old Brick. He said he spoke with the contact person at Old Brick and informed them of some of the issues mentioned at the City Council work session. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 15, 1999 Page 7 Long said there will be a review of CITY STEPS this fall. Head said staff will put together a schedule and present it to the Commission at their June meeting. Long handed out a memo to Commission members regarding conflict of interests and contracts. Elliott said he was meeting with Linda Severson next week about his concern of duplication of services for job training in the community. Long noted the letter in the packet from the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood Association. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Elliott moved to adjourn the meeting. Page seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Minutes submitted by Traci Wagner. ppdcdbg/min/hcdc4-15-99,doc MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION THURSDAY MARCH 11, 1999 - 5:45 P.M. IOWA CITY TRANSIT FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Foster, Rick Mascari, Howard Horan, Mark Anderson, Tom Bender STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Mitchell, Ron O'Neil CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mascari called the meeting to order at 5:46 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Anderson said the March meeting was at the Airport Terminal, not at the Transit Facility. The minutes of the March 11, 1999, Commission meeting were approved as corrected. AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Mascari asked about the bill for the trailer hitch. O'Neil said that was for the new truck. The other pick-up truck was ten years old and was on a ten-year replacement schedule. Foster made a motion to approve the bills. Horan seconded the motion and the bills were approved 5 - 0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: O'Neil introduced Jerry Searle, from Synder and Associates. Seafie was the planner for McClure Engineering when the 1996 Master Plan was designed. O'Neil said Seade was in Iowa City on another matter and had agreed to come to the Commission meeting to answer questions conceming approach surfaces for Runway 24. Seade said he is working on the Ankeny Airport and there are a lot of constraints around the airport, just like in Iowa City. He said one of the first things they did was to verify the actual heights of obstructions around the airport. At?ter identifying the obstructions, they found that a precision approach could be sited and "near Cat-l" approaches could be sited on the other three runway ends. This could give you an approach with ~/4 mile visibility and 300 feet. This would require for a light system. Seade suggested setting up a meeting with the flight procedures officials in Kansas City to see if a "near Cat-l" approach is possible. It would require protecting the approach to RW 24 with a 1000' primary surface. Mascari, Bender, Foster and Horan will try to meet with some of the FAA officials when they are in Kansas City on April 29m. O'Neil will try to contact Chuck Hawkins and Jim Finley to discuss approaches for Iowa City. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: ACSG Project: O'Neil said the Dyer property was purchased on April 2, 1999. This included the triplex and the Airlane Motel. The agreement will allow Mrs. Dyer to live in the triplex until June 15m. The motel was closed immediately. O'Neil distributed a list of easements to be acquired in the land acquisition program. Most owners are not interested in signing the easements. The FAA will not require condemnation for easements. O'Neil said he has directed ACSG to close out the easements by the end of the month. b® Rental rehab lease: The lease for the parcel of land leased by the Friends of Historic Preservation ends in July. Because of the development of the North Commercial area, the Commission decided not to renew the lease. The Friends are looking for a new location for their building. O'Neil suggested the property be leased on a month to month basis. He said that would give the Commission flexibility when trying to lease property in the North Commercial area. Foster made a motion to go to a month to month lease. Horan seconded the motion and it passed 5 - 0. Iowa City Flying Service lease - Shop building and United hangar: O'Neil said that although there is a verbal agreement to go to a month to month lease for the United hangar and shop after the new hangar is completed, a written amendment should be added to the ICFS Master lease. Mitchell will have an addendum for the lease ready for the next meeting. Airport Terminal Building: Bids are due May 12th. The Commission will discuss the bids at the May 13th Commission meeting. If there is an acceptable bid, this will be an agenda item at the May 18m Council meeting. The pre-bid meeting will be held April 27th at 10:00 a.m. at the Terminal building. e® Noah Commercial area: Mitchell had some revised plans for the NCA. He explained the new and old flood plains. He said the City Engineer thought the new flood plain area would be adopted next winter. The City was still waiting to here back from FEMA. The Commission discussed the merits of reserving a larger area for a 1000-foot primary surface for a precision instrument approach for RW 24. This would restrict the height of the buildings on the lots on the south side of the development road. Jim Larew, from the Iowa City Science Center, said that if the Commission reserves a 1000-foot primary surface, the Science Center would not be able to have a large format theater on the south side of Ruppert Road. He did not think the Science Center would develop without a large format theater. He also said it would change the whole complexion of the Science Center flit could not locate on the south side of the road. The Commission directed O'Neil to contact the FAA and see what the Commission's options were for a precision approach if they did not reserve the area for a 1000 foot primary surface. Mitchell explained to the Commission that they needed to make it clear that the Iowa City Mobile Home Park was purchased for safety reasons and would not be redeveloped for commercial uses. Anderson made a motion for a resolution to use the Iowa City Mobile Home Park land for green space or for a road to the NCA. Bender seconded the motion and at roll call vote, the motion passed 5 - 0. Southwest FBO hangar: O'Neil said weather had been delaying the installation of the roof. The walls are completed and the roof could be finished in three or four days. The building is on schedule and should be substantially completed in a month. Site Development - Public Works: O'Neil said the agreement in the packet was between Public Works and MMS for site development of the new Public Works site in the southeast comer of the Airport. Mitchell said an agreement still must be worked out between the Council and the Commission before work is started on the Public Works site. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Mascari commented that he was pleased that all the Commission members were at the Council meeting when they were discussing the Terminal renovation project. Mascan reminded the Commission members that he was coordinating the transportation to the FAA CIP Conference on Thursday, April 29th. O'Neil will send the Commission members that are going to the conference another copy of the agenda. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Horan said he was at the Airport on Sunday and he commented that the new building looked good. O 'Nell said the contractor was getting ready to install the tubing for the in-floor heat. There will be between 14,000 - 15,000 feet of tubing in the floor. Bender said the Commission needs to keep moving ahead with the North Commercial area. He said the Commission needs to get to a point where they can begin to market the property. Anderson went through the subcommittee summary report and wanted to delete and add some items. O'Neil will update the report for the next meeting. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: O'Neil said a subcommittee project list was included in the Commission's information packet. In the FY 99 budget, the Commission budgeted some money to assist sending someone from the Fire Department to ARFF training. Letters from two of the timfighters that allended training were included in the packet. They both said the training was very beneficial. SET NEXT MEETING: The next regular Airport Commission meeting is scheduled for May 13, 1999, at 5:45 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjoumed at 7:46 p.m. Rick Mascari, Chairperson MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTME.