Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-04-04 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES ' P IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Subject to ,/ proval i MONDAY, JANUARY 31,2000, 5:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lars Anderson, Richard Carlson, Mike Gunn, Doris Malkmus, Linda Shope, Sue Licht, Marc Mills, MEMBERS ABSENT: Frank Gersh, Michaelanne Widness, Pam Michaud STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler OTHERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Lorraine Bonans CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:30PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT GUIDELINES Anderson referred to the list of issues that was discussed but not completed at the January 24 meeting. 8. Should we allow panel .qaraqe doors as well as smooth ones? Kugler said that historically the commission has tried to talk the property owner into wood panel garage doors. It has also required flat, non-decorative garage doors. Generally, the aluminum pressed doors have been discouraged. Shope asked if this would be appropriate for Victorian type homes. Malkmus commented that if there are two small single doors next to each other and they are both flush on a garage it would look modern. Gunn noted that the wording was "smooth". Smooth garage doors do not appeal to him. His personal preference would be a panel door. Mills suggested smooth or panel; plain and simple in design. Malkmus said the whole idea is to make them unobtrusive. 9. What quideline should we use for built-in qutters? Licht commented that aluminum not be used unless it is a single sheet; otherwise there is so much expansion and contraction that the joints don't always hold. The joint would be the failure point. She believes a sheet rubber should be used because it can he welded together to become a single surface. She recommended eliminating aluminum flashing. Licht brought up the point of removing the original built-in gutters. She said she has yet to see a building with an original built-in gutter that did not have major wood rot attached to it. Most people have dealt with it by covering it over and tacking a gutter on the outside. She said very few people have chosen to re-build a built-in gutter. It was decided to take out the statement to remove the gutter. 10. How should we screen porches? Malkmus noted that there is the statement that says you can include a portion of the front porch. She said that it leaves the facade of the building more visible. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 31,2000 Page 2 Gunn reported that the design book recommended that front porches not be enclosed. Enclosing side or back porches with glass or screen is recommended only if great care is taken. He interprets this to say that front porch enclosures are discouraged. Historically the commission has recommended that the screen be placed behind columns. Malkmus asked if a permit would be required. Kugler said in some cases it is not required. Some type of installations are done from behind. Anderson noted that using the Secretary of the Interiors guidelines it is not recommended in enclosing porches that results in diminution or loss of historic character such as using solid material such as wood, stucco or masonry. Anderson suggested changing the heading "disallowed" to "not recommended". 11. Removal of porches does not currently require a permit. Should it? Malkmus inquired about a situation where there was a porch that had a couple of steps that would be torn off and replaced with a concrete pre-cast. She wanted to know if the concrete pre-cast required a permit. Kugler indicated that it does for rental property, but he was unclear if it did for single family. She suggested a review for porches. Kugler said that it would require a change to the building code to require a permit in historic districts. He suggested going to the Board of Appeals and ask them to make this addition the next time they make changes to their ordinance. Kugler suggested speaking to the Board of Appeals regarding this issue. If it looks like it will hold up the process, then it was decided this item should move to "not recommended" until the Building Code is amended. 12. Is the fake pillar-beam, concrete porch desiqn a qood idea? Gunn said this area in the exceptions category means to recess it to create the place for the lattice. Where there is normally lattice it is to be recessed about an inch and a half. He commented that a concrete porch should not be allowed that requires a big wall. Anderson suggested saying that there can not be a concrete porch over eighteen inches unless following the guidelines. Malkmus said she thought a concrete porch this was a bad idea. Gunn felt it was a good idea to limit it to eighteen inches and beyond that there would need to be masonry supports and frames. Licht joined the meeting at 6 p.m. 13. Shorter balustrades require Board of Appeals action. Should we try to obtain authority for certain deviations and write a quideline for it? Kugler said he checked with the attorney for the board and he felt it would be possible to set up such a process. It would be necessary to talk to the Board to get such an agreement. This would mean that the commission would be given the authority to grant those waivers under certain conditions. Malkmus felt that forty-eight inches was too high and she noted that thirty inches required a rail. It was decided that forty inches would be acceptable. COMMISSION MEMBERS ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION Widness noted she felt that there needed to be a better defined style sections and referred to district guidelines. Anderson made this same point. He suggested using common Iowa City styles and referencing them in the individual district guidelines. Malkmus suggested using a schematic or going through each style with height and mass, roofline, overhangs, window, doors, porches, and siding. She said the only bungalow style in the Governor/Lucas Street have gable forwards and massive porch on the front. She said there are lots of other bungalow styles. