Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-15 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, - APRIL 22, 1999 - 5:00 P.M. Members Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Stephen Greenleaf, Mary McMurray, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Anne Spencer, Members Absent: Jim Swaim Staff Present: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Heidi Lauritzen, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, Others: Trevor Maxwell, IC Press Citizen, Amber Hunt, CR Gazette CALL TO ORDER: President 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 !~iii:iiii 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 ~ 15,000. 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. 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 ,~800,000). 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 z~ out facts to educate the public via the computers. Craig has done a tour program for the library 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 PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES SPECIAL MEETING 2nd FLOOR ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM Tuesday, May 11, 1999 5:00 PM Members Present: Winston Barklay, Linda Dellsperger, Stephen Greenleaf, Mark Martin, Mary McMurray, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singeman, Anne Spencer, Jim Swaim Members Absent: none Staff Present: Susan Craig, Beth Daly, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Kara Logsden, Liz Nichols Guests Present: 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 TRUSTEES 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 Atkins 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 staffing 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. Atkins 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. Building 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 ka~ow 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 find 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 find 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 SELZER 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 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MAY 12, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: GUESTS: Toni Cilek, Bruce Maurer, Matt Pacha, Rex Pruess, Allen Wallace, Ross Wilbum Barbara Endel, Craig Gustaveson Terry Trueblood, Mike Moran Judith Klink, Matt Carberry, Peter Ault, Tony Malkusak 2b(3) Stroh, Kathy FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Stroh, to approve the April 14, 1999 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Maurer, to conduct the annual park tour on Wednesday, July 14, 1999. Unanimous. Pacha expressed the Commission and staffs gratitude to Judith Klink for her dedication and service on the Commission. Klink expressed appreciation to members who made it a pleasurable experience, with everyone being open to other's ideas. Pacha introduced Toni Cilek, who was appointed to complete Klink's term. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Matt Carberry introduced himself as a member of a group, Friends of Hickory Hill Park, who have adopted Hickory Hill Park. He referred to the 1997 conceptual plan for the trails, and indicated the group is willing to provide manual labor once this plan is finalized. Trueblood stated youth in the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County's FLIGHT Program will be working on the trails this summer, and occasionally there are other groups such as the Boy Scouts who also work on the trails. Trueblood indicated he would inform the group of it so the groups could coordinate their efforts. Carberry asked if the 1997 conceptual plan was what the City hopes to eventually achieve and how they can help in working towards that so they could focus their energy and thoughts to seeing it happen. Trueblood noted money is budgeted in 2001 to develop a semblance of the conceptual plan. He also informed him of the Oakland Cemetery Expansion Plan that will affect the park, with some earth moving and tree removal occurring this summer on the extreme western end of the park. Stroh indicated the commission has a philosophical commitment to Hickory Hill Park, with their position being preservation and not expansion of the trails, with the last master plan being an attempt to give guidance to where the trails should be and doing away with the "wildcat" trails that are causing erosion problems. lOVERFRONT AND NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION REQUEST Pacha noted the Commission had requested a legal assessment of the RNAC's proposal for a formal liaison to the Commission. Trueblood referred to the City Attorney's office memo, which indicates the RNAC's liaison would have to be formally approved and appointed by the City Council. Parks and Recreation Commission May 12, 1999 Page 2 of 5 After discussion, the consensus of the Commission was not to pursue this change at this time. They would like a representative from the RNAC to attend the Commission's meetings as a member of the general public for the next few months, and to then determine-whether or not it would be advisable or necessary to pursue the proposal of making the RNAC representative an "ex officio" member of the Commission. They indicated RNAC members are always welcome to attend the meetings, and the commission would consider anything they had to share with just as much importance as that of an "ex officio" member or anyone attending the meeting. MILLER/ORCHARD NEIGHBORHOOD Trueblood reported the City is going through the process to purchase the Braverman property. With respect to the Jensen property, four years ago the property was appraised at $38,500 an acre. At that time, the City's offer of $15,000 per acre was not accepted. Staff contacted a local appraiser to determine the cost to conduct another appraisal, with the appraiser indicating approximately $1,200. The City Attorney's office feels the approach that should be taken is to simply make an offer to the property owner or to ask if they would be willing to entertain an offer for the property and to proceed from there. The consensus of the Commission was for staff to proceed with contacting the owner to determine if they would be willing to sell. KIWANIS PARK DEVELOPMENT Trueblood updated the commission on the development plans. Two primary components are not being done at this time - the Memorial Garden and the prairie pothole. In the future the Kiwanis Club may complete the Memorial Garden to memorialize deceased members. With respect to the prairie pothole, cost issues and maintenance problems need to be addressed prior to proceeding. He reported the main issue is the parking lot, which has recently arisen from a resident who was not involved in the planning process due to the fact that their house did not exist at that time. Staff is looking into the possibility of narrowing the parking lot driveway with only one way in and out which will lessen the amount of concrete, and possibly reducing the bus parking spaces from two to one. Staff has agreed to take a look at reducing the amount of concrete and more landscaping around the parking lot. A sketch of the natural play structure was displayed. Trueblood noted the Kiwanis Club will erect the shelter and may help install the play structure. He noted much of the areawill be accessible. Klink asked if there would be pedestrian access to Willow Creek Park; Trueblood noted there would be, but that it was part of another project. CIP tIPDATE Trueblood updated the commission on the following Capital Improvement projects: Willow Creek Trail Phase II planning has begun. The trail begins at Westwinds Drive and Mormon Trek Boulevard, running through Willow Creek Park past Kiwanis Park and terminating at Willow Creek Drive. The trail will mostly be 10 feet wide and constructed of asphalt, with the sidewalk being widened to 8 feet and constructed of concrete. The contract with the consultant includes investigation of an underpass to Highway 1, which would enable the trail to go past the airport down to the Iowa River. Parks and Recreation Commission May 12, 1999 Page 3 of 5 Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park Items to be completed this summer include asphalting the roadways within the park, resurfacing the parking lots and access road with chip seal, constructing two new concession/restroom/storage buildings, installing two or more park shelters, installing playground equipment, addressing the drainage problems which could involve construction of a pond, continuing the program of turf improvement, and installation of water lines. Park Maintenance Building Earth moving has begun at the noah end of Napoleon Park for construction of the park maintenance building. Pacha asked what would happen to the present park maintenance building in City Park. Trueblood stated plans are to demolish part of it, and to refurbish the other section partly for maintenance/storage for City Park and off-season storage and partly for an enclosed park shelter. Other buildings to be demolished are the building by the Boys' Baseball diamonds to provide additional green space and additional parking, and the storage building near the horseshoe courts. Trueblood reported the main parking lot in City Park will be asphalted, with plans to eventually asphalt many of the parking lots in various parks. Klink noted the Riverside Theatre's groundbreaking for the Shakespeare Festival Theatre on June 8, 1999. Maurer asked if there had been any discussion on expanding the parking area for Little League so they don't have to park on the grass. Trueblood stated demolition of the one building will increase it. He noted last year he went to the park during a Little League game and there was more than enough parking to accommodate the number of vehicles. The problem is that people want to park within 100 feet of the field they are playing on. Napoleon Park Plans are to install playground equipment and at least one park shelter this summer and to complete the landscaping in and around the new parking lot. New asphalt or concrete pathways are also being planned. City Plaza Playground The equipment has been purchased. Removal of the old equipment and expansion of the safety zone will occur in late May/early June. Installation of the new equipment is scheduled for the week of June 14, followed by sub-surface preparation the week of June 21, and installation of the safety surface the week of June 28. The safety surface will be a poured rubber base. Skateboard Park The first public input meeting will be held May 13. Park and Terrell Mill Park. Possible sites being discussed are Mercer Park, City Cemetery Expansion Phase I of the Cemetery Expansion plan will begin this summer. Due to City budget constraints, the project budget was reduced from $650,000 to $350,000 with the elimination of the proposed mausoleum. ScanIon Gymnasium The grand opening will be Saturday, May 22, 3:00 p.m. It will include a ribbon cutting, dedication ceremony and planned activities by youth groups in the gymnasium. Free swimming during the day will be offered at the Mercer Park Aquatic Center. On Sunday, May 23, the gym will be open from 1-9 p.m. for public drop-in use. Parks and Recreation Commission May 12, 1999 Page 4 of 5 Longfellow/Twain Trail Staff has been meeting with the church, and it now appears the best route is to connect the Longfellow Manor Trail on the north side of the railroad tracks with the church property on the south side of the tracks. Iowa River Trail - Burlington to Napoleon Park The water level needs to go down in order to complete portions of the trail, with expected completion sometime in June. Wetherby Park Development Development plans were reviewed. The construction plans and specs for the portion of the project to be contracted are being prepared. Portions of the plan will be done in-house and/or with volunteers, with the expected completion date September/October. Riverside Stage Work is continuing on the soil borings and design. Hospice Memorial in Willow Creek Park Plans have been completed for the trailside rest area, with concrete benches, identification posts and memorials. Sturgis Ferry Park Landscaping and earthwork at the north end of the park will take place early summer. Ned Ashton Park Once the Iowa River Trail from Burlington to Napoleon Park is completed, work will begin on getting the Ned Ashton Park portion completed. City High Tennis Court Lights Toni Cilek asked to be updated on the tennis court lights at City High School. Trueblood stated he artended a recent meeting, and a decision has not been made on whether or not shields for the lights will be installed, or whether the City will share in the cost. ANNUAL PARK TOUR After discussion, it was moved by Wilburn, seconded by Maurer, to conduct the annual park tour on Wednesday, July 14, 1999. Unanimous. The Commission meeting will begin at 4 p.m. Staff asked commission members to determine what sites they would like to include on the tour. Pruess stated he would like to include Willow Creek Park and the Iowa River Trail. Stroh indicated the smaller-sized vehicle used last year worked well, and if possible, he would like to include the peninsula and water plant areas. COMMISSION TIME Wilbum welcomed Toni Cilek to the commission. Klink invited the commission to the Grant Wood Festival in Stone City, Iowa where her son will be performing. Parks and Recreation Commission May 12, 1999 Page 5 of 5 Maurer followed up on last month's meeting where the commission indicated it would like to meet every other month at the James P. Scanlon Gymnasium. He requested that next month's meeting be held at this facility. Pruess stated he enjoyed working with Judith Klink and welcomed Toni Cilek to the commission. DLRECTOR'S REPORT Trueblood reported on the following: 2000 PIN GRANT APPLICATIONS A memo from Marcia Klingaman, Neighborhood Services Coordinator, setting out the PIN applications being recommended by the Neighborhood Council to the City Council for funding that involve park improvements was reviewed; the Commission did not have any objections. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Stroh, seconded by Wilburn, to adjourn. Unanimous. Meeting adjoumed 6:25 p.m. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 20, 1999 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRELIMINARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Pam Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson, Dean Shannon, Marilyn Schintler, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Scott Kugler, Bob Miklo, John Yapp, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: Gary Watts, Larry Schnittjer, Deb Liddell, Jeff Lorenger, Jeff Madin, Dean Van Loh, David Dobbins, Lisa Dutchik, Susan Foreman, Gordon Tribbey, Del Gilmore, David Bailie, Robert Eckert, Gerry Ambrose, Harry Wolf, Mike Harding, Scott Boucher RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, of amendments to the CN-1 zone to allow drive- through pharmacies by special exception and to limit the number of drive-through lanes permitted for a financial institution, as written in staffs April 30, 1999 memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Recommended approval, by a vote of 7-0, of amendments to the requirements for freestanding signs as wdtten in staffs April 29, 1999 memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Commission, CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARDS' AND COMMISSIONS: Supple said a list of vacancies on City boards and commissions is available in the lobby. She said that serving on a board or commission is a responsibility and a privilege and encouraged those at the meeting to consider applying for a vacancy. REZONING ITEM: REZ99-0007. Public discussion of an application submitted by Arlington L.C. for a preliminary Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH) plan of Windsor Ridge, Part 13, a 7.72 acre, 28-unit residential development, and a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Planned Development Overlay (OPDH-8), for property located at the northeast corner of Barrington Road and Huntington Drive. (45-day limitation period expires June 19) Supple said because this is a rezoning application, there will be a second hearing on this item on June 3. Kugler said this is an application for a preliminary planned development housing plan for Windsor Ridge Part 13. He said the property is currently zoned RS-8. Kugler said the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20,1999 Page 2 application actually covers all of the RS-8 zone and not just the portion that may be colored in on some of the maps. Kugler said the site was zoned RS-8 in 1995, subject to the approval of a future planned development housing oreday rezoning and development plan. He said at that time, four parcels were included in the application: this RS-8 zone, an RS-8 zone further to the west along Court Street, a neighborhood commercial zone located at the future corner of Court Street and Taft Avenue, and an RM-12 zone on the north side of Court Street. Kugler said each of the parcels was rezoned with a requirement for a future review of a development plan before development can occur there. He stated that there was also a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) requiring the extension of Court Street to provide access to these parcels prior to their development. Kugler said the decision to allow RS-8 density on this property was made in 1995 when this property was rezoned. He displayed the concept plan that was submitted at the time, which showed a neighborhood commercial center with small shops and perhaps some office/retail uses, a town square green space, and townhouses located along the southern edge of the square. Kugler said the current application is for the development plan approval of the townhouses south of the proposed town square. Kugler said the preliminary planned development plan is being reviewed by staff. He said there have been a few deficiencies identified, and those will have to be resolved before the Commission votes on this. Kugler said the plan illustrates 28 dwelling units located within two eight-unit and two six-unit buildings. He said the fronts of the buildings would face the square and the rears would have garages underneath the units with access from the back. Kugler said parking for visitors and customers would be provided along a drive at the front of these properties; that ddve is expected to extend to the CN-1 zone and also provide access to Taft Avenue. He said the rear drive would provide access to the garages. Kugler said staff has some ccncems about the proposed parking plan along the north end of the front ddve as shown on the 1995 concept plan. He said staff feels the parking plan should be revisited and perhaps changed to 90 degree parking or parallel parking on each side, as the angled spaces would be difficult to access for visitors of the townhouse development. Kugler said that building elevations have been submitted for a fouFunit building; he said the plan calls for six and eight-unit buildings, and staff has asked for additional information to show those configurations. He said staff and the Commission will also need information on building materials, rear elevations, and the overall building height before the plan can be approved. Kugler said the rear of the proposed buildings will be three stories in height versus two stories in the front in order to allow the parking under the building. He said staff has some concerns about the rear of the buildings facing the rear yards of the proposed single-family development along Sheffield Place to the south. Kugler said staff has requested and the applicant agreed to provide a double row of trees along the south property line. He said staff is recommending that the trees or some type of landscaping be extended along Barrington to improve the appearance of the streetscape. Kugler said the applicant has indicated there may also be some berming there to help with the screening. He said staff has also worked with the applicant to shift the location of the buildings as far north on the site as possible in order to increase the amount of open space between this development and the single-family lots. Regarding access to Court Street, Kugler said that requirement was included in the 1995 CZA. He said to comply with the CZA, at a minimum, Court Street will need to be extended at least to its future intersection with Huntington Drive and Huntington Drive extended north to Coud Street to provide access directly to Court Street for these units. Kugler said staff is recommending that Planning and Zoning Commission Minu~s May 20,1999 Page 3 a CZA requiring that connection be attached to this rezoning as well. He said Court Street is currently built out to its future connection with Arlington Drive so that this project will require the extension of Court Street for an additional block. Kugler said the plan includes an access drive out to Taft Avenue. He said the site distance at the future access point does not appear to pose a problem, and although it will likely be some time before Taft Avenue is upgraded to City arterial street standards, staff feels this is an important connection to make. Kugler said the town square open space shown on the plan is proposed to be dedicated to the City. He said staff feels this is probably reasonable, provided that the area and surrounding properties are developed before that occurs. Kugler said staff is forwarding this application to the Parks and Recreation Commission for its recommendation before this goes to the City Council. Kugler said staff is recommending deferral of this application pending resolution of the deficiencies associated with the plan itself. Upon resolution of those items, staff recommends approval, subject to the extension and connection of Huntington Drive to Court Street prior to development of the property. Supple asked how one would anticipate the CN-1 zone to be configured for entrance to the commercial properties. Kugler said he would expect that the properties would front on the square. Supple asked if it were then appropriate to have the square off of Huntington. Kugler said the decision was made in 1995 when the zoning plan was put in place. He said the concept plan was reviewed and a number of revisions were requested and made. Kugler said the applicant is coming in with a design at this point that complies with that 1995 concept plan. Supple said she was curious about why it was intended that access to the commercial area should be from something other than Court Street or Taft Avenue. Kugler stated that it is good to have access from the side street in terms of neighborhood access since the CN-1 zone is intended to be primarily there for residents of the neighborhood. He said staff would not want to see a number of curb cuts along Court Street in that area since it is an arterial street, and one alternative is to use a collector street such as Huntington Road to provide access to the zone. Kugler said there would be one additional access on Court Street, and if it can be confined to an intersection, a better traffic situation results. Supple asked what the back of the buildings that front west and face the town square would look like. Kugler said that was a concern in 1995, and at this point, land banking some areas in the back for potential parking has been discussed as a possibility if it were determined that what was shown there was not adequate. He said that area on the site would be saved as landscaped area and would remain so if not needed for parking, and if it were needed for parking, could be converted to such. Kugler said it was decided that it would be most appropriate for these buildings to front on the square. Bovbjerg asked if the access from Huntington would be the major intersection for the CN-1 zone traffic, and Kugler confirmed this. Public discussion: Gary Watts. 4988 Lower West Branch Road, the developer, showed elevations of the six and eight-plexes. He said there would be brick on the first floor of the fronts of the buildings and just before the brick goes to the second floor, a limestone cap. Watts said the rest of the buildings would be covered with vinyl siding. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 4 Regarding the rear elevation, Watts said in order to break up the reo~ine and add some architectural dimension, there would be an outside fireplace chase. He added that the end units would also have a gable end for more character. Watts said the front would have pitches moving in and out and some designs and gable ends on the front of the roof for character. Watts said this is a good use for the land, as it is a good buffer there between the single-family and the commercial section. He said the density here would be 3.5 units per acre. Bovbjerg asked if the density calculation included the town square open space, and Watts said it did. Watts distributed photographs of the four-plexes on Mormon Trek Boulevard that are very similar to the way these buildings would be. Gibson asked Watts if he had any thoughts about the access to this area in relation to arterial streets in the neighborhood. Watts said he has not looked at other ideas for the only access off Court or Taft. He said that obviously there are sight distance issues, and where Court runs into Taft is about the best place for this zone. Watts said he really had not studied other access points but would be willing to do so. He said he definitely wants the commercial center to be neighborhood friendly. Larry Schnittjer. 