Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-28 Bd Comm minutesANIMAL CONTROL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES - AUGUST 26, 1999 MINUTES ATTENDING: Ursula Delworth, Shawn Lockhart, Diana Lundell, Marty Shafer (Chair) ABSENT: - STAFF: Susan Cote, Misha Goodman-Herbst, Terry Koehn VISITOR: Jonelle Hankner, DVM Minutes of the June 24, 1999 meeting were approved as corrected (spelling of names). OLD BUSINESS 1. SHELTER STATISTICS. These are not yet available. New computer software is needed. 2. OFF-SITE ADOPTIONS. A project, "Second Saturday", is now in operation at Eastdale Plaza. It is held on the second Saturday of each month, 11:00am-1:00pm. Four cats and one dog, plus much informational material and door prizes, were available. It is located next to the motor vehicle office, and response for the first event (August) was good. The site is operated by 12 volunteers (serving in shifts) recruited by Delworth and trained by Goodman-Herbst. 3. CONTRACT FOR VET SERVICES. After much discussion, it was agreed that Goodman-Herbst would send a letter to all Johnson County vets to gauge interest, and report back at the October meeting. 4. GOALS FOR 2000. Goodman-Herbst presented these in writing. Lundell moved and Lockhart seconded to approve. Passed unanimously. 5. UPDATE ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Goodman-Herbst reported on two recent Iowa City Council actions. Animals picked up with no means of identification will be microchipped. An invisible fence will not be considered proper containment of animals and they may be impounded. NEW BUSINESS 1. APPOINTMENT OF NEW BOARD MEMBER. Delworth moved and Lundell seconded to appoint Jonelle Hankner, DVM, as Member-at-Large of the Board. Passed unanimously. Goodman-Herbst will notify the City of Iowa City. Her three year term will expire in August, 20002. 2. COMPUTER SOFTWARE. Goodman-Herbst explained the necessity of purchasing appropriate software for shelter statistics. There was strong Board support. The Board decided to send a letter to Iowa City Manager Arkins. Delworth will draft a letter and forward to Shafer. 3.CORALVILLE REPORT. All is progressing well. Goodman-Herbst expressed appreciation for Cote's skill and cooperation with Shelter staff. 4.CITIZEN COMMENTS. None Next Meeting: Thursday, October 21, 1999 6:30pm - Transit Building AGENDA OLD BUSINESS 1. Update on computer software and shelter statistics. 2. Contract for vet services. 3.Update on other 2000 plans. NEW BUSINESS 1. Planned transition of Board members. 2. Report on Special Accounts (requested six-month update). 3. Coralville report 4. Citizen comments. MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION THURSDAY AUGUST !9, 1999 - 5:45 P.M. IOWA CITY TRANSIT FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Foster, Rick Mascari, Howard Heran, Tom Bender STAFF PRESENT: Andy Matthews, Ron O'Neil CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mascari called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the July 15, 1999, Commission meeting were approved as submitted. AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENDITURES: Foster made a motion to approve the bills. Bender seconded the motion and the bills were approved 4 - 0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: No items were discussed. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: ACSG Project: Pat Bridger, G-reg Bridger and Dave Kisser presented a power-point presentation, summarizing the land acquisition project. All the tenants have been relocated and most of the parcels have been purchased. Greg Bridger said the relocation part of the project was typical to most of the relocation programs he has done. He said because of the cost of housing in Iowa City, ACSG had a difficult time relocatmg many of the residents. Many of the mobile units in the program did not meet FAA standards for decent, safe and sanitary housing but the program requires the tenants be relocated into decent, safe and sanitary housing. This was an upgrade in housing for all the tenants. Many of the tenants were able to apply the value of their relocation package and move from a mobile home to a house. In all cases, the tenants' new homes were at least equal W, or better than their old dwelling. There were 54 mobile units owners, plus an additional 5 tenants to relocate. G. Bridger said there are three properties remaining to be negotiated. He thought these would be completed in the next 50 days. He said one of the most important things to do during negotiations is to answer all the property owner's questions and explore any options. He said he thinks most of this work has been done and there is nothing left to do but negotiate the final offers. Heran asked about the Iowa City Mobile Home Park and the Dyer property. Dave Kisser said the Dyer house was sold and will be moved. The motel will be demolished. That contract will be let in the next few days. b$ Ce O'Neil suggested a presentation be made to the Council when a few of the minor remaining details are completed. Pat Bridget said he would put together a presentation for the Council. Airport Terminal Building: 0'Neil said all the major demolition was completed and the contractor was starting to install the new walls. The new windows are being installed. Mascari said Anderson had mentioned that he was concerned that the cracks in the floor would show through the carpetbag. O'Neil said it would be up to the contractor and the carpeting subcontractor to take care of the cracks. Mascari said he was under the impression from last month 's meeting that FILM was going to try to move the water fountain so that the phone booths could go back in their original location. Foster said he thought the Commission was going to try to relocate one of the booths. Foster said it would be easier to relocate the phone booth than the water fountain. Mascari suggested having HLM look at it. O'Nefl asked the Commission what theft preference was. The consensus was to install one phone booth, someplace. Heran asked about the costs associated with relocatmg the ASOS computer. O'Neil said from what he was told, HLM allowed the contractor to choose between two different air handling units to be placed in the northwest room. Only the smaller of the units would fit in the space provided. The subcontractor chose the larger unit. The ASOS computer had to be moved. This involved moving the electrical outlet, two antennas and four phone lines. O'Neil said he thought this was HLM's mistake and the Commission should not use the contingency fund to pay for moving the computer. Heran suggested some type of open house when the Terminal Building is completed. The open house could showcase the Terminal and new FBO hangar. Master Plan ALP Update grant: O'Neil said the Scope of Services should be completed in order to hire a consultant to begin the project. He said the IDOT has a general outline and he had compiled a list of specific items to be included in the update. Because this is an IDOT grant as compared to a FAA grant, the Commission is not required to advertise for consultants for the project. The IDOT publishes a list of certified consultants and the Commission can select from the list. O'Nefl said the Commission could advertise or select however many consultants they wanted to send their Scope of Services to. They could then interview or select a consultant based on the written proposal. Whatever schedule the Commission chooses, O'Neil suggested they get someone on board as soon as possible. Foster made a motion to contact H.R. Green and Snyder & Associates and ask for proposals to conduct the Master Plan ALP update. Bender seconded the motion and it passed 4 - 0. O 'Neil will send a letter to both firms, requesting proposals by September 15, 1999. O'Neil said the North Commercial area and the 1000' primary surface for Runway 24 are important additions to the ALP. The Commission said they would wait to see the proposals before they decide if and when they will interview. North Commercial area: Bender reviewed the progress on the plat for the NCA. He explained the wetland mitigation part of the project. He said the design proposed by MMS is not compatible with airport operations. He said he discussed the project with Mascari and they thought the Commission should have an aviation planner on board to assist with the design of the NCA. He said that the consultant hired to do the ALP update would assist MMS with the final design. Bender said the appraisal for the NCA was updated, and based on that appraisal, the property could be leased for $ 477,000/year if it was all leased. He commented that it was a long way away from being leased and said that did not include what the Commission would have to pay the Council to repay the cost for infrastructure. Mascari questioned if the whole area was leased whether the Airport Manager would have time to manage all the leases and manage the Airport too. Bender said he thought O 'Neil would be able to manage the property up to a point and then it would take too much of his time away from the rest of the Airport. A property management company may have to be hired. ee Southwest T-hangar Building: O'Neil said there were 8 potential tenants that retumed the surveys. Two said they wanted hangars with 45 to 48 foot doors. O'Neil said that one of the possible building designs would have six t-hangars and three larger hangars. The Commission directed O'Neil to proceed with a site plan for a new building west of the south T-hangars. Fly-in Breakfast: O'Neil said the breakfast is scheduled for August 29. He said that in the past, Dick Blum was the safety officer for the air side activities of the breakfast. Because he was a member of the Commission and Zoning Commission, he was covered from a liability standpoint. Now that he was no longer a member of a City board or commission, the Commission would need to take action to appoint him as the safety officer. Heran made a motion to appoint Blum as the safety officer. Bender seconded the motion and it was approved 4 - 0. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT: Mascari said he got information on the WAAS and said it is on its way toward implementation. He said he talked with the FAA about a transponder approach and they said the only system that is currently certified is only in service 20% of the time. Mascari reminded the Commission that there is a Council election this fall and there are three seats up for election. Mascafi suggested the Commission members find out the views of the candidates as far as support for the Airport is concemed. Mascari said the new Iowa City Flying Service is having an auction to sell their unneeded inventory from the old ICFS. Mascari went through a list of pending projects. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Heran said he inspected the Terminal project with O'Neil and it looked like the contractor is on schedule. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There is a Council candidates workshop scheduled for August 31, 1999, at the Council Chambers at 6:30 p.m. O'Neil gave the Commission a site plan for where the new control access gate would be. The United hangar was one of several buildings featured in an article in the Smithsonian Air & Space magazine. O'Neil gave the Commission a copy of the most recent list of Council candidates. SET NEXT MEETING: The next regular Airport Commission meeting is scheduled for September 9, 1999, at 5:45 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Rick Mascari, Chairperson MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1999 - 5 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRELIMINARY Subject to Approval MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Bender, Kate Corcoran, Mike Paul, T.J. Brandt, Lowell Brandt MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Melody Rockwell, Dennis Mitchell, Le Ann Tyson OTHERS PRESENT: Jay Christensen-Szalanski, Michaelanne Widness, Jean Walker, Nancy Dejmal, Paul Anderson, Charles Ruppert, Adin Levitt CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bender called the meeting to order at 5:02 P.M. ROLL CALL: All members were present. CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 11. 1999· BOARD MINUTES: Motion: T.J. Brandt moved to approve the August 11, 1999, minutes meeting of the Board of Adjustment, as printed. L. Brandt seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEMS: FXC95-0011. Public headng on a request for an amendment to the July 12, 1995 Board of Adjustment decision submitted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to permit congregational worship as pad of the religious institution use established by special exception in 1995 for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 503 Melrose Avenue. Rockwell presented the site plan as approved by the Board of Adjustment in 1995 and the plan as actually constructed. The Church of Jesus Chdst of Latter Day Saints is requesting an amendment to a July 12, 1995, Board of Adjustment decision, which allowed the Church to establish a religious institution at 503 Melrose Avenue. The Board granted three special exceptions to allow the church to use the historic Pratt-Soper residence as a center for religious instruction; primarily for university students. The church is now requesting that the Board allow congregational worship to occur as part of its religious institution use of the facility. Rockwell said in its initial application in 1995, the church had requested that in addition to allowing the establishment of the center for religious instruction that the Board also approve the potential use of the residence for congregational worship in the future. Because there was no certainty that the church would ever institute congregational worship at the 503 Melrose Avenue property, the applicant withdrew its request concerning congregational worship and focused its efforts on securing approval for the religious study center. Rockwell said due to the disruption caused by renovations this year at the east side Church of Jesus Chdst of Latter Day Saints, the religious institute students began meeting at the Melrose Avenue property for worship on Sundays. According to the applicant, the students Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 2 found that this Sunday worship time together contributed to their sense of community. The church is now asking that this practice be allowed to continue on a formal basis. Rockwell said staff is inclined to support this request. Essentially the same population using the center would be meeting in congregational worship on Sunday mornings. There would be no extedor or intedor changes to the property required as a result of the requested amendment and the required parking spaces have already been provided. Thirteen