~'F MAY 12, 1999 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS IPRELIMINARY Sub ect to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Lowell Brandt, T.J. Brandt, Kate Corcoran, Michael Paul MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Melody Rockwell, Dennis Mitchell OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Blumberg, Michael Lilleg, Lorna Lilleg CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bender called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. ROLL CALL: All Board members were present for roll call. CONSIDERATION OF THE APRIL 14, 1999, BOARD MINUTES: MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve the April 14, 1999, Board minutes as submitted. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. Rockwell noted that on page 10 in the sixth line of the third paragraph, the reference to an RNC-20 zone should read RNC-12, The motion as amended carded by a vote of 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: EXC99-0009. Public headng on an application submitted by Mark S. Blumberg for a special exception to reduce the required ten-foot side yard setback area for a hot tub for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 536 S. Summit Street. Rockwell said Mark Blumberg, the owner and resident of the property located at 536 S. Summit Street, is requesting the Board's favorable consideration of a spedal exception to allow a ten-foot setback requirement between the proposed hot tub and the north side of the lot line to be diminished to one foot. She said the Zoning Chapter indicates that swimming pools and hot tubs with a depth of 18 inches or more may be located in any yard provided that in a residential zone they shall not be located closer than ten feet to a side or rear lot line. She said in order for the applicant to locate the hot tub as proposed, a special exception is required. Rockwell said the Board may grant a special exception to modify yard requirements, but it needs to consider whether the applicant's situation is peculiar to the property in question or if there is practical difficulty in complying with the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Chapter. She said the peculiarity of the situation does not actually apply to the residential lot in question, but to the way the improvements were designed with the hot tub as an integral part of the residential lot in question. She said both the addition and deck received approvals from the Histodc Preservation Commission (HPC) and the Housing and Inspection Services (HIS) Department. She said because a hot tub installation does not require a permit, the hot tub was not specifically reviewed by either the HPC or HIS staff. She noted that the applicant applied for the necessary approvals, and when he received them, he proceeded to construct the improvements accordingly. She said unless a special Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 2 exception is granted, Mr. Blumberg would be required to locate the hot tub away from the deck and the doom of the addition with which it was intended to be integrated. Rockwell said 70 square feet will be involved in the encroachment, and that represents 90% of the total hot tub setback area, which is substantial. She said the overall effect of placing the hot tub within one foot of the side lot line is minimized to some extent by the existing six- foot, eight-inch high solid wood fence that is situated along the north lot line. She said the applicant has added lattice to the top of that fence to increase the level of privacy between the two properties. She said there should not be a substantial change or detriment to the neighborhood in that the hot tub location was purposely designed to be tucked into a private area of the lot that is not readily visible from the neighborhood at large. She said the selected location also enables the applicant to monitor the hot tub more effectively than if it were placed further away from the house. Rockwell said commonly suggested altematives to a yard modification are to reduce the size of the proposed structure or locate the structure on the site so that it does not require a yard reduction, but neither of these seems to be a reasonable solution in this case. She said in staff's view, the proposed yard reduction is fairly reasonable in terms of effect. She said in all probability, the amount of noise associated with a hot tub is not likely to exceed that of quite ordinary residential uses, such as congregating on a patio or screened-in porch, or running an air conditioner. She said staff feels that as long as the property owner is responsible for maintaining the fence along the north side lot line, locating the hot tub as proposed should not contravene the interests of justice. Rockwell said as a reasonable condition of approval in addition to fence maintenance, the Board may want to require that the lighting of the hot tub area be mounted no higher than the height of the fence along the north lot line, and that the lighting be shielded and/or downcast so as not to exceed one-foot candle at the north lot line. She said allowing the hot tub to be placed one foot off the property line would not prevent the neighboring property owner from constructing buildings on their property in a way that is permitted by code. She noted that the hot tub is not a permanent structure and could be moved if necessary. -Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC99-0009, a spedal exception to reduce the setback requirements for a hot tub from ten feet to one foot for the seven-foot, eight-inch length of the hot tub be approved for property located in the RS-5 zone at 536 S, Summit Street, subject to the property owner maintaining the fence along the north lot line as a solid wood fence a minimum of six feet in height and any lighting installed in the hot tub area being mounted no higher than the height of the fence along the north lot line with that lighting being shielded and/or downcast so as not to exceed one-foot candle at the north lot line. Rockwell noted the letter in the Board's packet from Robin Simeonsson, who objected to buildings being constructed within ten feet of a lot line. Rockwell said she called Simeonsson to indicate that a building was not being proposed in this case, that buildings could be set within five feet of a side lot line and that a hot tub is not a permanent structure. Rockwell said Simeonsson said she planned to contact the neighbors next door to the property, Simeonsson said if they objected she would also object, but if they did not object she would not. Rockwell said since then she has not heard from either Simeonsson or the neighboring property owners. L. Brandt asked when letters would have gone out to neighboring property owners informing them of this public hearing. Rockwell said the notification letters were sent on April 20, 1999. Public hearing opened. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 3 Mark Blumberg, 536 S. Summit Street said he and his wife agreed with the staff report. He said they went through the proper procedures in receiving permits and went through the Historic Preservation Commission as well. He said while it was not under their purview to look at the hot tub, they were aware of it and it was discussed. Blumberg said his contractor delayed in applying for the building permit for the hot tub, and when one of the building inspectors checked they discovered that ten feet was the setback requirement. He said their addition, which was designed around the hot tub, was already 50% completed at that point. Blumberg said there are really not any other places to put the hot tub on the property. He said the lot is very narrow, only 50 feet wide, and the only other option he saw would be placing the tub behind and to the side of the garage. He said if they would have done that they would be obscuring the tub behind an evergreen and ash tree, and that would have taken it outside their view from the house. He said in terms of safety that would have been more dangerous. He said they would have either had to .put up a high fence and locked it, which would not make it very accessible, but otherwise neighborhood children and others could have gained access to the tub without he or his wife seeing them. He said the current room has windows on all sides and they will be looking down on the hot tub from the addition. He said the hot tub would be surrounded by the deck, house and a 6'8" fence with a 1'4" lattice, and when the tub is in use the cover is folded up to block the fourth area of access. He said the wooden slats on the fence are close