1917 South Gilbert, said he represents MMS Consultants. Regarding the initial concept for the town square, he said the square was planned to be the front yard of the lots across the street so that the commercial would not be right up next to those lots. Schnittjer said that to do any other 'kind of traffic orientation would take up more of that space with traffic lanes. He said two access points from Huntington create the square and also give the square good access. Schnittjer said then all of the commercial is about as far away from the proposed future residential to the west as it can get, with the exception of the possible bank facility or whatever was conceived for that comer. Schnittjer said he did not think there would be heavy traffic in the neighborhood commercial area. Gibson said Watts had introduced the possibility of moving that square up into the corner where Taft and Court Streets intersect..Gibson said it would be another option to address this concern if it really is an issue. Schnittjer said he did not believe it was an issue.. He said it could be a possibility but he would be concemed about having the possibility of commercial across the northern ddve, in other words, the fronts of these townhouses would be looking into the back of the commercial if the square were located in the northeast or northwest comers. Supple asked Schnittjer if he feels this is the best location for this town square. Schnittjer said he did and for several reasons. He stated that this puts all the commercial on the two major trafficways, Taft and Court. Schnittjer said that a good share of the square has exposure to the proposed townhouses and the future lots across the street; he said that changing the orientation may cause the square to become something that is not as functional to the neighborhood, He said that putting the square in the northeast corner would make it totally alien to the future neighborhood. Kugler said the square is to be not only an open space in front of the commercial area and the townhouses but is seen as a neighborhood space. He said putting it up at the corner of the arterial streets would defeat that purpose. Deb Liddell. 4831 Southchase Court, said she moved to Windsor Ridge because it was, in the words of the developer, a planned community, something she really liked. She said she moved there to capture a sense of neighborhood without the noise of an urban center. Liddell said she heard about this project about ten days ago when she saw a sign posted on the property. She said Kugler sent her the relevant information and encouraged her to use the 1997 Comprehensive Plan to better understand the City's and Commission's view of this proposal. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20,1999 Page 5 Liddell said she became better informed about this project. She said she spoke with Watts eadier in the week, and he expressed a willingness to meet with the neighbors, but was unwilling to postpone his petition for the rezoning until after the neighbors and City staff could meet with him to discuss the long-term issues that this proposal raises, rather than going about this development in a way that appears to be one block at a time. Liddell discussed aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. She said one assumption with the Plan is that the Comprehensive Plan accepts that growth and development are going to occur and that it should be managed in such a way that the community vision is achieved. Liddell said the Comprehensive Plan also states that it was developed as part of a grass roots level, with citizens of Iowa City indicating what the vision for the future should be, and the process included input from neighborhood organizations, etc. She said the Comprehensive Plan also makes the statement that for the purposes of this Plan, a slow rate of growth is assumed, as in 100 people per year. Liddell said she did not know if that assumption would still hold, although the published plan is only two years old. Liddell said she had a problem with the notification process. She said staff may have followed the City policy in terms of notification of neighbors, but this is really something that needs to be looked at. Liddell said there may have been four households that saw the notice posted around the comer from her house at the end of Barrington. Liddell said the notice posted at the end of Court Street is one quarter of a mile beyond any residents who would be affected by that growth. She said there was no notice on Taft Avenue at all until late last week when she asked Kugler to post a sign. Liddell said there must be a better way to inform the public who are going to be affected by these kinds of changes in their community. Liddell said her second problem is with the involvement process. She said the Comprehensive Plan is a unique document that she was pleased to be a part of developing when she was Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission. Liddell said, however, that the plan for this neighborhood did not receive input because the neighbors were not there yet. She said it was quite an abstraction to think about what would happen in Windsor Ridge. Liddell asked the Commission to postpone this project. She said the Commission is missing some important information. Holecek stated that this item will be deferred and heard again on June 3, because it is the Commission's policy always to hold two headngs on a rezoning. Ehrhardt said Liddell has discussed long-term implications for this development and asked her to put those in writing for the Commission to read before its next meeting. Gibson said Liddell had discussed two procedural issues, but no substantive issues regarding this development. Liddell said she was concerned about the height of the buildings. She said she also felt that this project violates the Comprehensive Plan, specifically the density recommended. Liddell said the density recommended is for small multi-family lots, RS-8 zoning. She said it looks like the Comprehensive Plan recommends apartment buildings that would be no more than four to six units per building and no more than 24 units at an intersection. She said it talks about the intersections of collector and arterial streets, which sounds exactly like the Court/Huntington site. Liddell said this was an expectation laid down in the Comprehensive Plan that she feels is violated by what is being proposed here. Jeff Lorenger. 4718 Chandler Court, said he feels it is pertinent that the majority of residents weren't here in 1995. He said the real issue is the 1995 decision. Lorenger said that the rezoning decision was made then, and he was not certain if, even with notice, there was anything for the neighbors to do except argue the tweaks to what is already in place. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 6 Lorenger said relying on the fact that this zoning was technically public knowledge, because it was filed is really not adequate because the majority of people who bought houses in Windsor Ridge probably didn't have a clue that this was zoned this way. He said the developer should be required legally somehow to make sure that gets communicated to the people who are purchasing homes. Lorenger said he felt like he was hoodwinked a little in that sense. Chair said one of the purposes of the Commission doing the approval it did back when this project was presented was to provide the neighborhood with the knowledge of what is going to be there. He said this way of zoning is something that allows the buyers, in theory, to have a picture of what is going to be happening. Chair said this is different than having an existing neighborhood and having a piece of land purchased and rezoned for something different than what everyone thought it would be. He said he doesn't see how the Commission can require the developer to ensure that the buyers are aware of what is happening in his development, but the process of approving this concept and this type of relationship with that land is something that is considered as a whole for the purpose of preventing what the neighbors are saying happened. Chair said that where the responsibility lies to ensure the buyer knows what is happening on the rest of the 240 acres is a pdvate matter between the developer and the buyers. Chait said this is starting to sound like "not in my neighborhood." He said in 1995, the Commission did this with the knowledge of everything that was happening to the design and to provide this in such a way to meet the standard to protect and provide for the envisioned neighborhood. Lorenger agreed that this was a "catch-22" situation. He contended that if the 1995 planning were going on today, however, the outcome would be a lot different. Lorenger said the vast majority of people living here were not there in 1995. He said the process is for the public to have input; the public was not there to give input in 1995. Lorenger said it raises the bar pretty high for the average citizen to research the property and the zoning for the areas around it. Chair said this entire parcel was designed to be this way through a process that the Commission and the City came up with. He said this met all the criteda at the time. Chait said that this is not one block at a time, but is a concept that the Commission would ideally like to see, having a large area planned in advance. Lorenger agreed that fundamentally this has already been predetermined. He said he still feels that it is odd that this is done that way without any input from the residents who live there now. Lorenger said it seems that something like this was a lot easier to get zoned then than it would be now, and maybe that is another reason for doing it. Chait said that may be true, but as a Commission, there is a lot more control in approving the project in its entirety all at once instead of looking at it one piece at a time. Gibson said the Commission was confronted with 250 acres of undeveloped land and had to make decisions to guide development to provide information for the future Commission, the City Council and prospective buyers. He asked Lorenger what alternative he would suggest for this type of planning. Lorenger replied that the high ground is the Comprehensive Plan, which he has not yet read. He said from his perspective, he would not have the RS-8 or commercial zoning, but he did not know what goals the Commission was trying to accomplish with the overall plan. Lorenger said as a bottom line, he would have zoned all of the property single- family. Gibson said the Commission had to decide about this development in the face of having no neighbors, and so all the Commission could decide this by was decent planning. He said the whole purpose of it was to give the developer, the Commission, and the City Council some guidance about how development of this area would occur. Lorenger said since there were no neighbors, he would suggest that a condition be placed on the RS-8 zoning so that the neighbors would now have the input. Jeff Martin. 