parking spaces are required for the congregational use of the facility and sixteen on-site spaces have been provided. Rockwell noted that after the Board meeting packet was mailed, a letter was received from George Haskell, a neighboring property owner. Although the applicant technically meets the parking requirements for congregational worship, Mr. Haskell points out in the letter that he has observed some parking congestion along Lucon Drive. Because the letter ardved too late for the Board to receive it and review it before the meeting and because Mr. Haskell could not be present at the meeting, Rockwell said she would read the letter into the record. Rockwell said the letter dated August 23, 1999, was addressed to Eric Andersen, who is a representative of the church. In his letter, Haskell pointed out that part of his reluctance to granting the exception is the poor track record of the Church in controlling parking to date and to what he perceives to be misrepresentations on the part of the church. He said in the request, Andersen stated that in the 1995 proceedings, the church did not seek approval for congregational worship at that time because of concerns expressed by local residents, but that "We emphasized that... we might approach the Board in the future for permission to use the building for regular Sunday congregational worship." Haskell wrote that two paragraphs later you say; "When we applied for the special exemptions in 1995, we had no plans for congregational worship in the building. It was obvious that a regular congregation could not be housed there..." It seems to me that these statements centradict each other. Which is true? In the letter, Haskell questioned the number of congregational members who actually walk or bicycle to the facility to alleviate parking congestion. He said he had been monitoring parking usage for the last few weeks and noticed that between 18 and 20 cars and an occasional motorcycle actually use the church's lot. On August 22, there was an additional car parked in the driveway and 13 cars parked on the gravel and grass area adjacent to the Sprout House Day Care Center. Two of these latter cars were double parked on Lucon Drive. He said that amounts to 34 cars on Lucon itself, and is typical of the situation we have observed over time and especially over the last few months. Haskell stated that this represents what I would call an unacceptable vehicle density and obstruction on a small residential drive that contains five homes. On several occasions the overflow has parked on our front lawn in addition to blocking the drive. We have yet to see any of the local leaders attempt to rectify this situation by monitoring use or asking visitors to move. This situation seems to repeat itself on Wednesday evenings. Haskell said the shared parking arrangement the church is developing with the Sprout House as part of your proactive approach to parking sounds good to the na'fve, but the truth is that your parishioners have been parking on every available gravel and grass area of the Sprout House for two years. This is an unsightly parking arrangement on Lucen that fosters the appearance of our drive Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 3 as a glod~ed parking lot, and seems to be encouraging use of that area by others on the nights your parishioners are not using it. Haskell further stated that Andersen suggests that discussions with the city planning staff confirm that the church has already satisfied relevant City of Iowa [City] Codes, including those related to parking. Is this meant to imply that we have no grounds on which to oppose this additional exception? Perhaps I was misinformed, but I was advised that you'had indeed approached the city planners' office about the prospects of receiving this exception without the need for a public forum and were advised that you could not. Haskell said certainly the Lucon residents appreciate the improvements the church has made to its property even though we are not so na'(ve as to think that they were done for our benefit rather than as a showcase for your Institute. But, since you asked, being a good neighbor involves more than that. Good neighbors are honest with each other, they don't misrepresent facts. A good neighbor would have approached us before beginning to conduct unauthorized services, not only after being advised they needed our support. A good neighbor would have reacted to the parking problem when we originally brought it to the attention of local leaders and when we left notices on improperly parked cars, not wait until they needed our support. But, frankly, the most offensive aspect of our past and present relationship is the implication that we are na'(ve enough to be fooled by such conveniently timed and transparent concern. Haskell stated that his primary concem is that once this exemption is granted, the interest of the Church in resolvif~g what we perceive to be an unacceptable traffic and parking density on a narrow ddve will retum to its previous level. Obviously, the purpose of the Institute and the interest in local congregational worship relate to the desire to recruit students to your religion. So I can understand your reluctance to have local leaders enforce parking policies, or to inconvenience potential acolytes in any way. Still, if you want to be a good neighbor, as you suggest, then we need some type of assurance that you will remain sensitive to our problems after our usefulness diminishes. Haskell recommended that an additional 6-month tdal pedod be conducted and the impact and success of the church in addressing this impact be assessed before a permanent exception is granted. He concluded that personally, he would like to see a better track record before he is convinced that the LDS Church is able, or for that matter willing to address this increasing problem in the long term. Rockwell pointed out that the parking situation needs to be addressed by the church in this low-density residential neighborhood, but she also felt there had not been intentional misrepresentation by the church. She said Mr. Haskell states in his letter that there are church statements that contradict each other on whether the church intended to have congregational worship. Rockwell said when the church first came in, it noted in the application that it thought in the future there might be congregational worship. There were no immediate plans to have congregational worship, so the church decided to defer its request. Now, as the church indicated it might do in the future, it is back to request approval of congregational worship. Rockwell went on to say that Mr. Haskell's letter also infers that the church approached city planners to try to institute congregational worship without coming to the Board. She indicated that the church contacted the city requesting to come in front of the Board, because they had promised in 1995 that they would do so if they wanted to have Board of Adjustment Minutes · September 8, 1999 Page 4 congregational worship. Rockwell said it may be that because the church meets the parking requirements, there is no physical expansion proposed for the facility and congregational worship could logically be considered a legitimate part of an established religious institution, the church would not technically have to come before the Board. Rockwell said, however, the church had indicated its desire to come before the Board, because of its previous promise. Rockwell indicated that Jean Walker, a resident of the area, called with questions about the meeting time, notification process and whether the parking area would need to be increased in size if congregational worship were allowed. At the time of the telephone call, Ms. Walker gave no indication as to whether she was opposed or supportive of the proposed amendment. Public hearing opened. Jay Chdstensen-Szalanski, lay minister for the Religious Institute, introduced himself, Edc Andersen and Lynn Rowell as representatives of the church present at the meeting. He said he'd like to comment on the church's proposal as well as responding to Mr. Haskell's letter, which they had only received by fax the day before from Rockwell. He explained that the request refers to two buildings at two locations. The two are at opposite ends of the city; with the Institute at the corner of Lucon and Melrose and the church on Bradford Street across from Mercer Park. He said it is more than a mile between the two buildings as indicated by Mr. Haskell; it is actually neady 4 ~ miles between the LDS buildings. Christensen-Szalanski said the Institute building is currently used to teach classes for religious instruction and a multi-use social gathering place. The church is asking for the religious institution use to be extended to allow congregational use on Sundays for approximately fifty individuals. He said the main concem of the community is the parking situation. He stated that Mr. Haskell's concerns as stated in the letter were that the parking problem was misrepresented and that the church had not been responsive. Chdstensen-Szalanski said the August 22 parking situation documented in Mr. Haskell's letter occurred the day before University classes began. On that date, the church held a once-a-year type event where there was a sudden influx of new students and their parents, who are not familiar with the University or the City parking policies. He said in upcoming years, the group could be more prepared for the event. One way he felt that the influx could be dealt with would be to post people outside the Institute so that parking policies are enforced even at these special events. Chdstensen-Szalanski suggested that if Mr. Haskell had taken photographs last Sunday of the parking situation along Lucon Ddve, they would have been entirely different pictures. He said last Sunday, the parking lot was less than two-thirds full and several spaces at the Sprout House were empty. He noted that this parking situation was also unusually low. The reality is that the usual parking numbers are somewhere between what happened on opening day and last Sunday. He indicated that he could easily prepare documentation to reflect that the average attendance is approximately fifty people. Christensen-Szalanski also stressed that the church's proposal was completely honest. He said there never was any intent to mislead the Board or the neighboring property owners. Concerning the non-responsive issue, he noted that Mr. Haskell's letter said that leaders do not react to parking problems even when they are brought to leaders' attention. Christensen- Szalanski said he spoke to Lynn Rowell, who has been the center director since its opening. He said with the exception of this letter, the Institute has never received a letter complaining about the parking problem in the two years that it has been open. He asked Rowell if anyone had ever made a direct request to resolve a problem caused by the Institute. He said Rowell indicated that about two years ago, he thought Jean Walker had commented that she did not want cars Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 5 parked too close to Lucon Ddve. Rowell assured Chdstensen-Szalanski that there was agreement on this issue. Chdstensen-Szalanski said the only other instances when the Institute has received a specific request regarding parking concems occurred when Edc Andersen and Chdstensen-Szalanski began talking to individual community members. One case in particular was when Andersen spoke to Mr. Haskell and his wife Nancy Dejmal. Mr. Haskell informed Andersen that parking was occurring on the grassy area of the Institute property along Lucon Drive. The three spoke of solutions to this problem. It was suggested that landscape brick be extended along the road to create a barder to prevent parking along Lucon Drive. This plan was implemented immediately. The bricks were ordered within days and the bdcks were put in on September 7, 1999. The decision to respond to the community members' request was instantaneous. He reiterated that clearly the church had not been aware of the neighborhood concerns until church leaders went to talk to neighboring property owners. Christensen-Szalanski also noted that at the Haskell/Dejmal/Andersen meeting, Andersen had suggested that a no parking sign be added to the area. Haskell and Dejmal agreed and the church implemented this. Christensen-Szalanski noted that there had been no mention dudng the meeting that cars had been parked on the Haskell/Dejmal property. He said if he had been informed of cars parking on the neighbors' property, they would have been moved immediately. He noted that the mission of the church is not to recruit new members and that they have only had one individual baptized since the Institute opened up two years ago. He said the Institute's responsibility is to make sure that the individuals attending the Institute are responsible individuals. That means not only being responsible to themselves, but also to the community. Christensen-Szalanski said upon realizing that parking was taking place on the grassy area, the Institute spoke to the folks at the Sprout House. Their agreement allows Sprout House parents to park in the Institute parking lot for the pick up and drop off of their children during the week. In exchange, the Institute will use the Sprout House parking spaces on Sunday. He said it appears that the arrangement made with Sprout House will be beneficial to both parties, and is scheduled to start next week. He noted that the Institute has also purchased pre-paid parking passes that will be used for members who do not find on-site parking. Church members have been made aware of the pre-paid parking passes. Christensen-Szalanski said the largest barrier to effectively addressing community parking concems is that they have not been communicated to the Institute. He said even though the Institute is a property owner on Lucon Drive and Melrose Avenue, they have never been invited to attend any Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association meeting. He felt this has been unfortunate. He said if the Institute does not initiate communication, they are considered bothersome and if they do initiate communication, they are accused of doing so for artificial reasons. He said cleady communication needs to be improved. Christensen-Szalanski said he believes that congregational worship at 503 Melrose Avenue is consistent with the original intent of the Board's July 1995 decision. He said this use meets the requirements of the City of Iowa City, and the largely student congregation has been able to meet its needs at the Melrose Avenue location. He hoped the Board would support the church's request to allow congregational worship as part of the religious institution use. Michaelanne Widness. 