together so that people cannot see through it, and it is not a good fence for climbing. Blumberg said as far as the neighbors are concerned, the neighbor to the north is aware of the hot tub and is not in opposition to it. He said she came over last week to help his wife choose vines to plant on the lattice. He said since the tub would be used for 30 minutes per day at the most and usually during the winter months when people are generally not outside of their homes and their windows are closed, it would not be a likely intrusion on their privacy. He said they already have a light to put on the fence and it will have a dimmer. He said they would always keep the light at the lowest possible illumination, and just use it to see to get in and out of the tub. L. Brandt said the staff recommendation included a requirement for fence maintenance and that the lighting be shielded or downcast so as not to exceed one-foot candle at the north lot line. He asked if Blumberg was okay with those recommendations. Blumberg said absolutely, and added that he thought those conditions were also in their best interest for pdvacy's sake. He said the fence was there when they bought the house, and that they purposely sunk the tub in the ground so as to block any views from their next-door neighbor's second story windows. He said the light would be as recommended by staff. L. Brandt asked if the addition of the lattice on top of the fence was fine, because normally the limit is six feet above grade. Rockwell said the lattice should be acceptable because it is open not solid, and that is allowed for the portion of a fence that is higher than six feet. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve EXC99-0009, a special exception to reduce the setback requirements for a hot tub from ten feet to one foot for the seven-foot, eight- inch length of the hot tub for property located in the RS-5 zone at 536 S. Summit Street, subject to the property owner maintaining the fence along the north lot line as a solid wood fence a minimum of six feet in height and any lighting installed in the hot tub area being mounted no higher than the height of the fence along the north lot line with that lighting being shielded and/or downcast so as not to exceed one-foot candle at the north lot line. T.J. Brantit seconded the motion. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 4 L. Brandt said he would support the motion with some reservations. He said he was concerned about the one-foot distance for this, and he would have to be satisfied that the neighbor is apparently fine with that. He said the rules can be confusing when permits are not required, knowing what you can and cannot do. He said he was having some difficulty with the standards and to what degree they are met. He said he had some question about the issue of injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property. He said it was very close, but he would have to defer to staff's recommendation in the absence of any objection by the adjacent property owners. He said the other standards in terms of developing property, public health and safety, etc. did not seem to be problems. He said he would reluctantly support this application. T.J. Brandt said he would also support the motion. He said he went by the site and walked back into the driveway to see the proposed hot tub location. He said his big concern was the neighbor to the north with the second floor windows, and he thought the applicant addressed that by sinking the hot tub down. He said that allows them to maintain their pdvacy as well as the privacy of the neighbor to the north, and the hot tub should not be a nuisance due to its location. He said knowing that the neighbor to the north has not complained and is not in opposition to the proposal, he saw no reason not to let the applicant continue to do what they had started out to do in the beginning. Corcoran said she would support the motion for the reasons her colleagues expressed. She said she took into consideration that the neighbor has not objected and it seemed like it was in the interests of justice to approve this application. Paul said he would support the motion. He said if it were not for the fencing, it might be a different story. He said he was a little concemed about the ongoing maintenance of the fence, but he was sure that would be taken care of. He said there is a lack practical alternatives on the site and the Iocatk)n proposed seems to be the most practical location for the tub. He said given what the owner is willing to do and has done, it did not seem to be injurious to surrounding property owners. Bender said she concurred. She said the Board considers feasible alternatives with setback requests, and she said she could not see. forring the applicant to place the hot tub somewhere else when the whole thing was designed to be integrated with his residence. She said further, it would be a safety concern if the tub were to be located somewhere else where there was not a clear view of it from the residence. She said it was important to know that no one was getting in there who did not need to be there. She said in practicality, access to the hot tub needs to be convenient for the property owner. She said at first glance the encroachment seems substantial, but she thought this was counteracted by the fencing and the way the hot tub is positioned. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. EXC99-0011. Public hearing on an application submitted by Michael and Loma Lilleg for a special exception to permit a front yard modification for a twelve-foot by fourteen-foot deck along Lukirk Street for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 1002 Highland Avenue. Rockwell said Michael and Lorna Lilleg recently obtained a building permit to incorporate sliding glass doors on the west side of their home and to construct a twelve-foot by fourteen- foot deck adjacent to the new doorway. She said the building permit was issued based on the site plan submitted by the Lillegs that showed the lot line, but not the street that was Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 5 adjacent to the deck. She said the Lillegs went ahead with their building plans and added a new doorway, and when a building inspector came out they were informed that the deck encroached into the front yard setback required along Lukirk Avenue. She said the Lillegs are requesting a~ special exception to reduce the required front yard setback area along Lukirk Avenue so that they can complete the deck on the west side of their residence as they had originally proposed. Rockwell said an uncovered deck is allowed to extend into any yard, except it cannot extend into a front yard more than eight feet. She said the Lillegs' residence is set back only nineteen feet from the Lukirk Street right-of-way line, so the twelve-foot wide deck would encroach thirteen feet into the required front yard along Lukirk Street; five feet more than the eight-foot encroachment of an uncovered deck that is permitted by code. Rockwell said there is nothing particularly unique about the property in terms of its shape or topography; it is, however, a comer lot with two frontages, which limits the buildable area on the site that has a relatively small size. It is 6,600 square feet. She said the proposed encroachment is minimal in staff's view in terms of substance and effect. She said the total encroachment of 70 square feet is 5% of the total required setback area for an uncovered deck on this property. Rockwell said the effect is further diminished because there are streets to the south and to the west, there is an alley to the north and the way the lot is oriented in the neighborhood means that it is along Lukirk Street, which is not a through street, is only two blocks long and is offset from other north-south streets. She said the Lilleg property is located north of a north-south alley, and the deck would be located across the street and in line with a basketball court and garage in the rear yards of the residential properties to the south. She said there is a vacant lot to the west and the rear yard of the residence facing Friendly Street to the north is across the alley, and the residence appears to extend at least eight-and-a-half feet into the front yard setback area along Lukirk Street. Rockwell said because the deck would not have a roof or walls, its extension into the front yard is less obtrusive in terms of mass or bulk than a standard addition would be. She said staff feels that the proposed extension of the deck would not create an incompatible encroachment in this residential context. She said there appears to be no other reasonable location