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Minutes January 31,2000 Page 3 Anderson suggested highlighting the type by area. Kugler commented that he thought it would be beneficial to keep it area-specific. It was decided to have a general style section with a note indicating where more information may be obtained. Gunn then inquired about the shingles. He did not find an interpretation in the guidelines. He said he has heard many times that it should be gray shingles that would look like weathered wood. Licht said that one cannot buy a single color composition shingle unless it is plain black. Malkmus suggested that the wording be wood shingles are the preferred roofing. If a composite roofing material is chosen it should be as close to weathered roof shingles in appearance as possible. Licht commented that there are a lot better selection of shingles now that there was ten years ago. She said that the new wood look lasts a very short time and the weathered wood is probably acceptable. She went on to say that it may read texture and color of weathered wood. Licht commented that a lot people do use metal and they have been on for seventy years. Malkmus pointed out that people in Governor and Lucas have said that they do not want to be held to the original roof. She suggested that the wording say that the commission ask them to try determine the original roof and try to put something on that is compatible with the original appearance. Licht also noted that texture is important. She believes there should be the recommendation that it would be shingled to look as close as possible to a weathered wood. Licht questioned the setback statement. Gunn said the whole idea was to encourage people to put additions on the back of their homes. Licht said the Secretary of Interior wants a differentiation between what is new and what is existing, but they do not really tell you how to do it. This gives an architect more leeway. Gunn said he felt there was more leeway given with the exceptions. Malkmus felt it could be taken care of by saying that it is either a street elevation or not. It could then say that there should be a distinguishable design. The existing roof pitch will be matched to be at least eight inches of step down. Kugler spoke about the section leading to the guidelines, particularly the listing of Secretary of Interior's Standards. The ordinance states that these standards need to be used in determining whether a project is approved or not. He suggested that the standards be listed first and the commission members agreed. Kugler inquired about the term "standards" and the use of "guidelines". It was decided that a uniform term will be used. Regarding the Summit Street Historic District guidelines on the size issue, Kugler noted that by saying a structure cannot be less than 2,000 square feet may be somewhat exclusionary. A 2,000 square-foot home that meets the standards would be quite expensive. Licht pointed out that this applies to new structures. Malkmus said that she would re-work this section. On the Governor Street Guidelines Kugler said that the maximum size limit will need to be substantiated in the report. Is this consistent with the neighborhood? For vinyl or metal siding he inquired about a limitation of color. It was decided to move it to the recommended/not recommended portion. ADJOURNMENT Mills moved to adjourn the meeting with a second from Shope. The meeting adjourned at 7 PM. Submitted by Le Ann Dunne-Tyson ppdadnVmin/hpcl -31-00,doc 04-04-00 ................ :;_::,,,,,,,· .~.,4b(2U HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Subject to ppl'ov JANUARY 24, 2000 - 5:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lars Anderson, Richard Carlson, Mike Gunn, Sue Licht, Doris Malkmus, Pam Michaud, Marc Mills, Linda Shope, Michaelanne Widness MEMBERS ABSENT: Frank Gersh STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler OTHERS PRESENT: Lorraine Bowans, Ann Freerks CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Widness mentioned the Engled Theatre. Anderson said the Commission discussed the issue at the last meeting and decided to send a memo to the Council. Widness said she missed that meeting and would send her own letter. Anderson said he could incorporate her comments. Anderson said he attended the Friends annual meeting the day before and spoke about what the Historic Prese~ation Commission has been doing. He said there were several questions about the Butler House. Regarding the Butler House, Kugler said the Commission has been searching for money to hire a consultant to do some of the planning work but has not had any luck so far. He said staff filed for community development block grant money. Kugler said the Historic Presewation Commission was named as the applicant for that grant, and wanted to verify that that was okay since it was not directly discussed with the Commission. There was general agreement that this was appropriate. Kugler said Friends of Historic Prese~ation has discussed the idea of having street signs in historic districts being different than standard signs. He said the idea is to have a brown sign instead of a green sign and to have some type of logo on it. Kugler distributed a few potential Iogos and asked Commission members to bring any other ideas to the ne~ meeting. He stated that this would be relatively inexpensive and could be taken care of fairly quickly, although City Manager and/or Council approval will be necessa~. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT GUIDELINES: Anderson suggested going through the checklist of items provided as a sta~ing point. Anderson stated that item one was written as the introduction to the book. Anderson asked for suggestions for changes or additions. Widness said she had small corrections that she would submit to Gunn. She said she thought the content of the page was veW good. Mills said the third bullet discusses color and texture, while he felt the Commission would also be looking at types of materials. Kugler said the Commission actually does not have the Historic Preservation Commission January 24, 2000 Page 2 authority to look at color. The consensus was to change "color and texture of building materials" to "type of building materials". Kugler said the second to last bullet refers to increasing property values. He stated that some residents have mentioned to him that they don't want a historic district designated if it will increase neighborhood property values, making the neighborhood less accessible to the common family. Widness suggesting ending the sentence with "improve neighborhoods", and that was the consensus of the Commission. Malkmus said the third bullet states that demolition will be reviewed in conservation districts and asked if that would be the standard. Anderson said by ordinance, it