1015 Barrington Road, said he was a property owner in Windsor Ridge in 1995, having purchased a lot there in 1994. He said that no one, not the City nor the developer, Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 7 notified him that this process of approving the entire parcel was going on in 1995. Martin said that what happened in 1995 was more of an abstraction, where there were City staff, the Commission, and ultimately the City Council working on this, and on the other side is the developer. He said he understood that the Commission wanted to get the best use out of this land and have a sense of what the overall plan would be, but it seems that having decided that absent any opportunity for any input from the people who would be most affected by this development, this is too much of a cooked deal to say we have to be governed by what happened in 1995. Martin said the 1995 decision should be rethought to see if all of the assumptions made then and the plan adopted then are still valid. He said important questions have already been raised about the commercial area. Martin said he did not understand how the townhouse parcel could be approved without a clearer idea of what will happen with the commercial area, considering the access and other issues involved. He said he has heard of a wide range of commercial uses that could go into this neighborhood commercial zoning and affect what the town square is like. Martin said the issues addressed in 1995 were issues in theory, and now we are faced with the reality of developing this and the reality of people living here and how it will affect them. Bovbjerg asked what kinds of uses would be typical in the CN-1 zone. Kugler said the CN-1 zone permits barbershops, beauty parlors, laundromats, laundry and dry cleaning pickup and delivery services, shoe repair services, copy centers, drugstores, floral shops and variety stores, branch offices of financial institutions, photofinishing services, retail bakeries, postal substations, video rental stores, other retail or personal service uses limited to 2,000 square feet of floor area, child care centers, grocery stores up to 30,000 square feet, a neighborhood superstore, which is a grocery store that includes departments for good and services permitted in the CN-1 zone and is greater than 30,000 but no more than 40,000 square' feet, and offices limited to dental practices, medical practices, insurance, chiropractic, real estate, travel agencies, accounting practices, and law offices. He said there are limits on the square footage and the amount of the zone that those uses can cover, a limit of no more than 15% of the overall zone, and no office can be more than 2,400 square feet in size. Kugler said there are some things permitted by special exception, which requires a public process, and those include dwellings located above the first floor of commercial uses, drive-in facilities for banks, fillings stations provided that no part of the filling station is within 100 feet of a residential zone, offices larger than those permitted by right as stated above, religious institutions, restaurants with a limit on the size and occupancy, schools for specialized pdvate instruction, adult daycare, and any retail or personal service use greater than 2,000 square feet requires a special exception. He said although the list sounds long, it is is actually quite limited compared to other commercial zones, and the intent is to provide for services mainly for the surrounding neighborhood. Chait said that planning is to some extent a cooked deal, and that when this was done, the Commission wanted that zone in that location. He said we have no idea which of the permitted uses will occur in that zone, and that will be a factor of market conditions and things that cannot be predicted. Chair said this project was designed to occur in that zone; how it actually happens no one knows until the request is made. He said that by some standards, it is a cooked deal; that is the nature of planning versus the alternative. Dean Van Loh. 913 Barrington Road, said Gibson asked what could have been done to alleviate this issue. Van Loh said Watts could have alleviated it to start with if he would have shown this plan to all of the people purchasing lots in this area. Van Loh said that at every step, Watts has the same plan, but it doesn't show anything beyond what he is currently selling. Van Loh said that if buyers had seen the complete plan, they would not be at this meeting complaining; their input would have been made at the time of purchase. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20,1999 Page 8 Van Loh questioned what the traffic flow pattem would be. He said he was not opposed to this development, but was concerned about the traffic. Van Loh asked if Huntington Road and Court Street would both have to be completely developed before the permit to build could be issued. Kugler confirmed this, showing how far Barrington, Huntington, and Court streets would have to be completed to on the map. He said staffs recommendation would include a requirement to continue Huntington up to Court Street and continue Court Street from its current terminus to Huntington to provide access to this property as required by the 1995 CZA. Van Loh asked if there were a time frame and if it was the City's responsibility to develop Court Street. Kugler said the City built Court Street up to the west property line of Windsor Ridge, and the developers are responsible for the rest of it, so this would depend on the developer's time frame. He said there is no required time frame other than that it is required before this parcel can develop. David Dobbins. 742 Barrington, said he respects Gibson asking the question of what might have been done differently, but he felt a lot of the response to that lands on the shoulders of the developer. Dobbins said he had a question of content regarding why the issue of not completing Court Street from Huntington to Taft is not on the table at this time. He said it is evidence of this sort of block to block mentality. Dobbins asked when that portion of Court Street will be completed. Kugler said that would be required before either of the parcels to the north and south of Court Street there can be developed. Dobbins said the potential townhouse owners will have a huge traffic flow through their backyards in order to bring traffic from Taft to the south. Dobbins said he had concerns about a process issue. He said these properties and this neighborhood were represented by the developer as a single-family residential area. Dobbins said the developer did not have the courtesy or the wherewithal to engage the neighbors in how the neighborhood was going to evolve.' He said that may not have been anticipated in 1995 in precise form, but it is now and there is a process element here that the developer should follow. Dobbins said that if there is not a regulatory process to require that, that might be something for citizens to consider. Dobbins said he lives on Barrington Road at the bottom of a slope, and for the first six months of occupancy had a significant drainage problem through the back of his property. He said some engineers told him there should be culverting there. Dobbins said Watts' partner, John Moreland, was very helpful and tried to 'resolve this issue, but did it without looking at the problem in a substantive way. Dobbins said he has been in touch with the City compliance officer possibly a dozen times, and the last time he was informed that the City cannot solve this and he should get an attorney and pursue this with the developer. He said a berm was built at the top of the slope and the developer moved that berm a block at a time in order to sell that piece of property. Dobbins said this was done after he had sod planted and growing, so that when the berm was moved, the silt came right back down the hill again. Dobbins said he and Mike Van Dyke were working on an agreement for replacement of the sod, and John Moreland eventually did replace the sod that was damaged. Dobbins said as soon as he released the lien on his landscaper, Van Dyke refused to return his phone calls. Dobbins said he therefore had some concerns about the process or method this developer has been using, at least with him. He said he brought this up because he had a sense from some of his neighbors that they had the same sense of betrayal. Dobbins said it is impodant for the neighbors to be heard on this issue if the neighborhood is to evolve in the spirit and intent of the original plan. Dobbins said if the developer is going to extend Court Street to Huntington, he should take the street right on out to Taft and asked if there were some other restriction keeping Court Street from connecting to Taft Avenue. Kugler replied that it is anticipated that Court Street will connect to Taft. Dobbins said he would recommend that connection as part of this, especially given the small interval that would remain. Kugler said if the Commission agreed, it could recommend that Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 9 as a condition of approval. Dobbins said the Taft Avenue traffic will absolutely cut through behind the townhouses in order to get to Arlington or Barrington and construction traffic will potentially do the same unless it is prohibited. Lisa Dutchik. 829 Barrington, said she found out about this only two days before the meeting. She said her biggest concem is that the traffic from the townhouses and the commercial traffic could potentially be routed through the subdivision, as opposed to Court Street and Taft. Dutchik said the entrance to Taft that has been discussed is not really viable, as most people would prefer not to take a gravel road. Dutchik said her other concern is the idea that everything was set in stone in 1995 and that little change can be made to this plan in 1999. She asked if she could then say with a lot of comfort that the proposed school for the area will most likely be constructed. Dutchik said we should not limit ourselves too much to a plan. She said it is important to look at what is going on currently also. Larry Schnittjer said he wanted to address the issue of the neighbors being unaware of what the surrounding areas would look like. He said when he prepares the plans for Watts or other clients to use for promotional documents, he does not like to show more than is approved, because there can be problems with misrepresentation for showing something in the plans that doesn't happen and also problems for something happening that was not in the plans. Schnittjer said people will have undue expectations for what might happen, and if it doesn't happen, there is the same kind of adverse feeling. He said that when he prepares some of these maps for Watts and other clients, he only shows what has been approved. Gibson asked Schnittjer if he could make a recommendation that there be some sort of disclaimer or additional piece of information there to put people on notice that this other zoning exists, and they might want to go to the City to find out what the plans are. Gibson said he appreciates Schnittjer's position and feels it is probably a pretty sound one, because these things are subject to continuous change and significant change is a possibility. However, Gibson said he thinks it would be fair to tell buyers that there are plans that have been put in place by the community for this neighborhood that may be different from what they see in the small plot they are looking at. Schnittjer said he has had the preliminary plans for this area from Court Street south, of which there have been several, from day one. He said that all of those plans have been on file with the City. Schnittjer said he would rather not put those plans out there officially because the preliminary plat can be amended and often is. He said there should probably be a zoning map included with the promotional materials, but he does not yet know what will happen with the commercial areas. Schnittjer said they are all relatively small spaces that will not be immense traffic generators, and there is not much parking out there that will accommodate a great deal of traffic. He said he does not want to show too much until he is sure what will be there, and that has been his recommendation to his clients. Jeff Martin, said Gibson had commented that he was surprised that people had not investigated what they were buying. Martin said that in fall of 1994, he and Watts drove around the entire area, with Watts showing him the location of a potential school, the location of the parks, and how the trails would be situated. Martin said there was not one mention made of commercial development or townhouses. Gibson said he was not suggesting that the buyer should take all his information from the developer, but was saying that purchasers should come to the Civic Center to find out what approved plans are, to the extent they exist. He said the responsibility lies with the property Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 10 buyer to find out all that they can about that property, especially when the lot is surrounded by acres of pasture and open space. Gibson said he did not know if there was any way to protect people against that, but he feels it is the responsibility of the buyer to find out all he can from an official, unbiased source. Susan Foreman. 