on the site for the deck, and although the Lillegs could diminish the width of the deck to seven feet to conform to the setback requirement, this configuration would reduce the practical use of the deck while yielding no discernable public benefit. She said the proposed front yard modification would upgrade the residential property without obstructing visibility for drivers of vehicles at the intersection of Lukirk Street and Highland Avenue, or where the alley to the north intersects with Lukirk Street. She said allowing the deck to be built as proposed is not likely to infringe on the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC99-0011, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along Lukirk Street from twelve feet to seven feet for a twelve-foot by fourteen-foot open deck be approved for property located in the RS-5 zone at 1002 Highland Avenue. Rockwell said she had not received any calls or letters regarding this application. Public hearing opened. Mike Lilleg, 1002 Highland Avenue asked for the Board to approve this application. L. Brandt noted Lilleg's April 30 letter and asked when the Housing Inspector came to their residence. Lilleg said Terry Goerdt came to their house the morning of Apdl 23 to inspect the headers for the sliding glass doors. He said the door and windows face Lukirk Street and Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 6 it evidently did not connect with Goerdt that there could be a problem. He said they picked up their building permit later that day. L. Brandt asked if the submitted site plan was part of a City standard form or was Lilleg's drawing. Rockwell said the site plan was a drawing that the Lillegs submitted. Lilleg explained how he drew the site plan he submitted. Rockwell said due to these types of situations, staff is advocating that a checklist be created so when people come in they can be told about additional requirements for comer lots. Public hearing closed. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve EXC99-0011, a special exception to reduce the front yard setback requirement along Lukirk Street from twelve feet to seven feet for a twelve-foot by fourteen-foot open deck by approved for property located in the RS-5 zone at 1002 Highland Avenue. Paul seconded the motion. L. Brandt said he would support the motion. He said in terms of the standards, the lot has some unusual features because it is a comer lot and therefore has two frontages to contend with. He said Lukirk Street is not highly traveled and in many respects is almost not a complete street. He said the issues of concern about air flow and visibility are diminished by the fact that it is not a highly-traveled street. He said even though it is a comer lot, it is a faidy small lot. He said the impact on neighbors and adjacent properties appears to be minimal, and there did not seem to be any ingress-egress issues or issues involving utilities. He said he was pleased that City staff had recognized potential problems for applicants. He thought the checklist idea was a good one. Corcoran said she would support the motion. She said she thought the encroachment was small and the deck as proposed was not incompatible with the other homes in that area. She said there did not seem to be any apparent negative impact that would accrue to the neighboring property owners because of this. She said she did not see any comparable alternatives for locating the deck on the property. She said she did not see any safety concerns regarding the deck. Paul said he would also support the motion for the reasons stated. He said he drove by the property eadier that day and saw the lack of traffic on Lukirk Street. He said that bodes well for this project. He said if it were a busier street it might be a different situation. He said it did not seem like there would be any impact on the neighbors and safety issues seemed to be well in hand. T.J. Brandt said he would support the motion. He said his big concern was the traffic issue and knowing that the area is not heavily traveled should diminish any safety issues with people running off the deck into a heavily traveled street. Bender said she would support the motion. She said because they are talking about a deck and not a structure with sidewalls and a roof, she did not think it was so obtrusive or would be so harmful as to take away from the neighbors or raise safety concerns. She said it would upgrade the applicants' property and increase its value, and that would be good for the applicant, the City and the neighbors. She said she did not think that there' was a feasible alternative. She said trying to pare the deck down to seven feet would not be a reasonable request, because that would virtually take away the practical use of the deck. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes May 12, 1999 Page 7 OTHER: 1. Letter of opposition to VAR99-0001 case. Rockwell said she included the letter in the packet for the Board's information. MOTION: Corcoran moved to make the letter dated April 7, 1999, from Dr. John Kammermeyer to Tammy Parks with regard to protesting the variance application for property located at 321/323 E. Davenport Street part of the formal public record of the Board's April 14, 1999, meeting. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 5~0. 2. Other Rockwell noted the memo from the Human Rights Commission regarding the proposed Board/Commission/Committee attendance policy. Corcoran pointed out that the Human Rights Commission had stated that the proposed attendance policy was more restrictive than University of Iowa employment attendance policies. L. Brandt said he wasn't present at the Board discussion on this issue, and he wanted to state that he agreed with Council. He said if you are going to serve on a board or commission, you should be serious about attending all the meetings of that group. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Bender said if any Board members knew that they were going to miss any summer meetings, they should contact Tammy in the Planning Department. Corcoran mentioned that she would probably miss the August Board meeting. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Corcoran moved to adjoum the meeting. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. The motion carded by a vote of 5-0~ and the meeting was adjourned at 5:48 p.m. Susan Bender, Chairperson Minutes submitted by Traci Wagner. pp<:ladm/minfoee5-12-99 .doc IOWA CITY BOARD Of ADd'U, STMENT A4Ec"TI'N~ WEDNESDA Y, MAY 12, 1999 - Civic Center' Council Chambers SIGN IN SHEET I Address Phone Z MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBL..!E~:. LIE~ BOARD OF TRUSTEES THURSDAY, - APRIL 22. ! 999 .. 5:00 P.M. :i~::" "::i?i:i:E:i:i:i:i:i::-., Members Pres~.~t.: .... EE::i~!~ton Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Stephen Greenleaf, Mary McMurr~y, r~rk Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Anne Spencer, r'.l..;~n:;,~-rs Absen': Jim Swaim O-.~erF~: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Heidi Lauritzen, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, Trevor Maxwell, IC Press Citizen, Amber Hunt, CR Gazette CAL_L_T.O OR_DER: Pressdem Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of March 25 and April 7 were approved as corrected. In the minutes of March 25, the correction was intended to read that Singerman suggested that it could not be done without closing when referring to the computer system transition. In the minutes of April 7 Singerman corrected the paragraph that suggested language for a letter to City Council to read that ~ Minutes were approved as corrected. Parker/Dellsperger UNFINISHED BUSINESS Craig was asked to follow up on a community survey and possible time frame. Craig reported that she contacted a consultant from Des Moines about a survey. The consultant sent Craig a proposal to poll approximately 500 Iowa Citians at a projected cost of 815,000. The board asked Craig to report back with an outline of what this survey would cover and a time frame. Craig surmised that this survey would be a Iowa City resident survey. It would combine and cover both users and voters. Objectives would be to measure whether the vote against the sales tax was opposition to the tax alone and measure opinions of Iowa Citians for an expanded library. Would citizens more favorably support a new building on 64 1A or prefer expansion elsewhere? Also, we would solicit opinions for branch libraries. Currently we have no hard data to give people. Martin feels that a reasonable scientific survey would present solid evidence. In order to be credible and fair we have to put everything out there and let the chips fall where they may. Also, a meeting gives people an opportunity to talk. Craig agrees that a survey would be difficult to put together, results may be open to interpretation but the alternative is to put a building project together, present it to Council and see what happens during an election. Conceptually it sounds good but we want to be sure the outcome gives us the information we need. Singerman suggested doing some developmental work with the consultant, framing some questions and then approving it at the special meeting. Craig can work with her if she agrees to do that and be paid on an hourly basis. Singerman and Barclay want to be involved. 