629 Melrose Avenue, said she is member of the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association. She noted that she was not at the meeting to speak in opposition of the exception; however she was in attendance to address the parking issue. Widness commented that at any given moment, many people looking for parking assume when they see cars in an area that it must be an acceptable place to park. The location is insignificant. She has spent a large amount of time in the last five to seven years trying to get illegally parked vehicles Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 6 moved. She said she speaks with Arthur Anderson in the Housing Office probably once a month about illegal parking that occurs on people's front yards in the area. Her biggest concern is that spillover parking will not necessarily end up on Lucen Ddve, but more likely in the front yard of the Sprout House. This is a problem because it is University property. Widness said the City Code dictates hard surface parking, but the University disregards this. She said she would not like to see overflow parking in the front yard of the Sprout House. Widness said she felt the pdme objective would be to see that the cars end up in ~he University parking lot with pre-paid parking. She noted that there has been one neighborhood function in the past two years. The Institute was invited as fliers were placed door to door. If the Institute did not receive the invitation, Widness apologized for the oversight. She said she thought the Institute had been a good neighbor. Jean Walker. 335 Lucon Drive, said there was a meeting of individuals who live on Lucon Ddve and she was asked to present their consensus opinion to the Board. Walker noted that in 1995, the neighborhood group was part of the discussions to permit the Institute to be part of the neighborhood. All views were presented and an amicable compromise was worked out. She pointed out that the Board had congratulated the two sides for coming to a good, workable compromise. She said it is with that feeling that the neighborhood group comes to the meeting. Walker said the consensus that the group came to was that they do not object at all to the church having services at the Institute, but they do not want extra parking beyond fifteen parking spaces. They feel that the fifteen-space limit has been abused in the past. The group feels that even if the church were allowed to park on the Sprout House side, they still would have more cars than would fit in the spaces. Those additional cars would have to go somewhere. She said the group felt that the church subsidizing parking at the University parking lot would be the solution; that all parking beyond the fifteen should be in the University lot. Then, the top of Lucon Ddve would not look like a parking lot. Walker said the group suggested that a temporary six-month permit be granted to determine if the parking problem can be worked out. After the six-month time period, the Board could make a permanent decision. Walker then went on to explain the background of the exception. She said the church odginally said the Institute was pdmadly a place for students to study. It was emphasized in 1995 that bicycles and walking would be the main mode of transportation to the Institute. Walker also noted that in 1995, the church did say that they might in the future come to ask to have services. She said even then, the neighbors had been concerned about the church having the services, because of increased traffic. In the odginal request, the Institute asked for twenty parking spaces and the neighborhood group wanted ten spaces. The two groups compromised to fifteen parking spaces. She said that seventeen spaces were actually constructed. Walker said Edc Andersen said that this was an inadvertent error. Walker said there were other compromises regarding lighting and privacy. She said run-off from the concrete was also a concern at that time. All of these issues were addressed and it was a good outcome. Walker then went on to say that a couple of years ago, the neighbors were contacted because the Institute wanted to park cars on football weekends. She said that involves only about six days a year and the neighborhood group agreed to this; although they were not too happy about the parking on the grass. She said it had only recently come to their attention that people who have been parking on the grass have also been drinking. She said this is not a good situation. She stressed that they were trying to be good neighbors as well. They all have very busy lives and have only in passing pointed out areas of concem. Walker said within the last year, wedding receptions and other events have been held at the Institute. It was then found out that Sunday religious services were being held at the Institute as well without letting the neighbors know. It was explained to the neighbors that this was originally Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 7 to be a temporary situation; however, the students liked the services being held at the Institute so the church is now approaching the Board. Walker then explained that there should be no parking on Lucon Ddve and signs have been posted. She said Lucon Drive is a very narrow street and should the need arise, emergency vehicles would have a very difficult time passing through the street. This would particularly be a problem in the winter. Walker noted that people, who were parking on Lucon Drive and were asked to move, had become belligerent. E, he indicated that these were not necessarily church people. Walker said the church wants to solve the problem with the Sprout House parking. She said this is not the church's problem and it is something the University should address. Walker said the University should solve its own problem. She said the University has taken out streets and then forced traffic onto Melrose Avenue. This caused the three-lane compromise that is currently in place. Walker indicated the enforcement of the shared parking plan would be very difficult. The neighborhood does not believe this is a solution for them as it increases the church parking from the actual seventeen parking spaces to twenty-five spaces. She said the fifteen-space limit was a hard-fought for compromise that occurred in the 1995 discussions. She said the problem is that the top of Lucon Drive looks like a giant parking lot almost all of the time now. The people unrelated to the Sprout House or the church will then park there. She said she had noted students parking in the Institute lot and then walking away from the Institute. She said this situation is attracting more cars. Walker then brought up the matter of trust between the church and the neighbors. She cited the original agreed-upon fifteen spaces and then the actual number built being seventeen spaces. Walker acknowledged that the grassy area on either side of Lucon Drive is church property, but said parking had occurred there and only now is the church making an effort to enforce no parking in that area. She said when parking occurs on the grassy area, it exceeds the agreed- upon limit of fifteen parking spaces. Walker said the holding of services without telling the neighbors has also brought about concem. Walker brought up the neighbors' concem regarding the house in the future. The parking situation could set a precedent for the future house owners. Walker said that Christensen-Szalanski had noted fifty people were attending the church service. She said the neighbors are interested in the number of cars, not the number of people attending the service. Walker stated that the people in the church are wonderful people and she appreciates their efforts. However, she did not think this should be an argument in favor of the church in this case. Nancy Dejmal. 223 Lucon, said she is George Haskell's wife and lives next door to the Institute. She said parking is the problem and they appreciate that parking is not now being allowed on the grassy stdp along Lucon Drive. She said it was a constant problem prior to now. She said she is not entirely sure if the landscaping stone will work, because University people will park anywhere possible. Dejmal also said the official looking no parking signs would be helpful. Dejmal requested that if possible, she hoped the Board would require the Institute to put signs on its doors to state that there is no parking allowed on Lucon Drive and that there is parking available in the University parking lot. Dejmal noted that the parking problem built up slowly and when the church services began, the problem escalated. Dejmal said she did not agree with the Sprout House - church shared parking agreement. She indicated that the Sprout House people abuse their parking. She said it is even more dense when the church parks there. Dejmal made the recommendation that the allotted parking be allowed on the Institute lot and that the remainder of those needing parking spaces be required to go to the University parking lot. Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 8 Chdstensen-Szalanski asked to address the Board with some possible solutions. He noted that there seems to be a question about the Sprout House. He said he did understand how the neighbors would not want cars parked on the grassy area. He said he believed that something could be done so that parking would not be on the grassy area of the Sprout House preperty. He said perhaps a sawhorse could be used to prevent the parking in that area. Chairperson Bender noted that the Board has no jurisdiction over the Sprout House parking situation, because it is University property. Christensen-Szalanski commented on the football parking saying that the church's use of the grassy area for parking could prevent undesirable people parking in the area. He said church officials did understand that there had been ddnking in the parking lot the previous weekend. His group was not in charge of this area. He did believe the grassy area is functional. Christensen-Szalanski said the communication problem needs to be addressed with the neighbors. He did not believe the six-month trial period would be workable since this would then give the appearance that the efforts would then be for just six months. He did suggest a regular meeting could occur between the neighbors and the church to solve problems. This would prevent miscommunication. Jean Walker commented that her concem about the Sprout House - church parking exchange is the increased parking on Lucon Drive. Walker then suggested cordoning off the grassy area of the Sprout House so that there would not be parking in the area on football days. Walker said the neighbors would appreciate opening up the lines of communication on a regular basis. She said the parking burden should not fall on the neighbors, it should be the church's responsibility once the guidelines are established. Public Hearing closed In reply to a query from the Board, Mitchell commented that the Board does have the flexibility to impose a trial pedod. He said the Board could grant the amendment to the exception for six months and ask the church to come back at that time to present evidence that it has addressed the parking problems. He said another option the Board could consider is to defer the item and give the church the chance to come back and show how it has addressed the neighbors' concerns. L. Brandt then noted that in this case new construction is not the issue. This is more of a use issue, The parking is a long-term concern. The neighbors are concemed about whether the parking will be addressed in the long term and actually the church said there is a concem about trust. Brandt said taking care of this for six months does not address the concerns that are at the root of the problem, MOTION: L. Brandt moved to amend EXC95-0011, a July 12, 1995, Board of Adjustment decision, to allow congregational worship as a part of the religious institution use for property located in the RS-5 zone at 503 Melrose Avenue. The motion was seconded by Paul. Bender stated that as chairperson, she generally does not comment until then end; however in this case she is the only person on the Board who sat on the Board when this item was originally considered in 1995. Bender stated that first and foremost she wanted to reiterate what Rockwell had said eadier. She believed that there never was ever any intent on the part of church to misrepresent this issue to the Board or the neighborhood. She said at the Board meetings in 1995, she had listened to both sides and felt very good about how the church and the neighbors had been able to work together to come to an agreeable solution. She said the Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 9 Board had congratulated the parties involved for their good work. She said she was disappointed that the communication that was going on then has now halted. She commented that she would second Chdstensen-Szalanski's suggestion that perhaps them needs to be regular and ongoing communication. Bender also noted that the worn hip issue was brought up openly at the 1995 meetings, but was dropped because the church had no immediate plans to have congregational worship at that time. The church had said it ~,ould come'back to the Board if it wanted to have congregational worship as part of the Institute, and it has done so. Bender said the other issue she wanted to make clear is that the Sprout House is a University day care and University properties am not within the jurisdiction of the Board. She said this needs to remain very clear. Bender also noted that in 1995 at staffs suggestion and the neighbors' request, the applicant took on the widening and improvement of Lucon Drive. The applicant was willing to do this at its own cost, and this had benefited all who used Lucon Drive, not just the church. She also said she would encourage the church to work out reciprocal agreements where possible to solve the parking problem along Lucon Ddve. L. Bmndt noted that the letter dated this August wdtten by Mr. Andersen to city staff stated that questions about the-effect of congregational worship on the neighborhood had been raised by nearby residents in 1995. He noted that due to other more immediate concerns regarding the establishment of the Institute, the church elected to put the request for congregational worship aside for the time being. He understood that there had actually been concerns about congregational worship issue in 1995. Bender stated that there were concerns, but it was not made a part of the decision, because the church had no immediate plans to do it at that time. Corcom n asked for clarification, as she understood that perhaps the Institute foresaw a possibility of having congregational worship in the future, but it appeared that church policy at that