1901 Hamilton Court, said she wanted to respond to Gibson's comments that the buyers should use due diligence to research what they are purchasing. Foreman said that in 1978, she purchased a home on Dartmouth Street and at that time actually got plans for the surrounding area and looked them over thoroughly, finding the surrounding area to be zoned for all single-family residential. She said that area later became duplexes, multi-family, condominiums, and a commercial center. Foreman said the area was all single-family residential when she bought her house. She said her concern here is that when commercial zoning comes in, the area up north of Huntington Street may end up becoming more and more dense, as far as development. Gibson said pretty standard behavior in terms of this activity when there is not a clear pattern of development, there is no planning done, andthere is uncertainty about what is going to happen, is to zone the land in the most restrictive manner possible, which is RS-5, excluding the preservation zones. He said anyone who asks the questions will find out that there is no assurance that that will all be single-family zoning, because the plan for the City is practically surrounded by that kind of development, yet everyone knows that there will be commercial and others kinds of developments as well. Foreman said when she did look at the surrounding zoning, it was later changed. She said the neighbors were concerned about what they could do now to improve a situation that they did not think existed. Foreman said she has seen personally that a citizen can look into the zoning and feel comfortable with it, but then it changes and the dtizen has no cont,rol over it. Chait said Foreman had a good point, but there is a distinction between the area she discussed and the property owned by Watts. Chair said the area Foreman discussed was owned by many different developers and is a much larger piece of property, and no one had an opportunity to look at that as one tract, because it did not develop that way. Chait said the nature of what the Commission does is to do the best it can in planning the growth of this community. He said the Commission would not be in existence if things didn't change. Chait said the distinction is that in Windsor Ridge there was the possibility of knowing what the entire plan might be. Gordon Tdbbey. 4821 South Chase Court, said he recently bought a lot on South Chase Court. Regarding the issue of buyers knowing what they are getting into, he showed an ad from the paper for Windsor Ridge. Tribbey said there is nothing about the commercial zone in the ad, and a reasonable person reading this ad would think this would all be residential. He said the last thing he thought of for this area was commercial zoning. Del Gilmore. 3845 Taft Avenue S.E., said he and his neighbor own a five-acre tract that is not in the City. He said he and his neighbor have three accesses onto Taft from that five acres. Gilmore said that is a 50 mile per hour street, and it carries three to four times the traffic that it did five years ago. He said the Commission should consider the hazard and speed of the traffic on that road and also consider the hazards associated with adding another access so close to the three that are already there. Dean Van Loh, said he discovered that under Iowa law, if the owners of 20% or more of the area located within 200 feet of the exterior boundary of the rezoning zone change protest the rezoning, it may only occur with a 3/4 majority vote and asked if that were accurate. Holecek said that was for a City Council vote. She said the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council, which has the final vote. Holecek said that if the owners of Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 11 20% of the property wiithin 200 feet protest, then a supermajority vote of the City Council is required. Van Loh asked if the Commission were amenable to any changes to this rezoning so that he might be better prepared for the next meeting. Supple said Van Loh should be as prepared as possible. Van Loh asked what the options for the Commission's vote are. Kugler said the options are to approve, deny, approve with conditions or work with the developer to come up with a plan in a form the Commission may be willing to approve, if it does not approve this one. Bovbjerg added that the Commission is always open to change. Dave Dobbins, said the neighbors would have seen the plan read RS-8 had they researched it, and this request is to now rezone the property to OPDH-8. He asked what the distinction is between the zones, specifically the density, and exactly what process the neighbors have to press their will on this issue. Kugler said that if this application is approved, the base RS-8 zoning would not change. He said the RS-8 zoning would establish the density and would establish things like the setbacks at the exterior of the property and building height. Kugler said the planned development process allows for some flexibility in some of the standards of that zone. He said the RS-8 zone allows only single-family and duplex residences, while the planned development allows for development at the same density but in alternative housing styles, in this case, townhouses. Kugler said that building height is one of the things that can be varied through the planned development process, although he did not yet know what the proposed height for these buildings would be and is still waiting for that information. Chait said that if the developer chose to build RS-8, he would not have to come before the Commission. He said that the fact that the developer wants to do OPDH, which is a planned reconfiguration at the same density, opens the process up to the Commission's input. Chait said this gives the developer more flexibility but gives the Commission a lot more scrutiny into how he can do things. Gibson said the density does change to some extent between these two zones. He said there are limitations on lot sizes and what can be put on those lots under RS-8, with the duplex being the biggest thing that can go on a lot and a minimum lot size for a duplex of 4,350. Gibson said that the OPDH calls for the total square footage of the area covered by the zone to be converted to acres and multiplied by eight to get the new density allowance. Kugler confirmed this. Gibson said there is therefore a higher density permitted under the OPDH-8 than under the RS-8. Dobbins said then what the neighbors will see is an institutional-looking building rather than what might otherwise be perceived as multiple single-family large homes up on the ridge, under the RS-8 zoning. Dobbins asked if this Commission provided the only input for the neighbors. Supple said there is an opportunity to have a meeting with the developer, another Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on June 3, and City Council meetings as well. Gibson said he would like to see the substantive issues addressed, e.g. if the commercial area is in question, the question of the density of the housing being permitted, or the issue of the kind of housing to be permitted. Dobbins said he thought all of the above were at issue. Gibson said he would like to hear specifics about those issues then. Dobbins said he had an issue with changing the zoning from what might look like single-family dwellings to an apartment building or a townhouse row. He said he does not care for the introduction of that into what has been represented to the neighbors as single-family homes in a Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 12 deady residential neighborhood. Dobbins said he is quite willing to discuss the issues, especially the introduction of commercial zoning, and the neighbors obviously have a stake in the neighborhood and want to see it grow and prosper. He said, however, there is an element of surprise in this that bothers the neighbors. Kugler said Gibson was correct in that the planned development process does essentially allow a higher density on the property because the developer can transfer density from one portion of the site to another. He said that in this case, given that the RS-8 zone includes the open space, this is actually about 3.5 units per acre. Jeff Lorenger, asked if there were any way for the neighbors to revisit the RS-8 zoning, now that the process is open. Holecek responded that Iowa law allows anyone to file an application for a rezoning; however, given that the zoning has been in place, there would be a different weighing between the vested rights of the property owner and those of the neighbors. She said the application would be assessed on its merits. Holecek added that Watts, the owner of the property, has vested rights by virtue of the zoning being in place for a certain period of time or the fact that he could now get a building permit to develop this property at an RS-8 density. Holecek stated that if an application to rezone has been set for public hearing before the City Council, it puts a moratorium on development of the property. Deb Liddell, said Appendix A of the Comprehensive Plan is a land use map and shows a neighborhood center that appears to be at the intersection and north of Court Street and Taft. She said the map shows all RS-8 or lower density between Scott Park and Taft, with the exception of this one neighborhood center. Regarding substantive issues, Liddell said she would like to see significant sound and sight buffers dividing the increased density area from the Windsor Ridge neighborhood. She said she had specific concerns about the three-story view of these buildings from the back, and she had information from Kugler and Marcia Klingaman that the buildings would have a fairly steep roo~ine as well. Liddell said that makes three stodes from her view, plus a roofline. Liddell said she had specific concerns about the traffic. She also had concems about the commercial aspect of this plan and said it does not make sense to her. Liddell said that the overall plan shows that everything across Court Street on that corner is already zoned RM-12. She said that if that is already zoned as a higher density area. it makes sense to put the commercial across Court Street, not closer to a lower density housing area. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to defer REZ99-0007, an application submitted by Arlington L.C. for a preliminary Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH) plan of Windsor Ridge, Part 13, a 7.72 acre, 28-unit residential development, and a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) to Planned Development Overlay (OPDH-8), for property located at the northeast corner of Barrington Road and Huntington Drive to the June 3, 1999 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chait seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said she feels the extension of Huntington Drive up to Court Street is essential, as is the berming and planting behind the buildings. She said she had the same problem with these three-story buildings that she had with the previous Windsor Ridge application, and she feels the landscaping buffer is essential for the residents in that area. Bovbjerg said she was concerned about the mass and said she would prefer to see all fourplexes here or perhaps four Planning andZoning Commission Minutes May 20,1999 Page 13 and six-plexes. She suggested that perhaps the angle parking could angle the other way to keep the traffic flowing. Bovbjerg said she also had a problem with the secondary roads going from the town square and the townhouses with one going onto Taft and one going onto Court Street; she said these are really potential traffic problems. Bovbjerg said she thought there would be problems with traffic circulation and asked staff to look into this. Ehrhardt asked Schnittjer if he could do an elevation from the townhouses to the future houses on Sheffield, including the berm. Schnittjer said he would prepare this. Ehrhardt said the Commission has, in the last six months, improved notification of neighboring areas. She said it has been pointed out that there is a real void when areas are not yet developed, and the Neighborhood Association Council has done some work on this. Ehrhardt said that is a problem that has not been solved, and she appreciated neighbors pointing that out so that it can continue to be worked on. Chait acknowledged all of the speakers and said their concerns are important. He thanked them for participating in the process. Chait said that the areas immediately to the south of this rezoning are now in the process of being done so that in theory, the people who are going to buy there will know what is happening with the townhouses in this RS-8 area just as the people buying the townhouses will know that there is commercial right across the courtyard. He said that does not invalidate the neighbors concerns, however. Chait said it is easy to look at the newspaper ads and say that Watts has some responsibility to tell the buyers what is happening on other land that he