2b(4) ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES APRIL 22, 1999 PAGE 2 Eckholt reported that his Board approved their hiring a consultant for an assessment of a financial campaign and there is a possibility they can dovetail the surveys. Craig also called Chuck Engberg, architect, regarding a timeframe for a schematic proposal in order to do cost estimates. We would be looking at June-August and he was to let Craig know if this was possible. Singerman reported that we had not heard from City Council re a joint meeting on the 17th. Craig thinks that it is assumed. Craig sent Board a copy of a memo from City Manager. The Council will be meeting next week at 8:00 am on Wednesday, May 5 in the Council Chambers. This will be a followup discussion of the manager's memo. Singerman, Dellsperger, Martin will attend the meeting. Other trustees will attempt to attend. Craig assumes the May 17 meeting will be at 6:00 pm or later and will let everyone know as soon as a time is set. Singerman encouraged all trustees to attend. A small working group met regarding community input. The plan is to hold a public meeting on May 26. The group will meet further to discuss the actual content of meeting. What types of questions we might put forward to the public has to be determined. One thought would be to identify issues and break into small groups each facilitated by a board member. The intention is that this be a prolibrary group, not a group to discuss the question of expansion, The presentation will outline what the committee sees as alternatives. The small groups will discuss them and come back together. Singerman feels that we need to offer an opportunity for people to speak openly and that we are obliged to listen. Singerman asked what help was needed from Board members. Martin felt a special meeting would be needed after the council work session. Wednesday May 26 was selected for this public meeting at 7:00 pm. A special Board meeting was scheduled for 5:00 pm on May 18 following the joint Council meeting. Strategic Planning Process. The list of recommended participants was distributed. Ten people were selected after Craig and Karin Franklin, City Planning Department met and reviewed applications. Parker moved approval. Dellsperger seconded. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS Report from Nominating Committee: Martin, President, Parker, Vice President. McMurray will stay on as Secretary. The slate was elected by acclimation. Policy Review: Library Programs Singerman questioned 702.3 which describes covering issues of local interest. Why not issues of national or broader issues? The assumption is that if there is community interest in national issues, those issues become local. A question was asked regarding the meaning of the phrase concerning developing new programs to attract new audiences. The response was that this referred to audiences who might be potential library users. There were no other comments. Parker/McMurray moved and seconded approval of the policy. Singerman asked for clarification about co-sponsored programs that meet goals and priorities. Priorities are identified in our Strategic Plan. For example, an organization who partnered with the library initially and then ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES APRIL 22, 1999 PAGE 3 began to push their priorities might not be continued. It gives the Library an out. Motion had been moved and seconded. All in favor. Policy Review: Cable Channel. No discussion. Martin/Parker moved. Motion carried. STAFF REPORTS Day 1 of the new system. Nichols reported it was busy all day. She thanked the Board for allowing us to close for the two days in order to make the transition. We have received compliments about how the catalog looks. Some minor problems but easy to deal with. Staff is having a great time with it. Singerman said it was a terrific, enormous project and went smoothly. It was a team effort with good support. Nichols said it was one of the most unique and satisfying experiences of her professional career. Read! Learn! Connect!. Posters have been placed all around the library. Reminder of the Open House on May 16. Lots of programs. Lots of balloons. Ads in paper. First ad on Saturday for a total of three ads. Thanks to Iowa City Computer Store for donating a personal computer as a grand door prize. Registration slips for drawing will be given to patrons who use technology, check out books, etc. Drawing will be on June 1. Library has always been a part of Childrens Day and ArtsFest. The location has been changed from the Ped Mall because the downtown will be torn up. Iowa Arts Festival will be moved to the Pentacrest of UI; as well as closing part of Washington Street. Children's Day moves away from the library. Will be set up on the Pentacrest. Date June 13. This will be the kick off for Summer Reading Program. Development Office report in packet. As part of the celebration of National Poetry Month, a performance of the "Bones" people has been scheduled at the Sanctuary. Enrich Iowa is in the State Legislature. The Governor recommended $1 million. It has been cut to$ 500,000 and is in committee (Senate cut to 9800,000). It looks like it will be funded by some amount this year. PRESIDENT'S REPORT Singerman asked if there was discussion regarding Atkins memo to City Council regarding finances and the impact on projects. Martin did not realize that Council had locked up all their lending power on a variety of projects that did not include the Library. He feels that we need to raise that issue. Singerman said it was mostly to protect City's status as a triple A bond rating. She feels we do need to make a case for why we need space. We need to describe what branches would cost and that they would not cut down on our need for a building. The public does not see the work areas and the congested space that staff have to work in. Singerman says we need descriptive anecdotes. Green, Childrens Services Coordinator, said we need to publicize losses like the fact that this year for the first time ever we are not offering Hear me Read program due to lack of space. One suggestion was to use our Web page to point ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES APRIL 22, 1999 PAGE 4 out facts to educate the public via the computers. Craig has done a tour program for the libra, ry channel in which she talks about the space needs and how they've .changed. Martin says we need to develop a proactive constituency. We appear to be very good at delivering excellent services under adverse conditions. A Board/staff team was suggested in order to get examples of what we could do with more space and what is not being provided that could be. ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MEMBERS Resignation letter from Greenleaf. Four trustee positions are open. Craig will get the schedule of postings and deadlines. COMMITTEE REPORTS None COMMUNICATIONS A letter from a patron regarding the use of the equipment in the "robo-room" by individuals representing groups using the meeting rooms was included in the packet. The CAVS staff is writing new procedures which will allow for people to use the equipment without library staff being present. It is required, however, that they be trained on the use of cameras generally and on our equipment specifically. Craig believes this takes care of the problem. FINANCIAL REPORTS We are right on target for this time of year in terms of budget receipts and expenses. Craig pointed out that the money left in personnel budget is largely due to our inability to retain temporary employees. We will initiate a new pay scale as of June 1. We will begin to spend from the endowment gift fund for library materials as the year runs down. OUTPUT STATISTICS We are seeing a downward trend in some areas. Dellsperger suggests that those numbers combined with more automation will require us to be proactive when it comes to responding to questions which may come from the public. Automation means that the work shifts and in some instances increases to meet the need for training, up-to-date products, etc. It is an evolving process. DISBURSEMENTS Review VISA expenditures for March, 1999. Approve Disbursements for March, 1999. Dellsperger/Parker moved. All in favor. SET AGENDA ORDER FOR MAY MEETING ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES APRIL 22, 1999 PAGE 5 Special meeting to discuss building project. ADJOURNMENT: Dellsperger/McMurray MINUTES .:::: ........: .... IOWA CITY P~Ij~ii!ik.,IBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES SPECL .... ~i::-' =================================== .... 