time did not allow a congregation of University students to be formed at the 503 Melrose facility. She asked if the church policy had changed since 1995 to permit the formation of such branches. Edc Andersen responded that in 1995, church policy did not permit the formation of new branches of this kind. There were some in existence and them was ongoing discussion at the general church level about whether new branches should be formed for young single adults. At that time, the church was not approving such applications. He said they anticipated that it might be possible sometime in the future to do so, which was why the request was included in the odginal application submitted by the church. He acknowledged that there was no way at that time of knowing if it would ever be possible. He said now that the church policy has changed to allow the formation of such branches, it is possible to consider congregational worship as part of the Institute. L. Bmndt then commented that issue is not the use of the facility for congregational worship. He said the overflow parking is the real issue. He indicated that the church appears to be responsive and that the Board could possibly assist them in resolving the parking issue. He suggested trying a six months or a year trial period as an option. He said that is hard to enforce, but suggested a condition of approval requiring that the church make reasonable efforts to ensure that parking does not occur on the grassy area along Lucon Ddve. Corcoran commented that she could see the benefit of having a continuance, because of the need for the two entities to talk to each other. She said from her viewpoint, she would like to see the bitter feelings resolved by having the lines of communication reopened. T.J. Brandt commented that he agreed with this. He said as he listened, the two sides seemed to be commenting to each other and using the Board was the sounding board. He suggested a Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 10 continuance or a deferral that would allow both sides to communicate their concerns and try to work out a compromise suitable to both sides. Paul said he has a long-term concem as to what would happen if attendance would double at the worehip service. He said he would like to see this issue addressed. He said since these parties were brought together before and worked out an acceptable resolution, he would like to see them do that again. Paul said it would be beneficial to the Board to make a decision that would allow that to happen. Paul noted that because he grew up just five de,ors away fiom the 503 Melrose property, he understands the parking situation. He said students take advantage of every available space. He said he did recognize what football Saturdays are like. It is only six times a year, but they can be incredible days. He said it does sound like the church people are willing to take a more active role in policing the number of cars related to the Institute and where they are parking. He believes there needs to be more discussion on each party's part. Rockwell indicated that if the Board is contemplating a deferrel, the applicant must either make that request or agree to a deferral. She said if the Board makes the motion to defer, that motion would take precedence over the motion that is on the floor. L. Brendt commented that if it were the sense of the Board to do so, he would suggest that a six-month tdal pedod be considered. Rockwell suggested that there be some type of demonstretion by the applicant after the six- month period to show that the parking problem is being addressed or has been taken care of. Bender said she would prefer the six-month approach. She said in looking at what was approved and what the Code allows, the parking that is provided in the Institute's parking lot is sufficient for congregational worship for up to seventy-nine persons. She said the neighbors are not concemed about the usage of the site for congregational worship, but are concerned about the parking. She said the church is acknowledging that it has not done enough in terms of policing the parking. She said the church has also indicated its willingness to subsidize its members parking in University lots to try to alleviate the situation. Bender felt confident that the issue could be worked out. Bender mentioned the concem voiced by a nearby property owner about what would happen if the church sold the 503 Melrose property. Bender noted that the 1995 Board decision addressed that issue by requiring as. a condition of approval that if the church were to sell or lease the property in the future to anyone other than the church, all agreements would be null and void. She said the Board's decision is specific to the current occupant/owner of the 503 Melrose property. Bender asked the Board for consensus and there was a generel consensus to consider the requested amendment for a six-month trial period. Eric Andersen then approached the Board stating that the church had some concern about this approach. He said the church is willing to work with the neighbors to resolve the parking problem, but they would like to see some standards to measure the level of success. L. Brendt agreed with this. He said although the church has no control on the Spreut House property, there is a level of control that can be maintained on the church property. He said the good news historically is that there have been improvements. He said he would like to hear in six months from both sides jointly reporting on how the parking is being handled. Attorney Mitchell suggested that guidelines be set out as conditions of approval. Corcoran left the meeting at 6:40 p.m. MOTION TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION: L. Brandt moved to amend the main motion to add that this approval would be effective through the March 2000 Board meeting, at which meeting the neighbors and church will report back to the Board on the measures being taken to eliminate parking congestion on the church's property along Lucon Drive Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 11 and the effectiveness of those measures. Paul seconded the motion. The amendment to the main motion was approved by a vote of 4-0. L. Brandt stated that the request to amend the religious institution use to allow for congregational worship does not seem unreasonable. He said staff has addressed the issue of the size of the area within the building that will be used for congregational worship and the occupancy load for that area. The maximum occupancy load is 79 persons and 50 persons are currently attending congregational warship. L. Brandt said the parking provided on-site by the church exceeds minimum Code requirements for the .proposed congregational worship. Because this is a generally religious use that has been addressed before, L. Brantit said he believes that most of the basic standards were addressed in the odginal 1995 decision. These standards had to do generally with public health and safety issues, ingress/egress, compatibility with the neighbors and drainage issues. L. Brandt said what the Board has before them at this time is essentially a concem about parking, which does impact the standards somewhat. He said by having the six-month approval with the opportunity to review the issue once again to see what can be workable seems like a reasonable thing to do. He said parking congestion is an issue relative to general safety, property values and use of neighboring properties. Paul said he agreed with Brandt. He noted that apart from the parking issue, the congregational use would likely have a relatively low impact on neighboring properties and should be an appropriate use of the property. He said the standards concerning establishing or expanding a religious institution use have been addressed previously. T.J. Brandt concurred. He said his biggest concern is that the structure would house the required numbers without being over-burdened. The parking was his main concern coming into the meeting. Since it has been addressed with the six-month amendment to allow time for the neighbors and the church to work things out, he does not have a problem with the usage of the building for congregational worship. Bender concurred and stated that the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior..Having worked on this issue before and seeing how these people worked well together and came to a suitable compromise, she said she has a lot of faith that this cooperation will continue. Bender reiterated that she believes the church has made an excellent adaptive use of an old historic site. She said it has maintained the grounds beautifully and noted that there could be far worse uses of the site. She said she still believes that the religious institution use is an appropriate use at this site and that the issues will be resolved to the mutual satisfaction of both parties. The main motion carried on a vote of 4-0. EXC99-0017. Public hearing on an application submitted by Hy-Vee Food Stores, Inc. for a special exception to permit an auto and truck-oriented use, a pharmacy drive-through facility, to be established in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) zone for property located at 1201 N. Dodge Street. Rockwell said the applicant is proposing a drive-through with one lane for a pharmacy at the Dodge Street Hy-Vee. She said the drive-through is proposed to be a one-way loop on the west side of the store. Rockwell said staff has evaluated this application and finds that it meets the necessary requirements for separating the traffic for the drive-through lane from pedestrians and vehicular circulation on the site. She said it minimizes the paved area to some extent, because the whole area is currently paved, and Hy-Vee is proposing that one tree that is being removed will be replaced by three trees within an expanded green space in the center of the loop drive for the pharmacy drive-through. She noted that the drive-through lane would be visually and functionally tucked behind the building so that it would be less Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 12 likely to affect neighboring property owners. She said this assures compatibility with neighboring properties. Rockwell said there is an issue involving compliance with the tree planting plan that was part of an approved Large Scale Non-Residential Development (LSNRD) plan. She said this plan indicated there would be a certain number of trees planted and maintained over time. This included some trees that are intended to provide vegetative screening, some of which have been truncated and are likely to die. Rockwell indicated that Hy-Vee is willing to replace the trees as recommended by staff to come into compliance with the LSNRD plan. She said this will address the special exception review standard concerning compliance with zoning requirements. Rockwell said staff recommends that EXC99-0017, a special exception to permit one drive- through lane associated with a pharmacy for the property in the CN-1 zone at 1201 N. Dodge Street be appmved, subject to the property being brought into compliance with the approved landscaping and tree planting plan approved in 1979 with new trees planted according to City Code subsection 14-6R-5B and the arbor vitae plants being replaced with new arbor vitae according to City Code subsection 14-6S-11 B, or an altemative vegetative screen may be planted with approval from City staff prior to a building permit being issued for the drive-through facility. Rockwell 'noted that staff received a couple of calls from people with questions regarding the application. She said there was no indication of support or any negative comments. T.J. Brandt inquired as to whether the Code requires the trees to be replaced. Rockwell said when the LSNRD plan was approved, the property was zoned a planned commercial area. The approval process involved the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the City Council. L. Brandt questioned the hours of operation and the fact that a speaker or intercom is not addressed. He wondered if a condition should be put into place to specify the hours of operation and to prohibit an intercom. Rockwell said that the staff report noted the hours of operation and indicated that Hy-Vee did not plan to have speakers associated with the pharmacy drive-through. Public hearing opened. Paul Andersen. MMS Consultants, said he was representing the applicant, Hy-Vee Food Stores. Andersen indicated that Hy-Vee's understanding of the tree planting requirements has grown through the application process. He said Hy-Vee does intend to make the appropriate tree replacements so that they are in compliance with the Code. Chades Ruppert commented that he is a neighbor who lives east of Hy-Vee. He said he has lived there for sixty years. He indicated that he does not have any problem with the proposed plan. Public hearing closed. L. Brandt raised the point of adding a condition regarding the hours of operation and prohibiting the use of an outdoor speaker. Bender said she hesitated to do this, as the hours of operation are quite standard. She said Hy-Vee is a known entity and she would not like to see the Board making a requirement that locked the pharmacy into certain hours. L. Brandt then withdrew the suggestion concerning the hours, but thought the issue of a speaker should be addressed. Rockwell pointed out that the Board has previously prohibited outdoor speakers in residential settings. She noted that an intercom might be used as opposed to a speaker and would be Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 13 acceptable in such a setting. T. J. Brandt commented that an intercom is what is being used at the east side pharmacy drive-through. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve FXC99-0017, a special exception to permit one drive-through lane associated with a pharmacy for property located in the CN-1 zone at 1201 N. Dodge Street, subject to the property being brought into compliance with the approved landscaping and tree planting plan approved in 1979 with new trees planted according to City Code subsection 14-6R-5B, and arbor vitae plants along the east property line being replaced with new arbor vitae according to City Code subsection 14- 6S-11B, or an alternative vegetative screen being planted with approval from City staff prior to a building permit being issued for the drive-through lane and window, and subject to no loud speaker system being installed as part of the drive-through facility. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt commented that he would support the request as it addresses most of the basic standards, which includes public welfare and the use and enjoyment of adjacent property. He said this is primadly because the pharmacy lane and window are proposed to be tucked away on the side of the building that is away from the main street and is not immediately adjacent to residential structures. He said it actually makes a nice location for this type of facility. T.J. Brandt noted that he supports the exception, because it meets the standards and it is in the public's best interest to allow a pharmacy drive-through facility to occur on the north end of Iowa Paul said he would support the motion for the reasons previously stated as well as the fact that it will not impact neighboring residential areas to the degree that it might in other neighborhoods. He said the pharmacy drive-through lane would be separated from the surrounding pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the parking lot. He said the way that it is designed for vehicles to queue up makes sense. He said it should prove to be a smooth operation in that location. Bender concurred with the other members of the Board. She said in reviewing the standards in relation to the proposed location of the pharmacy ddve-through facility, she had concluded that it should in no way endanger public health or safety. She said the zoning requirement for landscaping has been addressed through the conditions of approval. Bender noted that she was glad to hear that Hy-Vee is willing to comply with the tree-planting requirements. The motion was approved 4-0. EXC99-0018. Public hearing on an application submitted by Adina and Andrew Levitt for a special exception to permit a school of specialized private instruction, a yoga center, to be established in the Central Business (CB-10) zone for property located at 115 E. Washington Street. Rockwell noted that Adina and Andrew Levitt are requesting a special exception to establish a yoga center in downtown Iowa City on the second floor above The Brown Bottle Restaurant at 115 Washington Street. She said the yoga center is considered a school of specialized private instruction and as such is required to receive a special exception to be established in the CB-10 zone. Rockwell said such schools may vary widely in terms of types and times of instruction and the numbers of students involved in the classes. She said in this case, the yoga center is proposed to be in vacant space on the second floor of a downtown building and have only one classroom with a class size of ten to twelve students. Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 14 Rockwell noted that such a use would be consistent with the intent of the CB-10 zone to accommodate a wide range of retail, service, office and residential uses. She said it is also in line with the Comprehensive Plan policies to encourage commercial activity to take place in defined commercial centers and to encourage the creative re-use of existing commercial sites that are vacant or underutilized. Rockwell said the proposed yoga center is likely to contribute a positive factor to the welfare of the community. She noted that the small class sizes and quiet mode of teaching would allow for a low impact instruction service that should be both compatible and complementary to surrounding businesses. Rockwell said aerobics classes ' were taught in this space previously, and the yoga center should prove to be a less intensive use in terms of numbers, noise and vibration. Rockwell said there is no parking problem associated with this use. She said staff recommends approval of this special exception. Rockwell noted that she received a call from Gilda of Gilda Imports. Gilda felt that it would be good to have the use on the second floor. She stated that there was entirely too much vacant property in the downtown now. Rockwell went on to note that she had received an e-mail from Bill Nusser with questions about the application. Rockwell responded and then received an e- mail statement from Nusser indicating that he would gladly support the staffs recommendation for approval of this use. Public hearing opened. Adin Andrew Levitt stated that he and his wife Adina would like to open the yoga center. He said they think that Iowa City is a great place and they hope to teach the art they have acquired of shadng relaxation with small amounts of people. He said the practice of yoga helps people stretch their bodies in relaxing ways and is useful in helping develop minds and promoting growth as individuals. Levitt said they want to open a small business where they will share what they leamed in their studies abroad in India. They hope to bdng that culture here. Public hearing closed. MOTION: L. Brandt moved to approve FXC99-0018, a special exception to permit the establishment of a school of specialized private Instruction, a yoga center, for property located in the Central Business (CB-10) zone at 115 E. Washington Street. T.J. Brandt seconded the motion. L. Brandt noted that the applicants had addressed the findings of fact very well in the application itself. He said it is hard to imagine much about this use that would be of concem in terms of the general public welfare. He said as Gilda had mentioned in her phone call, it would be beneficial to develop some of the vacant spaces in the downtown area. He observed that it looks like it might be rather lonely on the second floor and maybe this business will attract some commercial neighbors. Since the use is proposed to be located in the downtown, many of the other concems, such as parking or vehicular ingress and egress, will not be a concern. He said the application meets the basic standards for granting a special exception, and he will support the exception as requested. T.J. Brandt commented that he would support the exception as well. He said knowing that empty space downtown will be utilized will hopefully draw in some other uses in those vacant spots on the second floor. He said the yoga center should be good for the welfare of the general public. He said he too would vote in favor of the exception. Paul stated he would vote in favor of the exception for the reasons covered by other Board members. He noted that he couldn't imagine a better neighbor to have upstairs than this business. He thought that the use is proposed to be in a perfect location from a business standpoint in drawing on students located close to the downtown. Board of Adjustment Minutes September 8, 1999 Page 15 Bender said she would agree. She said the interests of justice would be served in granting this application. She said the proposed yoga center is likely to be such a light use that she couldn't imagine that it would affect the municipal facilities nor have any detrimental effect on any of the neighbors. She said the yoga center would probably have an overall positive effect, as it is consistent with the intent of the zone, which is to accommodate a wide variety of retail, service and residential uses. She said she too would vote in favor. The motion was approved 4-0. Board of Adjustment Information Bender noted that she would be traveling next month. She recommended calling other members prior to the October Board meeting to ensure that would be enough members present for a quorum. Rockwell stated that Corcoran had asked her to advise the Board that the reason she left the meeting earlier today is that she has a class she is teaching this semester, which is scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday nights. Corcoran has indicated that if staff knows that the Board meeting will be longer than usual, she will arrange with the class to meet later. She said this situation would be in effect through October, November and December 1999. Adjournment T.J, Brandt moved to adjourn with the second by Paul. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Susan Bender, Chairperson Melody Rockwell, Secretary Minutes submitted by Le Ann Tyson p~2admin~i,'~)aS-9.doc SIGN IN SHEET IOi/VA CZTY BOARD OF ADjIUSTMEIIIT Mgg'i'lAfG W. EDNESDA Y~ SEPTEMBER 8/~999 - S:O0 P. M. Ci, ic Center Council Chambers Name Address ! 2. ...' ,.,.---~-, C~ ~' ..{ ) ,~ ,'~.-~ ' '~' \~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 16. 1z 18. 20. MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, - 5:00 PM - AUGUST 26, 1999 Agenda item 3A Members Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger,, Mary McMurray, Shaner Magalh~es, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Jim Swaim Members Absent: Linda Prybil Staff Present: Others: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, Heidi Lauritzen, Kara Logsden, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, CALL TO ORDER: President Martin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was noted that the minutes reflected Martin's attendance at the meeting; in fact he was not. Approved as amended. Singerman/Parker UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Building Project Martin thanked the Board for their excellent participation at the recent joint Council meeting. Trustees were prepared and articulate. Some discussion has taken place since the Council meeting. The mayor called Craig and Martin after Tuesday s meeting. He asked that we come back to Council with cost estimates for a third floor expansion that includes all the related costs for moving out and place that side by side with the basic costs for building on 64-1 A. The issue is whether we want to proceed with this process as approved by Council resolution and discussion and present both proposals or to only propose the third story, as the mayor suggests. At Council meeting Tuesday night, the mayor asked Craig about the option of a third floor, and was interested in looking at that before we spend ~60,000 on a plan for 64-1 A. Swaim suggests that we give the mayor the figures from several years ago with a idea of updating figures. The suggestion of a Kirkwood satellite diffuses the focus of the project. Craig demonstrated the 1995 architect's model illustrating the third floor addition, pointing out the construction that would have to be done above and below ground. The model shows the complexity of that proposal. Is it reasonable to think we could get figures together quickly on the expense of a third floor including the costs of moving out, renting another building or more in order to present it to the Council? The council authorized money for us to explore one option and the Board verbally agreed to pay for looking at the third floor addition. Craig referred to a proposal she had just received from the architect with a timetable for them to work on plans for 64-1 A. She has discussed the possibility of adding work on the third floor to the scope of work, with Board paying those costs. Swaim believes that Craig and Martin should meet with Lehman and review the plans for the 3rd floor. Singerman believes that although the majority of council voted one way (to approve the contract) the message was to bring information on the third floor. Singerman moved that Martin and Craig have a meeting with Lehman, discuss the vertical option and suggest that the Library Board will have a special meeting to approve the contract with the architect ten days from their ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES August 26, 1999 Page 2 Agenda item 3A meeting with Lehman. Parker seconded. Swaim moved that we have a special meeting one week from today to review and make a decision about the contract. Singerman seconded. Dellsperger/Parker moved that the first motion be considered perfected. This motion passed. A motion was made that Swaim's motion be considered perfected. Singerman/McMurray. Motion is carried. The question was then put: "Shall the substitute motion become the main motion." This motion was approved; the vote was 8 to 1 in favor with Dellsperger opposing. The main motion (Swaim's motion) was then approved. Craig will call the architect after the special meeting on the 3rd. She will ask him how quickly they can do the study. NEW BUSINESS Review of FY99 Annual Report. As an aside, Swaim suggested talking about Smart Alec mascot at a future meeting. Trustees commented favorably on the thoroughness of the report. Dellsperger was pleased to see that Circulation had not dropped as drastically as she feared. It was a very busy year. STAFF REPORTS Intellectual Freedom Festival -The Board is invited to attend any of the events of that week. An updated calendar of events was distributed. Computer Upgrade - Memo from Liz. The Empowerment Board has been appointed. They will be sending Green e-mails and pertinent information and work with her to provide library training for new staff during a session here at ICPL. Swaim said that he will encourage them to keep Library staff informed as it relates to materials because several members have talked about developing information centers about various topics. Development Office Report: Was included in the packet. Eckholt distributed a draft copy of the Case statement for the campaign that will be launched soon. He read his final three paragraphs aloud. This case statement will be mailed along with a letter, to approximately ninety people who have been identified as potential donors of substantial gifts. They will be invited to take part in interviews; surveys, and focus groups. The report will be compiled in time for the October Board meeting to provide us with a sense of what kind of private financial commitment there might be. Fountain Celebration. Green is serving on the committee. On September 25 a special event, City Plaza party, will take place at the Ped Mall at the new fountain. The new playground and the Weatherdance fountain will be dedicated. ICPL will help the arts advisory sub group with planning family activities. It will be an afternoon designed to attract families. Eckholt has been asked to do a special article; one recounting the broad history of urban renewal which will incorporate the library and the role of the arts in the development of the original Ped Mall. Council election: An announcement of forums sponsored by the League of Women Voters was included. These forums are to highlight City Council candidates. Maintenance Staff - New maintenance staff have been hired and will begin work on August 30. Craig reported on a phone call from a columnist for the new Sunday edition of the Press Citizen who is planning to write a positive column about the library. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES August 26, 1999 Page 3 Agenda item 3A PRESIDENT'S REPORT Martin reported a call froma Iowa City Press Citizen reporter who is doing a feature article on the Library this Sunday. ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MEMBERS The Crime Prevention Board is looking for new members. Barclay announced that the Council for International Visitors in Iowa City is hosting a free picnic on Labor Day to welcome new international writers to town. Hoping for a good turnout. COMMITTEE REPORTS None COMMUNICATIONS North Liberty resident, Glen Mangold, passed along his concern about homeless people in the library to Board. Board acknowledged receipt of his message. FINANCIAL REPORTS Receipts and Expenses. Up in the general fund and down in the Enterprise Fund. Photocopies are down. Use of debit cards will hopefully bring in more money. Final reports from City on FY99 operating budget. receipts and 97.4% of it was spent. Gifts & Bequests Funds. Most are designated. Receipts and then expenditures. 100.6 % of Some money from 5311.5, the Board's discretionary fund, was encumbered with approval of the NOBU budget. Open access report identifies where people are coming from in order to use our Library. Visa was reviewed. Disbursements approved. Swaim/Singerman. ADJOURNED at 7:00 p.m. Minutes taken and transcribed by Martha Lubaroff IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY SPECIAL MEETING September 2, 1999 Board Conference Room Agenda item 3B MEMBERS PRESENT: Dellsperger, Parker, McMurray, Magalh~es, Barclay, Singerman, Martin MEMBERS ABSENT: Prybil, Swaim STAFF PRESENT: Lubaroff, Lauritzen, Eckholt, Black, Nichols, Green OTHERS PRESENT: Kathryn Ratliff, IC Press Citizen. Meeting was called to order at 5:00 PM. The discussion at this special meeting is to follow-up on contract approved last week: Barclay moved that we sign the contract. Singerman seconded it. Magalhies asked to be briefed on the conversation held with Martin and Craig held with Lehman. Martin described the meeting as positive and helpful. Lehman would like to find a solution. It is clear that there are a number of issues related to building on 64 1 A , the most critical being what we do with the old building. Martin felt that the mayor would be receptive to a plan that we might produce that would utilize the building. After reviewing a copy of the packet that the Board received detailing the extraordinary measures required to reinforce for a third floor, Lehman seemed to agree that it would be unacceptable to move out of the building for one year. Expansion to part of 64 1 A with a similar design to what was presented during the sales tax campaign might be more acceptable since it dealt with the use of this building and left space on 64 1 A for some further expansion. Dellsperger pointed out that because of the configuration of that plan it would involve operating costs which would bring us back to where we were. Martin said that he had promised not to increase operating costs for three years. Dellsperger said she was confused as to why the disposition of this building is our problem. It is not our role to work on economic development. Martin believes that the City councilpeople who are opposed to a brand new building, don't want to see vacant city space. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY SPECIAL MEETING September 2, 1999 Board Conference Room Agenda item 3B Singerman focused on the fact that what the contract says and what Council directed us to do is to present both px~h~s; exl:r~ding to the 3rd floor and expanding to 64 1 A. Craig thought it would be better for the Board and architect to come back with an update on costs for the third floor option. Lehman believes that the Council could use more information on the third floor option - they have never had much detailed information. He would like to see that report to Council asap. Martin expressed his frustration about locking us into options that won't solve the problem either way. He is opposed to the third floor option. Singerman and Magalhaes would not automatically reject a third floor option. Parker agreed that she would want more information. Martin is concerned that we not take a third floor option just because it is the only one, if it doesn't work. Board is in agreement that if it won't work we won't recommend it. Call for the vote. All in favor of signing the contract. None opposed. Motion carried. Dellsperger recomended that at the time we present options to the Council, we also present the program that was done years ago by David Smith which recommends additional library space downtown and branches later on. The architect still plans to be here Tuesday afternoon, at 1:30. Building Committee has been invited. The mayor and city manager will also be invited. Architects will explore options, including third floor expansion. Martin felt it was optimistic to remember that Council did approve the design that was presented at the time of the sales tax vote. After a motion by Dellsperger and Magalhaes meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm. Minutes taken and transcribed by Martha Lubaroff MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 - 7:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS PRELIMINARY Subject to A proval MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Bovbjerg, Benjamin Chait, Madlyn Schintler, Dean Shannon, Lea Supple MEMBERS ABSEN..~: Pare Ehrhardt, Dick Gibson STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Holecek, Melody Rockwell, John Yapp, Anne Schulte OTHERS PRESENT: George Dane, Rick Mascari, Howard Horan, Larry Wilson, Vicky DiBona, Roxanne Bohlke, Karen Willjams CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Supple called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES ON CITY BOARD AND COMMISSIONS: Supple encouraged those at the meeting to take part in the workings of the City by serving on a board or commission. COMPRFHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Public headng on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to adopt and incorporate the South Central District Plan for property generally located west of Highway 218, south of Highway 1 and east of the Iowa River. Public discussion: George Dane. 4120 Dane Road, said he and his wife live on the high ground toward the west end of the proposed arterial, just east of Dane Road. He said he wished to speak about the proposed route of the east-west arterial. Dane said it is interesting that there are many laws, rules, and regulations for the protection of wetlands, historic sites from the past, and the habitat of endangered species. He said economic factors tend to prevent the dislocation of established commercial enterprises. Dane said however, there is very little designed to protect and preserve locales from which the beauty of nature can be observed and enjoyed. Dane said perhaps this is because Iowa has so many places of scenic beauty. He noted that these places are fast disappearing. Dane said there are few places in and around Iowa City where the beauty of the Iowa River Valley can still be observed and enjoyed. Dane said the beauty of the landscape is a gift from our creator. He said the opportunity to enjoy it was his gift from Harold and Ethel Dane, who acquired the farm some 70 years ago. Dane said it can still be enjoyed because neither Harold and Ethel, nor he, succumbed to the pleas of developers to subdivide the property. He said it has never seemed right that this gift of beauty and the gift of its enjoyment should be converted to personal economic gain. Dane said the best inheritance he can pass on to his grandchildren and all who follow would be the continued opportunity to enjoy this place of beauty. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 2 Dane said how to best do this has not yet been worked out, partially because he never anticipated the kind of threat the proposed artedal street location poses. He said he has done the first part in preserving what was given to him. Dane said he understands that cities grow and traffic has to be accommodated. He asked and urged that when the final location of the artedal is being set, it be moved down to lower ground and not follow the high ground along the ridges. Dane said this might mean more dirt has to be moved, but that would be a one-time expense, and well could be a small pdce to pay for the preservation of a locale from which all could see and enjoy nature°s beauty. He provided two photographs to give an idea of what he is talking about. Dane also invited Commission members to come to view the area for themselves. Rick Mascari. 4542 Canterbury Court, said he is the chair of the Airport Commission. He said he has been shown the location for the road, just south of the airport. He said the N2 alternative to the south would be crossing the threshold of the north/south runway. Mascari said he wanted to make it clear that the Airport Commission would like to keep north/south runway (17/35) open for as long as possible. He said at first it was thought the runway would need to be closed, because the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) will only support two runways. Mascari said with the desire to develop the north commercial area, which is on airport property, the airport might be able to become more self-sufficient. He said the income from that area should be able to sustain the airport and also provide funds. to keep the runway open. Mascari said the more runways there are, the safer the airport will be. Mascad said another big factor regarding the north/south runway, is the fact that it is the only runway served by a non-precision, instrument approach, which involves a set of procedures designed by the FAA to allow aircraft to enter the airport at less than ideal conditions. He said if the north/south runway is closed, the airport will not be as economically desirable place to land. He said that is why it is the Airport Commission's intention to keep the north/south runway open. Mascad said the idea that the runway might be closed is due to the Airport Master Plan. He stated that the Master Plan was designed before there was the idea that the airport could sustain itself using the north commercial area. Mascad said the Airport Master Plan cleady states, however, that closing Runway 17/35 is a local decision that is to be made solely by the Airport Commission. He said the recommended street route, N2, goes right through airport property. Mascad said with that runway open, it would violate all the FAA guidelines regarding the clear area needed over that threshold to have a street constructed in that location. Bovbjerg asked what the legal separation of the end of the runway and a crossing road would be. Mascad said the requirement is 1,000 feet from the end of the runway to the road. Bovbjerg asked if there would be room for the north/south runway to expand northward, Mascari said the threshold markings at the north end of the north/south runway were moved to the south to accommodate development of the north commercial area. He said the adjustment of that threshold gives the necessary 1,000-foot clearance to develop the north commercial area at the north end of the runway. Chait asked if there were 1,000 feet between the southernmost end of the north/south runway and the end of the airport property. Mascari confirmed this. Chait said the Commission was told the current alignment of N2 was based on the fact that the runway would be closed. Chait said the reason the N2 alignment is shown where it is on airport property is to allow for development on either side of that road; to provide for what would be the south airport commercial area. He said the fact that the runway may now stay open simply tells him that the design parameters have changed. He said instead of having any kind of commercial development on the south end of the airport, the road may need to be located farther to the south. He felt that the arterial street alignment should support what the Airport Commission what the airport wants as its plan. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 3 Chait said this is the first he had heard of the change in plans, but he did not see it as a problem to abandon the concept of a south commercial area and move the alignment down closer to the south edge of the airport property. Mascad said it was his understanding that the road may not be able to be moved to the south, because of a pond to the south that is not on airport property. Chait asked if it were possible to move the street alignment north of the pond, but not as far north as it is proposed for now. Mascad replied that would not provide the required clearance of 1,000 feet. He agreed the pond is not on airport property, but there is an easement that there will be no building on the pond, so that there is 1,000 feet of clearance from the end of the runway. Chait asked why the planning staff and the street study consultants were not aware of this situation. Rockwell said staff and the consulting firm had discussed the artedal street alignment with the airport manager and had understood from reading the adopted Airport Master Plan that Runway 17/35 was due to be closed eventually. Because the timing of the road construction in this area was not immediate, the consulting firm determined that when the runway was closed, the road could be put through. Rockwell said it is not certain that there will be sufficient funds to keep that runway open, maintained and functioning safely. But if that is the case and a decision is made to keep the runway open, then another alternative will need to be looked at in terms of street alignment. Mascari said most of the airports in the State have only two runways, and the FAA will only support two. He said if potential funds come into the Airport, the first pdority of the Airport Commission is to keep that runway open. Mascad added that the FAA mandates that any funds generated on the airport property have to remain with the airport. Chait said he could not support putting the road in the proposed location if it compromises the use of the runway or the ability of the airport to keep that runway. He said the location of N2 is based on design parameters from the Airport Commission, and if those parameters change, the selection of that road alignment will change as well. Chait said no one is at fault here, but the Commission will have to rethink the road alignment. He said the Commission will have to look at the other altematives again, and re-evaluate based on slightly different cdteda around the runway. Rockwell noted that the Commission would not be going back to square one because much of the research has already done for the various street alignments. Mascad noted that the location of N5 would be perfectly acceptable with regard to the north/south runway. Shannon said the actual distance between the runway and a road had to come out to 1,000 feet. He asked how far back either way would be needed for clearance once you get away from the runway itself. Mascari said it is pie-shaped and he thought that it goes out to 1,000 feet on the outer edge. Shannon suggested a kind of tubeway, a small tunnel, at the end of the runway. He said he has seen other places where roads have dipped under the end of the runway like that. Shanr~on noted that some of the other road alignments were much more expensive than N2. Mascad said the tunnel concept might be faidy expensive. He said the floodplain in the area might also cause a problem with that scenario. Chait suggested going back to the consultants with the change in the design parameters. He said he was comfortable with the goal of keeping all three runways open. Howard Horan. 