owns that he is not showing. Chair said for whatever reason, that is his choice. He said if the rezoning under discussion were not part of Windsor Ridge but was another development, that argument would not really be available. Chait said that given that the argument is available and this is a 240 acre tract that the Commission shares responsibility for allowing to be, there might be an opportunity to look at what kind of methodology could be encouraged, similar to having a neighborhood meeting with the developer, in terms of presenting to buyers of the first acre what is going to happen on the 240~ acre. He said perhaps the City could come up with something, based on the feedback and neighbors' concerns, that would address that way of doing development, since one person does control the whole tract. Supple thanked citizens for their participation and said she hoped they would come back and participate again on June 3. She encouraged citizens between now and that time to organize and focus. Supple recommended that the neighbors have a meeting with Watts if he is available, in order to come to an understanding of what is happening here, so that the next meeting can focus on the issues of how this land should be developed. Kugler said the staff report did not contain a lot of information about how this whole plan fits within the Comprehensive Plan. He asked if the Commission would need more explanation of that, as there are a lot of provisions and policies that staff could point out showing how this plan does comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Supple said she thought it would be appropriate for staff to respond to concems from any member of the public who feels this does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Chait said the Commission approved the rezoning and the concept plan and asked if the Commission could change course at this point. Kugler replied that the 1995 CZA requires that there be a planned development here that includes the town square open space. Holecek said that any amendment to that CZA would be tantamount to a rezoning, and it cannot be done unilaterally. She also said it would go through the same process as if it were a rezoning. Gibson Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20,1999 Page 14 asked if the requirement in the CZA assumes the approval of an OPDH plan. Holecek said it does not. Gibson asked if the RS-8 zoning could stand and not be in opposition to the CZA. Holecek responded that it would be something to be contended about. Ehrhardt asked if the Commission could approve a different planned development than this one. Holecek confirmed this. Kugler said he would like to check the agreement to see how the concept plan was referenced. Holecek said it would be accurate to say that even if it anticipates a planned development plan being submitted, by virtue of the nature of zoning, it never presupposes approval. Gibson asked if the town square was included in the density allowance associated with this property. Kugler confirmed this. Gibson said that the developer would be contributing this land to this purpose and suggests it be turned over to community responsibility for maintenance after it is developed and after things have built up around it. Kugler said that, including the park land and the square in the calculation, the density of the townhouse area would be 3.5 to 4 units per acre. He said that excluding the square and using only the property the townhouses are on, the density would be just over seven units per acre, still under the RS-8 density allowance. The motion to defer carried on a vote of 7-0. CODE AMENDMFNT ITEMS: Public discussion of amendments to the CN-1 zone to allow drive-through pharmacies by special exception and to limit the Iqumber of drive-through lanes permitted for a financial institution. Yapp said staff recommends approval of allowing drive-through pharmacies in the Neighborhood Commercial Zone subject to certain location and design criteria including: 1) maximizing their separation from pedestrian and vehicular circulation, 2) insuring that there continues to be safe pedestrian and vehicular access to the site, 3) minimizing or limiting areas of paving, including the areas devoted to the stacking spaces, 4) encouraging areas devoted to the stacking spaces, where the vehicles line up, to be at a side or rear access drive to the store, and 5) each drive-through facility would be allowed by special exception only, under review by the Board of Adjustment. He stated that the Board of Adjustment would look at how the location and design conform to these cdteda. Yapp said staff is also recommending that the number of drive~through lanes for a financial institution be limited to three and be subject to the same location and design criteria. Bovbjerg asked if there were any advantage to using Mark Brauer's proposed wording over staff's wording. Yapp said that although the substance is essentially the same, the format forwarded by Mr. Brauer, who works for the Hy-Vee Engineering Depadment, puts the conditions into bulleted items, which staff feels come across as being more like criteria rather than broad guidelines. He said most Board of Adjustment language for special exceptions is written more as'broad guidelines and less like. strict criteria, because the applications the Board of Adjustment reviews are done on a case by case basis and can be very different from case to case. Yapp said staff prefers to have the language be more general. Public discussion: David Bailie. 5820 Westown Parkway, West Des Moines, said he represents Hy-Vee's corporate office. He said he shares the same beliefs as staff regarding this in that a drive-up window for a pharmacy is really a convenience and a service to those in the neighborhood and are a necessity for those who are sick and the elderly. Bailie said this is not something that increases traffic in the neighborhood and is really just a service. He stated that safeguards are in place Planning and Zoni.ng Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 15 through the Board of Adjustment revieW, which helps guarantee the character of the CN-1 zoning, and he asked that the Commission approve these amendments. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve amendments to the CN-1 zone to allow drive- through pharmacies by special exception and to limit the number of drive-through lanes permitted for a financial institution, as written in staff's April 30, 1999 memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chait seconded the motion. Ehrhardt said she would vote yes on the drive-throughs for pharmacies, but would likely not go along with proposals for other drive-through facilities in the CN-1 zone. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Public discussion of amendments to the requirements for freestanding signs. Miklo said staff recommends approval of the amendments, which would basically allow one additional freestanding sign for lots or tracts that have a frontage of 300 feet, and if that tract has multiple frontages, more than one street, then up to four signs would be permitted. Ehrhardt asked if this would allow the Pepperwood Place/Econofoods tract to have up to four freestanding signs. Miklo confirmed this. Ehrhardt asked if another business owned by one person with more than 300 feet of frontage and more than two frontages could also have four freestanding signs. Miklo said that if it were a corner lot and there was more than 300 feet of frontage, that would be accurate. Ehrhardt said there is no distinction here between the Pepperwood Place/Econofoods tract and the Riverside Drive tract. Miklo said for the part of Riverside Drive with a shared common driveway, the entire development up to and including Kentucky Fded Chicken, could have four freestanding signs total. Ehrhardt said in some cases, this would be allowing more signs where they were unneeded. Miklo said 300 feet is a fairly large frontage, so that this would not be a common occurrence. Bovbjerg said the numerical analysis has shown that there would really not be much of an increase in the numbers of signs, because such tracts are already allowed two freestanding signs. Miklo agreed because in all of these situations the tract would have been allowed to have two signs, and if it is not a comer lot, the tract would now be allowed to have three signs, while a comer lot with more than 300 feet of frontage could have four signs. He said that one of the reasons the amendment is tied to the 150 foot separation is that in cases where there are tracts that are more than one block long, it may be reasonable to distribute the signs. Ehrhardt asked if the Riverside Drive frontage was long enough to allow four signs. Miklo said the frontage there is 840 feet from Benton Street to Highway 6 on Riverside Drive. Supple asked about the Wardway Plaza area. Miklo said he assumed that frontage was over 300 feet and with two frontages, the tract may be able to have three or four signs. Public discussion: Robed Eckert, said he is the director of construction for Tuffy Associates Corporation in Toledo, Ohio. He said his facility is located on Riverside Drive. Eckert said his organization is not seeking an advantage, but is seeking a level playing field with its competitors. He said that not having a pole sign would be an extreme competitive disadvantage for the new franchisee at that location and he would appreciate the Commission's support of these amendments. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 16 Gerry Ambrose, said he is the developer hero. He said the City has recognized that there is a problem with this, in particular on Riverside Drive. He said there are multiple businesses there, and because they sharo a common access, he has been denied the opportunity to have a pole sign. 'Ambrose said the business needs to have a pole sign to survive and be on an equal playing field with its competitors. He said that 150 feet apart is a long way, half the distance of a football field. Ambrose said this is not an unreasonable request, and this is the right thing to do. Ehrhardt asked if the amendments would permit enough signs for these businesses. Ambrose responded that Tuffy's and O'Reilly's would have to share a sign and Tobacco Outlet would share a sign with whatever goes into the former Fin and Feather site, He said the businesses would not be in this position if not for the fact that they were sharing driveways, which limits the number of accesses to Riverside Drive. Ambrose said the lots have been penalized for this limited access to Riverside Drive, which is a positive thing for traffic control. Harry Wolf, said he works for Southgate Development, the developer of the Pepperwood area. He said it was Southgate's request that brought this problem to the City's attention. Wolf said the size of freestanding signage in Iowa City, although adequate, is not large in relative terms, compared to freestanding signs in other pads of the country. He said that a freestanding sign in Iowa City must be between 10 and 25 feet in height and is restricted to a square footage per sign face. Wolf said that amount is adequate, but tends to be modest compared to other areas. Wolf said that in trying to remedy this problem, staff looked at maintaining the size of the signs, separation of signs, frontage, and the question of multiple frontages, things that help to control sign pollution. He said these amendments are a large step forward compared to the current situation and urged the Commission to vote in favor of this. Mike Harding, said he is the franchisee at the new Tuffy's location. He said he was starting this new business in Iowa City and asked for a fair judgment on the sign issue for competitive reasons. Harding said he wants to be able to market his new business to its full potential. Scott Boucher. 5202 18th Avenue S.W., said he works for Nesco Signs. He said he has a lot of expertise in this area and commends Ambrose for the economic development taking place on Riverside Ddve. Boucher said that part of economic development for the business coming in is allowing signage for the incoming business. He said he has seen businesses fail fast because they don't have the adequate amount of visibility for passersby. Boucher said it is an advantage to a business to be able to display its business out to the roadside. Boucher said that three or four signs on a shared property with 800+ lineal feet with two lot frontages should be more than sufficient and generous in itself to market the businesses through there. He said that as it is, two of the businesses will have to share their pole sign. Boucher said there will be four signs on this property. Public discussion closed. MOTION: Schintler moved to approve amendments to the requirements for freestanding signs as written in staff's April 29, 1999 memorandum to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE MAY 6. 