1ha F~OOR .~~~~ CO~~C~ ROO~ '::::::::::::::" Tues&~, ~y:~j~ii~;:!9~~::'' 5: 00 PM ::;:~::~:' ::~:: Mem~s ~:~i? W~ston B~ay, L~& Densperger, Styhen Gree~e~, M~k M~, .... ;::~j::~?:~:::~:: ::::::::::::::::::::::: ....M~ McMu~y, Lisa P~ker, Jesse S~ge~$, ~e Spencer, J~ Sw~ Membcr~ Absent: none SI;I ff Present: Guests Present: Susan Craig, Beth Daly, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Kara Logsden, Liz Nichols Trevor Maxwell of the Iowa City Press-Citizen CALL TO ORDER - President Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM. ANNOUNCEMENT - POETRY IN MOTION- Logsden reported that twenty-four different poems, written during the recent Library led poetry workshops, will be displayed in Iowa City Busses through June. One workshop was for kids in grades three through five, and one workshop was for adults. Logsden mentioned that other Library .sponsored events featuring a well know poet were beautifully done. DISCUSSION A. Joint meeting of City Council and Library There are several meetings coming up which concern the Library expansion plans. May 12: The City Council will meet on May 12 to continue their May 4 meeting. Craig and Singerman will attend the May 12 meeting. Other Board members will attend if able. Singerman has asked to address the Council at the start of that meeting. As directed by the Board, Singerman will cover the following: 1. The Council needs to give the Board direction. Can the Library use 64-1A? Yes or no. 2. Can the Library consider property acquisition? Yes or no. 3. If the Library plans and builds a stand-alone Library on another site, what will be done with the present library building? 4. Tell the Counselors that the Library is planning to do a public input survey. 5. Ask the Council to wait to make any decisions until after the joint discussion planned for May 17. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTF~F~S January 28, 1999 Page 2 May 17: There is a joint meeting of the City Council and the Library Board scheduled for May 17 in Council Chambers. This is an informal session before the formal Council Meeting on May 18. All Board members are encouraged to attend on the 17th. This will be a round table discussion. The Library Board would like the discussion to follow the letter from Singerman to the Council as an outline for the discussion. May 18: The May 18 Special Board Meeting was canceled. Singerman was instructed to prepare an update to give at the May 26 Public Meeting. May 26: The public will be invited to an open meeting at 7:00 pm on May 26. Singerman will give a short talk, then Library staff will take the participants on a tour of the Library, focusing on areas where space is short. After the tour, the participants will meet back in the meeting room for a small group discussion with Board members. May 27: There is a regular Board Meeting on May 27. Further Meetings: The Board proposed that the Library hold public meetings at least once per month to keep the public informed. One meeting should explain the results of the survey. B. Building Project 1. Construction Costs - City manager Steve Atldns had previously stated that the City could absorb $22 million in construction costs for the expanded Library without jeopardizing the City's AAA Bond Rating. Since then, Charles Engberg, the architect, has done a quick and dirty estimate of the construction costs for two building options, and projects that the expansion could cost between $15 and $17 million. 2. Operating costs - The City Manager has estimated that library operating costs could be $180 thousand per year. This breaks down to $150 thousand for staff and $30 thousand for utilities, etc. Craig projected that operating costs could be lower in a new building, if designed well with energy savings and staff'rag needs in mind. It would be most cost efficient if the City builds a new Library from the ground up. The Council is reluctant to pledge funds for operating expenses. They have committed to fund numerous fire and police positions, so don't perceive the financial flexibility to increase staff in other departments. Also, they are trying to protect the City in case the State passes more laws limiting City revenue. Atldns suggests that to fund the Library's projected operating costs, the Board could make changes - generate income, change operations, possibly cut hours. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES January 28, 1999 Page 3 3. BuiMing Site - The Board is waiting for direction from the Council so they can decide the best direction to go with the expansion project. Can 64-1A be used? Can the Board look at, acquiring property? It is possible that the wishes of the new owners of the Holiday Inn will conflict with the Library's desire to use 64-1A. One possible solution to this conflict would be to use the present library building for the Holiday Inn's conference center. 4. Support from Public - While the consensus is that the public supports the Library, the Board senses less than whole-hearted support for the expansion project. People are still questioning the Library' s avoidance of the issue of branches, the raising of taxes, and even the Library' s need for more space. The Board would like the City Council to stand up and say they won't pay for a branch - it's not just the Library arbitrarily saying no. The Board is working on a survey and ways to gather input from the public. They discussed putting a survey on the web site or a question of the week in the WINDOW. While the Board seriously wants to know public opinion, they plan to take a leadership role and guide the Library through a realistic, positive plan. Swaim has visited new libraries both in West Des Moines and Bettendorf. He suggested that the staff could prepare a videotape tour of some of the newer libraries in Iowa, contrasting them to ICPL. For example, Council Bluffs has a new library with an ICN room with the capacity for forty participants. This video could be shown on The Library Channel. 5. Timing - The Board is doing the ground work and hopes to be ready to proceed with a bond referendum in November. Engberg could begin work on plans in early June, although Craig doesn't want spend money on design unless the Council gives the go-ahead to proceed with the building. The Board can have the project ready by August 24, the last day for City Council to vote for the bond to be on the November ballot. If a bond is approved in November, a new building would open no sooner than 2002. 6. Paying for project - It would be economically prudent for the Library to expand now, as construction costs will only rise in the future. The Board is committed to work with the Council to fred a compromise for funding. The Board would work to ensure that we have a good, efficient design to reduce energy costs and need for extra staff. The Library would explore self-check-out and other staff saving measures, as well as fred ways to generate income. If surface and lower level parking are included in construction, part of the funding could come out of Parking Income. The Development Office hopes that the Foundation can raise at least one million dollars and aim for two million, part of which might go into an endowment to defray ongoing operating costs. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES January 28, 1999 Page 4 7. Support from Council - The Library Board is frustrated because they feel that while they are earnestly trying to answer the concerns of the City Council, the Council keeps stalling and asking for more studies and more ground work. The Board is ready to compromise, but feel that the Library can't proceed without the promise of funding from the City. The Board would like to feel that they and the Council are working together to solve a common problem. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH SI::J-ZER AND COMPANY FOR SURVEY Ann Selzer proposes to conduct a survey of Iowa City residents for just under sixteen thousand dollars. The survey could be completed by mid-June. The money would come from the Board's discretionary gift account. Motion to approve contract with Selzer and Company to do a survey: Dellsperger/Martin, carries, with Barclay abstaining. As the lone dissenting voice, Barclay explained that he was not opposed to doing a survey, but was skeptical that a survey would produce useful results. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 pm. Dellsperger/Spencer Notes taken by Beth Daly MINUTES IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, APRIL 26, 1999 - 5:30 PM CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Hoch, Betty McKray, Cathy Weingeist, Jim Pusack Terry Smith STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Dale Helling, Bob Hardy, Andy Matthews, Keri Stokstad, Mike Brau OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Rene Paine, Denis Martel, Mary Jo Langhorne, Kevin Rice RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Stokstad reported that members are being sought for the Community Television Service Advisory Board. Representatives are needed for the neighborhoods, artistic, political, and health seats. The Board meets the first Thursday of the month at 3 p.m. Shaffer reported that InfoVision has added a category that covers the information contained in the Citizen's Guide to City Services, which is provided to new residents when they arrange for city services. Paine gave a talk on April 14 to non-profit organizations dealing with how they might market their organizations using PATV. PATV will host an open house May 14 from 12-6 p.m. at 623 S. Dubuque to celebrate nine years of service to the community. Fisher reported new web-based catalog system is up and functioning well. The new URL for the library is www. icpl.org. The library will host an open house in the afternoon of May 16 to highlight the new system. Martel reported the four channels-CNBC, CSPAN2, TCI TV, and Bravo-will be realigned in June so those subscribing just to the basic tier will receive those channels. In regards to PATV's contract renewal Helling said the Commission could proceed with a two part, simultaneous process. The Commission could proceed with an evaluation of PATV making use of the existing Performance Assessment Criteria and other information presented by PATV while City staff meets with PATV to gather the other types of information the City needs. Hoch said the new Performance Assessment Criteria should done at the same time as the contract rather than after, as had been done previously. McKray asked City staff to prepare a timeline for the contract renewal process so the Commission could review and adopt it at their May meeting. In regards to the McLeod franchise negotiations Pusack asked how it is determined how far a franchise might differ from the franchise passed in the referendum before it is unacceptable. Shaffer said that the legal department would need to issue an opinion on if a new referendum is required. If the time between coming to an agreement and the past referendum is too long, a second referendum may be advised. Shaffer said the over-riding principle has been the desire for competition. Pusack said he is concerned that negotiations may not reflect the desires of all Commissioners, as the positions of the negotiating team has not been made clear. Pusack said Commissioner's concerns and the parameters should be considered before a draft agreement is forwarded to them for review and a recommendation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Hoch and seconded Pusack to approve the March 22, 1999 minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE REPORT Hardy reported the Media Unit has been busy working on project videos. Coverage was provided of the local option sales tax election and plans have been made to cover all the elections through out the year. InfoVision has been exploring different approaches to using sequencer screens. Stokstad reported that members are being sought for the Community Television Service Advisory Board. Representatives are needed for the neighborhoods, artistic, political, and health seats. The Board meets the first Thursday of the month at 3 p.m. Shaffer referred to the Community Television Group materials in the packet outlining the criteria for evaluating funding proposals and the acceptable use of the funds. Shaffer said that there was an additional proviso agreed to that stipulated that pass-through funds should not be used for capital expenses or equipmentreplacement costs. Hardy said the actual funding proposals will be forwarded to the Commission in May or June. The members of the CTG want to make sure they are headed in the direction as desired by the Commission. In general, the CTG wishes to improve the quality of their programming for the sake of viewers. Shaffer noted the draft public right-of-way ordinance included in the packet and noted that, while the proposed public right-of-way ordinance covers a variety of topics, the draft section of the ordinance in the packet pertains to only the role the Commission might play. Shaffer reported that InfoVision has added a category that covers the information contained in the Citizen's Guide to City Services, which is provided to new residents when they arrange for city services. PATV REPORT Paine reported the workshops funded by the grant from the Hospital Schools have been completed and were very successful. The program produced, "Accessing Community Media", will premiere on May 5, 7 p.m. on channel 2 and a premiere party will be held at the PATV office. Paine gave a talk on April 14 to non-profit organizations dealing with how they might market their organizations using PATV. A tape of the program will play on PATV. Stokstad also talked on the Community Television Service. An open house will be held May 14 from 12- 6 p.m. to celebrate PATV's nine years of service to the community. Discussions are being held with the Neighborhood Centers regarding possible joint projects during the summer. Projects with the Girl Scouts and the Summer Youth Leadership Program are also being explored. Weingeist said she has heard that many students from the University are using PATV's equipment and facilities to complete their coursework because the University's equipment is out of date. Weingeist asked if PATV has considered approaching the University about getting some remuneration for the training they provide University students. Paine said she has talked to Dean of the Liberal Arts College about the situation. The Dean, in turn, contacted so. me of the professors of those programs. Paine will continue to pursue this issue. Paine said PATV does not want to exclude University students, and ideally, the University would provide the needed equipment to their students. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher reported new web-based catalog system is up and functioning well. The new URL for the library is www. icpl.org. An open house will be held in the afternoon of May 16 to highlight the new system. Channel 10 had 25 live productions in the last 30 days, including 9 "Storytimes", 5 special events, 10 PSA's, and an episode of"One of a Kind". The library averages about 12-15 programs per month. ECC REPORT Langhorne reported the annual Kate Wickum scholarship event and the Lucas Fine Arts Festival were taped and will be cablecast on channel 11 in May. The initial School Board special meeting dealing with the criteria for selecting a search firm to assist with the hiring of the new superintendent was also taped for playback. More meetings dealing with hiring the superintendent will also likely be cablecast. TCI's Denis Martel talked to a sub-committee of the District Technology Council on the convergence of video and data systems and the implications for schools. SENIOR CENTER REPORT There was no representative present from the Senior Center. TCI REPORT Martel reported the four channels-CNBC, CSPAN2, TCI TV, and Bravo-will be realigned in June so those subscribing just to the basic tier will receive those channels. The rebuild of the Coralville system will begin in 2-3 weeks and is anticipated to be finished by August, 1999. Fisher asked about the channel designations (NBC, CBS, MTV, etc.) provided for subscirbers to the digital tiers and asked if the local access channels designations might also be included. Martel said he would look into that possibility. MCLEOD REPORT Kevin Rice reported that one concern McLeod has relating to some of the terms in their franchise agreement being negotiated is the impact direct broadcast satellites (DBS) might have. DBS has seen very fast growth the past 6-9 months. A vote in the U.S. House of Representatives will be held tomorrow which would permit carriage of local signals on DBS satellites. If that bill passes and becomes law, DBS will be in a stronger competitive position