2407 Crestview Avenue, said he is a member of the Airport Commission. He said one of the pdmary concerns about the functionality of the Airport is to be able to use the Master Plan as it has been developed, and that is adding about 800 feet of concrete on the end of another runway, runway 6~24. Horan said exactly when and how the funding for that will happen is unknown at this time, because it has a lot to do with the availability of FAA funding. Horan said if that funding were available and Runway 6~24 were lengthened, it would be an important step in understanding how valuable those last hundreds of feet of Runway 17/35 Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 4 might be. Horan said all of the aviators he has spoken with are uttedy and seriously committed to the north/south runway. Horan said in the future, there is a possibility that there will be technological advances having to do with GPS navigation systems that may make it possible to reduce the length of that runway. Horan said the Airport Commission wants to be a member of the community and wants to help the Planning and Zoning Commission get traffic frcm point A to Foint B. He .said the important thing to consider is that the safety and functionality of the airport will be improved substantially when Runway 6/24 is expanded. Horan urged the Commission to explore other alternatives if a commitment is needed now on the route of this road. He said if the City does not have to make a commitment now, perhaps time will be on the side of the Airport Commission as well as the Planning and Zoning Commission. Chait said the Planning and Zoning Commission's commitment is to support whatever the Airport has to have to work. He said the Commission was merely supporting the design parameter of the Airport Master Plan. Chait said he was hearing Horan say that it is possible that runway may still close in the future, and Horan confirmed this. Chair said the N2 route was chosen given the fact that the Commission thought the north-south runway was going to close and the possibility of having commercial property on either side of the street alignment would maximize its economic potential to serve the Airport. He said putting the route closer to the south boundary of the Airport just mitigates against the possibilities of economic development. He said if the street location is moved, it might affect future economic revenues that may be generated for the Airport. Chait said reiterated that if the runway is to be kept, the Commission wants to work around the revised design parameters. I arty Wilson. University of Iowa Campus Planning, said wherever the road ends up, if it goes through the University property, either at the Thomas & Betts building or the Pdnting Services Building, it would affect the University's future plans for expanding the use of its property and would also affect the current uses. Wilson said the University is open to dealing with this and will respond to the possibilities for working with the City. Wilson asked the Commission to keep that in mind as the alternative road routes are discussed. Chait asked Wilson if the University has plans to further develop that property. Wilson confirmed this. Chait said he understood the University would potentially consider a land swap. Wilson said he was not sure what would work, because the discussions have not gone that far. He said he did know the road alignment as recommended would require removal of some of the University's loading docks and then the current operations would not work. Wilson acknowledged that the University may be interested in a potential land swap; that the University would be open discussing that as well as other altematives that have not yet been considered. Bovbjerg asked Wilson if he has been in touch with EarthTech and the planning staff all along. Wilson said he or a member of the University staff has been involved in the various stages. Vicky DiBona. 4173 Dane Road, said regarding the read issue, she would encourage the Commission to reconsider the NIA route, although she did not know how that would be affected by keeping the north/south runway open. She said the N1A route was dropped from the initial plan because it runs close to or on the edge of the Runway Protection Zone. DiBona said the plan states that roads are not necessarily excluded from the Runway Protection Zones, but it is preferable that all objects be removed from the Runway Protection Zone. She said the other reason for dropping the NIA option was because the N2 option served more area. DiBona said the plan describes an artedal road as serving half a mile on either side of it. She said the difference between N2 and N1A is 1,000 feet, which would not make a big difference between service areas. DiBona said N1A does not interfere with as many archaeological sites as N1 or Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 5 interfere with the aesthetics of the area as much as N2. She said it also would provide ddvers on that read as well as construction of that mad with less change in grade to contend with. DiBona said she lives on Dane Road, and N5 would change the neighborhood and change the Commission's plan a great deal, if there are to be residences in that area. Regarding future proposed uses, DiBona showed the neighborhood where she lives on Dane Road. She referred to .the i}roposals for townhouses and condominiums on either side of her, apartment buildings to the north and single-family dwellings to the south. DiBona suggested that the area behind the residences along Dane Road be reserved for green space and a recreational area. She said preserving the area as a green space opens up the opportunity for the proposed trail system to the east to be expanded to the west. She said the trails could be linked through the recreation area and the buffer area along Highway 218 to the two recreation areas that are already proposed. She said it would create a triangular recreation space connecting all the areas of recreation and green space, as well as creating commuter trails in the south area of the South Central District. DiBona bicyclists, joggers, and walkers heavily use Dane Road. She said this would be a trail system that the public would support, as would future residents of the area. Howard Horan urged the Commission not to consider any road alignment that runs anywhere close to the Runway Protection Zone or the object free areas of the airport. Karen Williams. 4146 Dane Road, asked what some of the altematives for the arterial street would be. Rockwell suggested that Willlares review the arterial street study, which evaluates a number of street alignments and why one alternative may have been selected over another. Roxanne Bohlke. 4195 Dane Road, referred to the map of the arterial and collector streets showing the proposed streets. She showed an area east of Dane Road that is proposed in the draft South Central District Plan for single-family housing. Bohlke said the person who has just purchased the land already has an incredibly huge development of manufactured housing south of the airport. She said this developer is cuffing into a beautiful hillside and just destroying it to the point that it looks like a mining site. She said she does not have too many objections to the collector street in her area, although she does not like the fact that it would be directly across from her driveway. Bohlke asked how strict it would be for the area to be single-family housing and if the landowner to the east would have to rezone it to have him move further to the west with manufactured housing. Rockwell said the manufactured housing park she mentioned is in the County, and the rezoning process would be handled by the County. She said under the Fringe Area Agreement, the City has with the County, the City has the dght to make recommendations on rezonings to the County Board of Supervisors. She noted that the City does not have the authority to approve or deny County rezonings. Rockwell said if the property remains in the County and is zoned by the County to allow a manufactured housing park to go there, the streets could not follow the design as proposed in the draft plan. She said the plan is intended to guide development and show potential alignments for streets if the area were annexed into the City in the future. Rockwell said if the property remains in the County, then the proposed urban development in the plan will not apply. Jonathan Jordahl. 709 6th Avenue. Coralville, said he'd like to comment regarding the County's plans in the rural area here if the property were not annexed were not annexed into the City. He said he and Mike Lehman were at the meeting because they have been delegated by the Board of Supervisors to attend sessions working on a revision of the Fringe Area Agreement with Iowa City. Jordahl said it has certainly been the intention of the Board over the last few years to cooperate with the City in planning and in doing things that will conform with the City as it grows. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 6 He said he could not speak for future boards, but in looking at the Fdnge Area Agreement, the Board will be listening to what the City has to say and respecting the plans it has laid out. Public discussion closed. Rockwell announced that if anyone would like a copy of the South Central Distdct Plan or the arterial street study, he or she should sign up on a sheet available at the back of the room. MOTION: Chait moved to continue the public hearing on the South Central District Plan to the October 7, 1999 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Bovbjerg seconded the motion. Bovbjerg said this is a good example of why the Commission holds discussions and continues them, because things always come up in the process. She said the new information really does change all the weights and the way some of these things are looked at. Chait said this is not something where the Commission is going to do anything but support the recommendations of the people who are doing the detailed analysis. He said the Commission is simply trying to coordinate action with all those concerned. He said the Commission may want to revisit its time line. Bovbjerg said if this development is dependent on the read alignment, then this sets the whole plan back as far as it takes to get a reasonable, honest read alignment. She said she would not go ahead with anything else on the whole plan if there is a major problem with the read alignment, which there seems to be. Chait said the research was already done on ten or fifteen alignments and is available. He said the choice of making one alignment a pdodty over another involves weighing all of the alternatives. He said the only change is the fact that there will be three runways at the airport, with the north/south runway remaining. Chait said all of the analysis has been done with due diligence. He said the Commission just has to factor in that the runway will stay open and come to a different conclusion for an artedal street alignment. Bovbjerg agreed that the analysis is done, but said the Commission does not know how long factoring in the new information will take. She said the facts are still there, but this really does change the whole perspective. Chait said he would like to get feedback from the consultants at the next meeting as to what the change does in terms of reanalyzing the information. He thought that would give some idea of the time frame for the plan. Supple said the Commission originally looked at this plan one and one-half to two years ago and was bogged down, because the Commission did not have a good location for that street. She said the Commission then thought it had what was a good location for that street and now discovers that it does not. Supple said she is in favor of postponing this and would not be surprised if the Commission were not ready by the next meeting to vote on the draft plan. She said this will be on the October 7 Planning and Zoning Commission agenda, and hopefully the new analysis of the consulting firm will be available at that time. The motion to defer carried on a vote of 5-0. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes September 16, 1999 Page 7 CONSIDFRATION OF THF SFPTFMBFR ~>. 1999 PI ANNING AND 7ONING COMMISSION MI=FTING MINUTI=S: MOTION: Bovbjerg moved to approve the September 2, 1999 minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission, as amended at the informal meeting. Shannon seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. OTHER: Bovbjerg said she spoke to Jim Throgmorton's planning class for graduate students earlier in the day. She told the class that the Commission relied heavily on and was very appreciative of the planning staff. She had also discussed the legal underpinnings of the Commission and the kinds of things looked at by the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:41 p.m. Dean Shannon, Secretary Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte IOWA CITY PLANNIN6 & ZONING COMMISSION MEETIN6 THURSDAY, .SEPTEMBER ;18, 1999 - 7:30 P. M. CjFjC Cellter Colllldl Chambers SIGN IN SHEET Name ]. Z H. ~T CALL TO ORDER ATTENDANCE EXECUTIVE SESSION 3b(7) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - September 2, 1999 Lobby Conference Room Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 2:08 P.M. Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, J. Stratton and J. Watson. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton 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, 5/0, all members present. Open session adjourned at 2:09 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 3:00 P.M. Motion by P. Farrant and seconded by P. Hoffey to review PCRB Complaint #99-04 at level 8-8-7 B. 1 (a) in accordance to the ordinance. Chair directed Legal Counsel to speak with the City Attorney regarding the "Supplemental Report" from the officer included with the Chief's last Report. 2 PUBLIC DISCUSSION None BOARD INFORMATION L. Cohen - contacted by Rick Spooner, a city council candidate. L. Cohen - acknowledged a memorandum she sent to staff on August 26, 1999, and a reply memorandum from M. Karr dated September 1, 1999 (both received by board members and staff this date). Following discussion, the Chair summarized that issues of substance that concern the Board be brought to her attention before they are brought to the Board. J. Watson - contacted by Ross Wilburn, city council candidate. Watson suggested that the continuity of the PCRB be an issue for all candidates to address. STAFF INFORMATION None ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned at 3:25 P.M. ~-2t-qq POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - September 14, 1999 Lobby Conference Room CALL TO ORDER Chair L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: L. Cohen, P. Hoffey, J. Stratton and J. Watson. Board member absent: P. Farrant. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and Administrative Assistant S. Bauer. Also in attendance was Captain T. Widmer of the ICPD. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey to adopt the Consent Calendar. Discussion followed regarding the City Manager's memorandum regarding diversity training. Board members expressed their appreciation for being informed. P. Hoffey expressed interest in knowing about the length of the training, the type of instruction, and who is doing the training. Motion carried, 4/0, Farrant absent. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Receive PCRB Public Report #99-04 POLICE POLICIES, PRACTICES, AND PROCEDURES Report by Legal Counsel re In Car Recording Devices General Order: C. Pugh reported on her communications with the City Attorney, acknowledging receipt of Ms. Dilkes letter dated 8/25/99. The tapes will be kept and will be available to the Board. Not all incidents are recorded, however. Ms. Pugh does feel the 90-day period needs to be extended, as a complaint could be received at the end of the 90 days; they would be willing to extend it to 110 days. Officer Widmer indicated it has already been extended to 110 days. Officer Widmer advised the Board that all officers have been trained in the use of in-car recorders, and all officers are now mandated to follow the General Order, and will activate the device when required and also at their discretion. Every officer will be issued his/her own lapel mic. Further discussion of the General Order followed. 2 Police Vehicle Pursuits General Order: The following editorial changes were suggested by J. Stratton: 1. OPS-02.6 'C should read "Notification - When a motor vehicle pursuit is initiated, it shall immediately b__e reported ..... " 2. OPS-02.7 D.5 should read "Contact surrounding agencies and advise them of the pursuit. We do not encourage involvement of other agencies unless specifically requested." 3. OPS-02.7 E.2 should read "In the event the supervisor initiates the pursuit, the supervisor [or he/she] should ..." 4. OPS-02.7 E.5 - "their" should be changed to "the supervisor's." 5. OPS-02.8 F.4 should read "Do not focus the spotlight on the back window of the pursued vehicle." 6. OPS-02.11 A.4 and A.5 - Put these in a positive by stating "Whether" instead of "Did." CONSIDERATION OF SUBPOENA POWER Legal Counsel advised that subpoena power would probably not be difficult for the Board to obtain. Usually subpoena power is grouped with discovery power, which the Board already has - the ability to conduct its own investigations and invite witnesses to talk to the Board. Subpoena power, however, will not cure the main reason the Board wants it - that is, to get the policeman's side of the story if the policeman doesn't want to tell his side of the story to the Board. The policeman will still have the opportunity to plead the fifth amendment. The Board could subpoena the officer's statement, but they could block that subpoena by saying the policeman is refusing to release that information, it's a voluntary statement and he has the right to not incriminate himself. The Board already has access to the case report, including the supplemental report .by an officer, if there is one prepared. Watson inquired whether the Board could request that a summary be routinely prepared. Stratton stated, as he understands it, the refusal to provide the officer's interview has been supported, if not encouraged, by the union. Stratton inquired whether this is a matter of union policy that the Board ought to deal with. Ms. Pugh stated it is a matter of union policy. Capt. Widmer explained that supplemental reports are usually secondary reports when there's a follow-up investigation. It is his opinion that the supplemental report the Board is requesting would actually be handled in the internal and would be part of the internal report. It is not a matter of policy or routine that supplemental reports are requested within the ICPD. Anything that's in the official case file, the Board has access to. Pugh reiterated that the Board can request anything that is in the case file, but does not have access to information gathered to investigate the incident from the officer. P. Hoffey summarized by stating the Board does have access to the case files, but there are some restrictions regarding internal investigations. Before going further with subpoena power, the Board will see how well they do with case files when they ask for them. Looking at the complete file might be very helpful. If the Board feels it needs to see more, the issue of subpoena power will again be addressed. E-MAIL AND OFFICE CONTACTS Legal Counsel reported on how the City handles e-mail with the City Council. Staff does not forward e-mail on to the City Council unless it is addressed to City Council, in care of some particular member of staff. That is considered correspondence to the City Council and is forwarded on. Any e-mail that is received in the Clerk's Office or by the Board's Admin. Assistant that is directed to the Board is automatically forwarded to the Board as correspondence. From time to time, the Clerk receives questions from people that isn't directed to the Board, it is directed to her as a matter of information-gathering, and it routinely has not been reported. The Clerk has now agreed to pass that information on to the Board, if the Board wishes. Legal Counsel and the Clerk did discuss the caveat that sometimes a person may contact the Clerk with a question concerning a potential 4 complaint, but not really want to pursue it, and that person really wouldn't want their name to show up on the Board's consent calendar. The City Clerk would be happy to give reports to Ms. Bauer on a regular basis about what contacts were made to her office concerning business that would affect the Board. They then need to be handled carefully so they remain confidential. If the Board wants to use that on a statistical basis, this information would give a fuller picture of office contacts. As outgoing Chair, L. Cohen suggested that all contact information should be brought to the attention of the Chair on a weekly basis (in written form), and the Chair could make the decision whether it is essential to go to the Board. Since the PCRB "exists for a specific reason and has support staff to support it's reason rather than an advisory board that supports a City function," Watson agreed that the Board should be looking at everything. The Chair stated that the consensus of the Board is if the City Clerk or the Board's Admin. Assistant receive e-mail, it shall be reported to the Chair. The Chair requests that a printout of all e-mail correspondence be provided at the weekly meetings; also any phone calls the Board's Admin. Assistant receives during the week should be reported at the weekly meetings. Names will not be withheld from the Chair unless the person requests that it not be forwarded. If correspondence is critical to an officer, that officer's name will be blocked out prior to transmission to the Chair. Chair directed Ms. Pugh to inform the City Clerk of this direction. NEW BUSINESS Chair advised that Board elections will take place at the regular meeting on October 12, at the beginning of the meeting, prior to the presentation by the Police Department. Chair advised that P. Farrant's presentation on national boards has been deferred to the next special meeting, September 28, 1999. MEETING SCHEDULE · Special Meeting September 28, 1999, 7:00 P.M. · Regular Meeting October 12, 1999, 6:00 P.M. · Special Meeting October 26, 1999, 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Capt. Widmer confirmed the ICPD presentation on Use of Force at the Board's October 12 meeting. This presentation will be the same as presented at the Citizens Police Academy, with updates. Board members also wish to discuss the Use of Force Reports. BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION An ICON newspaper article was distributed. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Hoffey 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, Farrant absent. Open session adjourned at 8:20 P.M. Regular meeting resumed at 8:50 P.M. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton to approve PCRB Public Report #99-04, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Farrant absent. Chair directed Legal Counsel to check with the City Attorney to verify that the complainants are receiving the Chief's Reports. J. Watson requested, and Chair confirmed, that the format of PCRB reports be an agenda item for the next Board meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton. Motion carried, 4/0, Farrant absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:51 P.M. PCRB PUBLIC REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL This is the Report of the Police Citizens Review Board (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint PCRB #99-04 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Section 8-8-7 B, the Board's job is to review the Police Chief's Report ("Report") of his investigation of a complaint. The City Code requires the Board to apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review to the Report and to "give deference" to the Report "because of the Police Chief's...professional expertise." Section 8-8-7 B.2 While the City Code directs the Board to make "findings of fact," it also requires that the Board recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify his findings only if those findings are "unsupported by substantial evidence," are "unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious," or are "contrary to a Police Department policy or practice or any Federal, State or local law." Sections 8-8-7B.2(a), (b), and (c). BOARD'S PROCEDURE On June 3, 1999, the Complaint was received at the office of the City Clerk. As required by Section 8-8-5 of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Police Chief for investigation. The Chief completed his Report and submitted it to the Board on August 30, 1999. The Board voted to review the Complaint in accordance with Section 8-8-7 B. 1 (a), which means that the Board may examine all complaint information on the record with no additional information. The Chief included with his Report copies of the Iowa City Police Supplemental Report and the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) record, both relating to the incident that led to the complaint; and summaries of interviews with the complainant and the Police Records Clerk. A summary of an interview with the officer was not submitted to the Board. The Board met on September 2, and 14, 1999 to consider the Report. FINDINGS OF FACT At approximately 1:45 p.m., the complainant appeared at the Iowa City Police Department (ICPD) to get information about his driving record. The Police Records Clerk who was assisting him thought that she detected the odor of alcohol about him, that his eyes did not seem to be focusing properly, that his speech was slurred, and that he showed some confusion. She asked if the complainant had driven to the ICPD and received an affirmative answer. She then informed the dispatcher of her perception of his condition and of her concern that he not drive. The dispatcher requested that Officer A investigate the situation. Officer A spoke briefly with the Records Clerk, then approached the complainant in the lobby and asked if he had been drinking. The complainant denied that he had been drinking, and stated that he had not had a drink for 16 years. Officer A detected an odor that he felt, but was not sure, was alcohol, and was not certain there were any other indications that the complainant had been drinking. Officer A accompanied the complainant as he left the Civic Center to return to his car. Once outside, near the complainant's car which was parked in front of the Civic Center, Officer A asked him to submit to a Preliminary Breath Test (PBT). The complainant took the test, which registered .002 (a reading of. 1 indicates intoxication according to Iowa law). Officer A informed the complainant that he was free to leave. CONCLUSION Allegation 1. The officer administered the breath test without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The officer requested the PBT because the Police Records Clerk had reported her suspicion that the complainant had been drinking and was concerned that the complainant not drive away from the ICPD if he had been drinking. She had detected an odor of what she thought was alcohol, and other characteristics she felt indicated he might be intoxicated. The officer was aware that the complainant intended to drive from the ICPD, and was rightfully concerned about public safety and the safety of the complainant if he was to drive while under the influence of alcohol. Accordingly, the conclusion in the Chief's Report that the officer had probable cause to administer the PBT is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation 1 is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 2. The officer failed to advise the complainant that he could refuse to take the test. Under Iowa law, officers are not obliged to inform individuals that they can refuse to take a field sobriety test. Accordingly, the conclusion in the Chief's Report that the officer did not wrongfully fail to inform the complainant that he could refuse to take the test is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation 2 is NOT SUSTAINED. Allegation 3. The officer used an inaccurate Preliminary Breath Test unit to conduct the test or administered the test wrongly. Because there is no record that Officer A signed out a PBT on the date of the incident, it was not possible to determine the accuracy of the unit he used. However, the reading of .002 is far below the level set for intoxication according to Iowa law. Accordingly, the conclusion in the Chief's Report that there is no evidence to support a finding that the testing unit was used incorrectly or 4 was malfunctioning is supported by substantial evidence and is not unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious. Allegation 3 is NOT SUSTAINED. COMMENT: The Board recommends that the Chief insure that appropriate administrative policies and procedures be developed and/or followed to permit routine identification and tracking of each PBT unit in the field. DATED: September 14, 1999