1999 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes May 20, 1999 Page 17 MOTION: Gibson moved to approve the minutes of the May 6, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, as written. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. PI ANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION INFORMATION: Miklo asked Commission members if they would like to reschedule the May 31 informal meeting. He said he expected the June 3 meeting agenda to be fairly heavy. The consensus was to cancel the May 31 meeting, to start the June 3 meeting at 7:30 as usual, and to defer any item the Commission may feel is not adequately addressed. Ehrhardt said she had notes on the APA meeting she at'tended in Seattle, and she planned to submit a report to the rest of the Commission in written form. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Dean Shannon, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte ppdadm/min/p&zS-20-99.doc IOWA CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THURSDAY, MAY20, 1999- 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS SIGN IN SHEET Name 7. ~ bet ~,X5 11. 12. 13. 14. [4¢d242'4 FA/o Address 17. 18. 19. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - May 25, 1999 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 6:33 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, M. Raymond and John Watson. Staff present: Interim Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. CONSENT CALENDAR Chair acknowledged Margaret Raymond's last meeting with the Board and thanks were extended on behalf of the Board, the City and its citizens. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by M. Raymond to adopt the consent calendar, as amended, to include (e) Memo to John Watson regarding Grass Roots/Gun Control. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by M. Raymond to amend the agenda to move Item 4 and Item 5 before Item 3. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL None COMPLAINT FORMS PROPOSED AMENDMENT No response has been received from the City Attorney regarding the information sheet to the two complaint forms. Chair Cohen reiterated her concern about the length of the information sheet. P. Farrant suggested a shortened version could be used, with other information expanded elsewhere (i.e., the PCRB brochure). Correspondence dated May 11, 1999 to C. Pugh from the City Attorney was discussed. After questions from the Board, legal counsel noted that the ordinance states "...the Board may comment generally as to whether the Board believes discipline is appropriate without commenting on the extent or form of discipline." The Chief's report shall not comment at all on discipline. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by P. Hoffey to recommend approval of the amendment to Section 8-8-7 B(3) of the ordinance. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Chair directed legal counsel to communicate the Board's approval to the City Attorney. Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Hoffey to amend the agenda to move item 6 before Item 3. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. ANNUAL REPORT PLANNING P. Farrant distributed the First Draft, May 22 of the annual report, to be reviewed and commented on in greater detail at the next Board meeting. Regarding the investigative log provided by the Chief to the Board, Chair noted that only PCRB complaints appear on this log and not the internal complaints. As it is the Board's understanding that a consensus of the City Council wanted the Board to have full information on all written complaints within the Police Department to allow the Board to track this information, C. Pugh was directed to draft a letter to the City Attorney advising her of the Board's concern; the draft will be discussed at the next Board meeting. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Hoffey to adjourn into executive session based on Section 21.5(1)(i) of the Code of Iowa to evaluate the professional competency of an individual whose appointment, hiring, performance or discharge is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that individual's reputation and that individual requests a closed session. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 6:57 p.m, Regular meeting resumed at 8:25 p.m. POLICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEWS The subcommittee had a follow-up meeting with the Chief on May 13 regarding concerns the Board has with investigative interviews. The subcommittee indicated to the Chief that the Board felt the approach to police officers and sympathetic witnesses was a more direct interview type approach, whereas the interview approach to complainants and witnesses sympathetic to the complainants tended to be more adversarial and interrogative in nature. Although the Chief wasn't sure that he agreed with the Board's perception, he stated he would continue to look at the matter and would probably begin to reserve many of the interviews for higher- ranking officers. He also stated he would bring this matter up at the next staff meeting with supervisory personnel. The Chief was uncertain whether all investigative interviews are transcribed. PRIORITY SETTING Goal Priority setting goals will be finalized at the June 8 meeting. MEETING SCHEDULE · Regular Meeting June 8, 1999, 7:00 P.M, · Special Meeting June 22, 1999, 7:00 P,M. · Regular Meeting July 13, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting July 20, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting July 27, 1999, 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None BOARD INFORMATION When a new Board member is named, the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board will meet with him/her for an orientation prior to attending his/her first meeting. Bauer was directed to prepare a packet for the new Board member, to include all essential documents. Chair advised that a new board member may have any public information that they would like, however past confidential information is not available unless for some reason the Board is using it in a current process. Chair advised that she and Watson met with staff to discuss staff roles. Agreement was made that written 4 STAFF INFORMATION EXECUTIVE SESSION procedures and practices will be developed, to include duties and responsibilities. J. Watson - Received a call from a potential board applicant regarding time commitment. Following Board discussion regarding Nancy Overstreet's memo on a gun buy-back program, Watson stated he would contact her and suggest that it be referred to the City Council or to the Police Department. Watson also advised of a voice mail message from Chief Winkelhake on May 13 in reference to the Board's discussion of the Broadway Neighborhood Community Forum. Watson returned the call. Discussion followed. S. Bauer - 1. The remainder of M. Raymond's term is being advertised for an additional 30 days, with appointment by City Council on June 29. 2. Council will begin advertising Watson's board seat on June 15, with appointment on July 27, effective September 1. 3. Peter Matthes delivered requested documents about the study on relations between UI students and ICPD. (Documents will be included in the next meeting packet) A presentation by Mr. Matthes will occur next semester. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5 (1)(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 bedy'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, and 22.7(5} police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 9:10 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 9:25. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by M. Raymond to assign the level of review of 8-8-7 B. 1 (d)(e) tO PCRB Complaint #99-02. Motion carried, all members present. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by M. Raymond and seconded by P. Hoffey. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 9:26 P.M. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - June 8, 1999 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, and John Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. Also in attendance was Capt. T. Widmer from the ICPD. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adopt the consent calendar, as amended, to include (d) copy of a Memo to Chief Winkelhake from the City Manager. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL COMPLAINT FORMS PCRB requests a 60-day extension of time to August 20, 1999, to file its Public Report on PCRB #99-02 because | 1) the Board is awaiting additional investigative information from the Police Department, and (2) to accommodate summer scheduling of Board members. Correspondence from the City Attorney was received by legal counsel which shows further changes the City Attorney would like to see made to the information sheet to be attached to the PCRB complaint form and the ICPD complaint form. Farrant suggested that the title be changed to "Filing a Complaint About an Iowa City Police Officer." The information sheet will be stapled to the PCRB complaint form and the ICPD complaint form. Following further discussion, Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to approve the final draft of the attachment to the complaint forms, as amended. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. Legal counsel was directed to communicate this action to the City Attorney. Staff was directed to have the information sheets copied and attached to both the complaint forms. 2b(6) PRIORITY SETTING GOALS After lengthy discussion, Board members established tentative goals for fiscal year 2000, to include: Hold forums (at least two a year) · Continue to streamline board procedures · Continue to look at national boards or associations · Establish a baseline of information to analyze different types of reports New Board member briefings Visit Police Academy at Camp Dodge · Provide information aimed at improving officers understanding of the board's function and educating the public about the PCRB · Address the perception of discriminatory enforcement · Community relations · Review of general police policies, procedures and practices, to include the use of force The goals will be discussed further at the next Board meeting. Cohen recommended that at each regular board meeting, one of these issues be discussed. ANNUAL REPORT PLANNING The draft of the annual report was discussed. Inclusions and deletions were noted. J. Watson was directed to draft summaries of "Comments" under Complaint Resolutions. P. Farrant was directed to draft a section on Accomplishments. S. Bauer will provide a second draft at the next meeting. As part of the Board's own data collection, S. Bauer was directed to combine the complaint histories from last year with those of this year, with officer identification numbers, and provide it to the Board. (This will not be part of the annual report.) The Board directed staff to send a letter to the Chief requesting that he provide to the Board a log identifying all lAIR written complaints and all PCRB written complaints. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5 (1)(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, and 22.7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 8:55 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 9:10 P.M. Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Hoffey directing staff to send a letter to the Chief requesting that the Board receive transcripts of all interviews that are conducted during an investigation of a PCRB complaint at the time he sends his Report on the complaint. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by P. Hoffey requesting a 60-day extension from the City Council on PCRB Complaint #99-02 because the Board is awaiting additional investigative information from the Police Department, and to accommodate summer scheduling of Board members. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. POLICE PPP This agenda item was requested by the Chair. Legal Counsel advised that discussions regarding personal or professional issues must be discussed in open session. With respect to a discussion relating to someone's reputation, that particular statute requires that the person's whose reputation is at issue request that the session be closed (it cannot include a board member). Chair suggested an agenda category of "New Business" be added to discuss issues that are not on the agenda, but are of more substance than "Board Information." Clarification was made that action cannot be taken under this category, but agenda items may be identified for future meetings. MEETING SCHEDULE · Special Meeting June 22, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Regular Meeting July 13, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting July 27, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Regular Meeting August 10, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Special Meeting August 24, 1999, 7:00 P.M. P. Hoffey advised he will be absent all of July. J. Watson reiterated his absence on June 22 and July 13 The "Complaint Deadlines" sheet will continue to be provided by staff in meeting packets. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Chair welcomed the representative from the ICPD, Captain Widmer. BOARD INFORMATION P. Farrant - Provided ACLU Report on Racial Profiling to be distributed in the next meeting packet. STAFF INFORMATION S. Bauer - as such. Regular meeting can be cancelled if posted ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Watson. Motion carried, 4/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 9:12 P.M. MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE FRIDAY, APRIL 16,1999--11:00 AM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Deborah Galbraith, Kevin Hanick, Gary Nagle, Nancy Purington, Terry Trueblood, Lesley Wright Rick Fosse Karin Franklin Betty Monroe, Adam Lowenstein (Gazette) Chairperson Hanick called the meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Therewas none. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 1. 1999 MEETING: Purington indicated that the spelling of Schinnick on page 2 should be Schinnik. She also commented that the sculpture pads should be measured since they did not appear to be 5' by 5' as stated in the calls. Purington moved and Wright seconded a motion to approve the minutes of April 1 as corrected. The motion passed 6-0. DISCUSSION OF THE SCULPTURE PROJECT: Wright reported on the deliberations of the selection panel for a sculpture for the pedestrian mall. Their decision focused on the Iowa call. Wright indicated that the panel received no submittals which were appropriate for the site. Discussion followed of the two submittals received from the national call. After reviewing the slides, Galbraith moved and Wright seconded a motion to close the national call, finding neither of the submittals appropriate for the downtown site. The motion cited the inadequate number of entries and the inadequacies of the submittals based on size and cost. The motion carried 6-0. Since the preliminary review of the Committee found no submittals to pass on to a selection panel, it was decided that the process for these sculptures would terminate at this point. Purington and Wright volunteered to provide options at the next Committee meeting for how the Committee should proceed in acquiring sculptures for the pedestrian mall. OTHER BUSINESS: Franklin reported that the water jets in "Weatherdance" would include lights. At the Committee's request and upon further research, it became feasible to include lights in the project. The use of red lights should ensure the visibility of the lights even with the new lighting in the downtown. The cost of the lights will be approximately $8,000, including installation and wiring. Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes April 16,1999 Page 2 Franklin stated that the issue of whether the meetings of the selection panel should be open meetings had been raised by the Cedar Rapids Gazette. She indicated that the City Attorney's opinion was that given the nature of the selection panel, the panel need not comply with the Iowa Open Meetings Law. Discussion followed of the desire to keep the process open, while allowing the selection panel to deliberate freely. Since the panel's charge is to judge someone's work, an analogy was made to evaluating personnel or selecting a consultant. Hanick proposed a trial process in which the slides of entrants would be presented in a public meeting so that the public could see what was submitted; the deliberations of the panel, however, would be closed. It was pointed out that there are numerous points in the entire art selection process now that involve the general public and provide for public comment. The Committee agreed to try this new process before amending the acquisition procedures. Wright suggested that the selection panel meeting be more structured with an introduction on the members, a presentation of the call, a presentation of the function and status of the panel, a description of the Iowa City Public Art Program, and how the process of selection proceeds after the panel is finished. The next meeting was set for May 6. The meeting adjourned at 12:00 p.m. Minutes submitted by Karin Franklin ppddi~min/art4-16-99,doc MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE Thursday, May 6, 1999, 3:30 p.m. Civic Center Council Chambers MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Rick Fosse, Deborah Galbraith, Kevin Hanick, Nancy Purington. Terry Trueblood Gary Nagle, Lesley Wright Karin Franklin, Joyce Carroll CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Hanick called the meeting to order at 3:45 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE APRIL 16, 1999 MEETING: Purington moved and Hanick seconded a motion to defer action on the April 16th minutes until the next meeting. The motion passed 5-0. DISCUSSION OF SCULPTURE PROJECT: Purington distributed "Concepts for Call #2: Sculpture in City Plaza", by Wright and herself. Purington began the discussion. Review' of the outline was as follows: TIMELINE. Purington suggested the timeline stated would be more reasonable than previous expectations the committee has placed on themselves. Publishing the call August 1, 1999 would allow time to create a master mailing list. Responses would be due December 15. Review and selection would be completed by March 1, 2000. Installation date may vary depending on whether pieces were purchased or commissioned. Suggested installation dates might be between Spring 2000 and Spring 2001. TERMS. It was suggested slides be reviewed in terms of commissioning works as well as purchasing completed pieces. Purington defined commissioning as reviewing several examples of an artist's work, then requesting a site-specific proposal. Franklin stated that the call for slides will be done with the intention of purchase o_gcommission. Purington discussed the need tbr the budget to be stated clearly in the call. Franklin commented that within the last call. the budget was confusing to some of the artists. PROJECT DIRECTIONS "Concepts for Call #2" calls ti>r a master plan incorporating all five-sculpture pads for City Plaza into a master plan or concept. Purington suggested the group may wish to explore a theme or concept. Franklin reminded Nancy of a previous committee decision regarding permanent installations and rotating temporary sculptures. The committee had previously decided to place permanent sculpture on the two pads at Blackhawk Mini-park and that the remaining three would maintain rotating sculptures. Purington reviewed Project Goals and suggested the group select goals according to what has already been established with WeatherDance. Purington reviewed some ways to develop the concepts; Real vs. imaginary Kinetic/interactive Works representing, or variations on natural form Figurative works Franklin suggested that the artists would appreciate more direction in regard to what the committee is looking for. Also, that the selection panel should be well educated on the call before viewing slides. Purington shared a list created a few years ago of what a downtown development committee would like to see in downtown Iowa City. MATERIALS Purington suggested the group could list materials that would be harmonious with those selected for the downtown renovations. The group may also choose to list materials they are not interested in. SCOPE A decision needs to be made regarding whether the national call should give preference to Iowa artists or not. Special attention should be given to building a list of artists. Purington and Wright could help provide names, and Purington encouraged others to contribute as well. Purington mentioned that many organizations use the same call letterhead or call style for the purpose of familiarity to artists. Hanick asked how many calls went out; how large the current list is, and how much does the group want to increase the list by? Franklin reported that 1,200 calls were sent for the Iowa call. The database is growing and improved by designation of artist's area of work. The national call went to Arts Councils; state and regional. Lead time was not sufficient. The goal is to maintain a thnctional and efficient database. Trueblood asked if this database is something someone else already has. Franklin responded that existing lists may be available but tend to be outdated. Galbraith shared a "Public Art Review" percent tbr art slide registry deadline. Franklin said this could be done when the group is not in the process of a call. Purington encouraged all members to begin looking at sculpture in periodicals and list artists' names. Franklin shared "Architectural Arts and Sculpture" publications of The Guild. Franklin suggested that future calls to individual artists need to be targeted by type of work. Purington suggested that the group will be more successful if they take more control. Franklin reported on artists' comments about size. Again, she reinforced that the call needs to be more descriptive. Purington shared brochures from "Sculpture on 2nd'' in Cedar Rapids. A note was made that many of the pieces for sale ranged from $5-$10,000. Hanick moved the discussion to the topic of theme, and permanent vs. rotating, temporary sculpture. Hanick felt there was no problem changing the committee's original plan as long as it will mean securing higher quality sculpture and as long as the group does not feel compromised in choices. It would, however, take away some opportunities in the future by installing permanent sculptures only. He suggested expanding the budget, purchasing fewer pieces that are permanent and spreading the acquisition time out. Purington agreed; saying if the committee wants to send out national calls they need the money to purchase higher quality work. Hanick and Purington suggested a goal of three permanent sculptures totaling $120,000. Then a rotating program for the other two pads may be an option if the group feels a need to fill the pads right away. The group reviewed the maps of the Downtown Streetscape and the location of the pads. Franklin suggested the committee's next step is to decide on the amount of money they are willing to spend. Trueblood referred to an earlier comment by Franklin regarding sculpture on 2"d, which shows no piece costing more than $6,000. Galbraith suggested contacting other cities to find out how' much they spend on certain sculptures. Franklin mentioned site and size will affect costs. Purington recommended Galbraith should research the artists and works she has seen and been impressed with in other cities. Franklin reminded the committee that it needs only to refine its call and they will be successful. She suggested defining precisely what the group has in mind for just one of the pads. Then review what is available and what the cost of those is to see if they are within the committee~s reach financially. Hanick and Purington discussed the positive theme of the WeatherDance piece. Purington stated that the WeatherDance feature is popular with the public. Purington reviewed the goals of WeatherDance. Franklin suggested that the committee should plan on making decisions regarding the specific call at their next meeting. COMMITTEE TIME/OTHER BUSINESS Franklin reported that the artist of "Iowa City Bops" called to indicate the materials used in the sculpture were glass fiber reinforced concrete, a very durable material. A call was received regarding an artist interested in displaying stained glass work in the trees during the Winter in College Green Park. A proposal may follow. Franklin mentioned the Ames Public Arts Council Conference will be held at Iowa State University on Friday and Saturday, June 18 and 19. She will be presenting twice at this conference. Meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m. Minutes submitted by Joyce Carroll