in relation to cable TV. Other technologies, such as VDSL, may offer competitive video delivery systems within the next ten years. LEGAL REPORT Matthews reported there was nothing new to report that was not covered by other agenda items. IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION BY-LAWS McKray said that the election of officers held at the last Commission meeting was held a month prior to that stipulated in the by-laws. Matthews suggested that the Commission could pass a resolution to ratify the election. Hoch moved and Pusack seconded a motion to ratify the election held at the March meeting. The motion passed unanimously. McKray said that the by- laws need to be updated. City staff will review the by-laws and suggest changes. PATV LETTER FOR CONTRACT RENEWALL McKray noted that according to the contract with PATV the City Council must respond to PATV's letter within 60 days. Shaffer said that in the past, two Commission members and City staff had formed a negotiating team to work on PATV's contract. The Performance Assessment Criteria, which were included in the meeting packet, can serve as a starting point for evaluation. Paine said data is being compiled on how well PATV has met the existing Performance Assessment Criteria. It is anticipated that report will be complete by September. Hoch said the first step is for that report to be submitted to the Commission. Shaffer said that when the Performance Assessment Criteria were developed the process took much longer than first anticipated. This was due to the fact that it was the first time such an activity had been undertaken and there were difficulties in realistically defining what PATV thought they could or should do and what the City wished they would do, and then meeting in between. That problem may still be present. Pusack said that one issue might be the types of programming provided. If PATV wishes to provide samples of certain types of programming for Commission review, then some of that activity could start soon. Hoch said the Commission should hear from PATV first, especially in regards to the statistical information provided on training, number of programs, camera checkouts etc. Pusack said the Commission should not judge the content of programs, but a review of the mix of programs would be beneficial. For example, in the past the Commission has expressed interest in seeing more programming often thought of as "community programming". Paine said the Guidelines might be changed to reflect new trends and new activities PATV has or will be undertaking. New Guidelines could help PATV be more effective. Helling said the Commission could proceed with a two part, simultaneous process. The Commission could proceed with an evaluation of PATV making use of the existing Performance Assessment Criteria and other information presented by PATV while City staff meets with PATV to gather the other types of information the City needs. Hoch said the new Performance Assessment Criteria should done at the same time as the contract rather than after, as had been done previously. McKray asked City staff to prepare a timeline for the contract renewal process so the Commission could review and adopt it at their May meeting. MCLEOD UPDATE Shaffer said Helling's letter sums up the three issues McLeod wishes to discuss with the City. Progress is being made at the meetings held with McLeod and more meetings ~e planned. Shaffer noted the letter from McLeod included in the packet that puts forward their position. Pusack asked how City staff knows what the Commission might feel are negotiable items. Hoch said that when the negotiating team has arrived at an agreement it will be forwarded to the Commission for review. At that point, a full, public discussion will take place. Although no more than two Commissioners can privately discuss an agenda item at a given place and time (according to the Iowa Open Meetings Law) any Commissioner may meet with City staff or other Commissioners to provide input and gather information. Pusack asked how it is determined how far a new agreement might differ from the agreement passed in the referendum might be before it is unacceptable. Shaffer said that the legal department would need to issue an opinion on if a new referendum is required. If the time between coming to an agreement and the referendum is too long, a second referendum may be advised. Shaffer said the over-riding principle has been the desire for competition. Pusack said he is concerned that negotiations may not reflect the desires of all Commissioners as the positions of the negotiating team have not been made clear. Pusack said Commissioner' s concerns and the parameters should be considered before a draft agreement is forwarded to them for review and a recommendation. ADJOURNMENT Hoch moved and Weingeist seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cable TV Administrator MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 1999 LISA HANDSAKER CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT Bebe Ballantyne, Jay Honohan, William Kelly, Terd Miller, Allan Monsanto, Deborah Schoenfelder, and M. Kathryn Wallace. MEMBERS ABSENT Joanne Hora and Larry Pugh. STAFFPRESENT Michelle Buhman, Julie Seal and Susan Rogusky. GUESTS PRESENT Bernice Haugenjorde CALL TO ORDER Miller called the meeting to order at 3:00. MINUTES Motion: To approve March minutes as distributed. The motion carded on a vote of 7-0.HonohanNVallace PUBLIC DISCUSSION None SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION - Honohan Honohan, Miller and Kopping presented the City Council with information supporting requests for additional programming space in the Iowa Avenue parking facility, and a walkway connecting the parking facility and Senior Center. The odginal request for 7,700 square feet of programming space on the second floor of the ramp was modified to include 3,527 square feet on the first floor with a high ceiling and 3,700 square feet on the second floor. The City Council directed city staff to have the architect design plans for a walkway connecting the parking facility and Senior Center. Commissioners discussed various ways to fund the expansion project. A special meeting of the Senior Center Commission is scheduled for Apdl 28, 1999 at 3:00 to review the Space Review Committee report. SPACE REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT- Kelly Kelly reported findings from the visits to several Senior Centers and congregate meal programs located in eastern Iowa. SATILLITE VOTING - Kelly Commissioners discussed possible areas to hold satellite voting in the Senior Center. After discussion, commissioners agreed that due to space limitations, satellite voting should not be held in the Senior Center. The original motion from the March meeting was withdrawn. MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMM!RSION 2 SENIOR CENTER UPDATE Operations - Kopping A report was distributed. Programs - Seal May events were reviewed. Volunteers - Rogusky An update of volunteer programs and opportunities was given. COUNCIL OF ELDERS -Thomas A report from the Council of Elders was given. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Schoenfelder reported progress made by the Fumiture Committee. Commissioners agreed the Commission Retreat was a successful event. It was suggested to have similar event next year when odentating new commission members. Motion: To reschedule the May Commission meeting from May 18, to May 25, 1999. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Honohan/Wallace Motion: To adjourn. Motion was carded on a vote of 7-0. Wallace/Monsanto The meeting adjourned at 4:35. MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, APRIL 28,1999 MEMBERS PRESENT Bebe Ballantyne, Jay Honohan, William Kelly, Terd Miller, Allan Monsanto, Deborah Schoenfelder, and M. Kathryn Wallace. MEMBERS ABSENT Joanne Hora and Larry Pugh. STAFFPRESENT Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping, Julie Seal and Susan Rogusky. GUESTS PRESENT None CALL TO ORDER Miller called the meeting to order at 3:10. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None SPACE REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT Reports were mailed to all Commission members for review prior to this meeting. Motion: To approve the Space Review Committee Report. Honohan/Wallace The Commission discussed the report, making a few minor changes to the wording. Motion: To adopt the report as amended and present it to City Council, Board of Supervisors, and the 28E Committee. Motion carded on a vote of 7-0. HonohanNVallace. Motion: Motion: To adjourn. Motion carded on a vote of 7-0. Kelly/Monsanto The meeting adjoumed at 4:10.