would be reviewed. He said if a permit is needed to demolish something in a conservation district, it would be under the Commission's purview. Kugler said the Commission could decide through the conservation district report which must list out what things get reviewed and what things don't. He said, if for some reason the Commission doesn't want demolition to be reviewed, it can be stated there. Anderson said that is somewhat addressed later on by saying that demolition of certain types of buildings, e.g., non-contributing structures in conservation districts, would be automatically granted at the next meeting. Gunn said that language is right out of the existing guidelines. Malkmus said the Commission doesn't have any way of determining which structures are contributing and which are not. Anderson said that is another point of Gunn's - that the Commission needs to make this identification. The second item involved who should review apartment design and should the infill guidelines with modification control the process. Anderson said the Commission has discussed the infill guidelines quite a bit. Kugler distributed copies of the infill guidelines to Commission members. He said what is currently being drafted are guidelines for new apartment buildings within the Central Planning District. He said the guidelines state that when apartment buildings are being proposed in an area covered by the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Historic Preservation Ordinance will take precedence. Kugler said the Commission has discussed turning that back over to the apartment infill process or at least using the guidelines. He said staff has some concerns about review in historic or conservation districts not being done by the Commission, mainly because the staff Design Review Committee is made up of individuals who are not necessarily proponents of or have great knowledge of historic preservation issues. Anderson said the issue of whether the Commission wanted to get involved in the process would apply to more large-scale commercial buildings probably more in conservation districts than historic preservation districts. He said this is currently set up to be reviewed by the Commission, but there is a City staff commission that would review these projects in non- historic districts. Anderson said the Commission discussed letting that staff committee do the same in conservation districts and possibly historic districts. He said there is currently a point system proposed for new apartment buildings in the Central District, with a minimum number of points being required. Anderson said the points are earned by satisfying different criteria, and the Commission discussed increasing the points for conservation districts more than the minimum elsewhere or by modifying certain features. Gunn said he is in favor of either turning it over to the staff review committee or to modifying the guidelines slightly to actually write into the guidelines how they would be modified for historic districts and then having the Commission use them. He said he is not at all in favor of reviewing large apartment buildings without firm guidelines. Historic Preservation Commission January 24, 2000 Page 3 Anderson said the Commission's consensus was that the infill guidelines were a good document. He said the Commission was comfodable using that document or having someone else use it. Anderson said the document has not been adopted or approved by anyone yet. Kugler confirmed this and said that relying on the guidelines would basically be relying on them being approved. He said staff hoped to bring the guidelines to the Planning and Zoning Commission at its February 17 meeting, but it might not be ready until March. Anderson said he thought that it might be best to have staff do the review for the conservation districts, using a higher point requirement or a higher point requirement in addition to mandating specific requirements and having the Commission keep the review over large-scale apadments, if there were any, in historic districts. Shope asked if the option were given up and it didn't work out, could the Commission regain its purview. Kugler said that would be subject to the approval of the City Council. Anderson said the Commission also proposed for both districts, having the request go to City staff and having them make a recommendation to the Commission, with the Commission having the final say. Kugler said that could also occur outside the staff Design Review Committee. Malkmus said that might be asking too much of the Commission, if a developer comes and asks to put up a great big shoebox building. She said she believes the infill guidelines are a good basis to help developers or builders design something, but she did not want to give up the final review to people whose historic sensitivities are unknown. Malkmus said she would be comfortable with the staff person or Historic Preservation Commission doing some work. She said if a couple of these were put into the mandatory section, the amount of points left would probably be lower than they're requiring. The Commission could put things into the mandatory section that are more about style. Malkmus said she would prefer the Commission keep authority over the final decision for both historic and conservation districts. Mills said he also would prefer the Commission not give up its review. Shope agreed. Anderson suggesting trying it that way then and revisiting it if it becomes overwhelming. He said such a review could take hours to do, if not days, and Gunn and Malkmus agreed. Anderson said it will be easier with the guidelines to point out what the requirements are. Anderson asked if Commission members would like an initial report to come through staff, either one staff person or the Design Review Committee, with the Commission keeping the final say. Kugler said he would rather it did not go to the Design Review Committee. He said one of the ideas behind use of the staff committee was to have this be less onerous for the developer. Kugler said one of the developer's constraints is often time, and he would not like to see developers have to go through two different commissions. He said he would prefer to see the staff person work with the developer to come up with a plan that is ready to be brought to the Commission. Kugler said it may be possible to get the review committee involved at that point also for a major project. Anderson said the Commission has therefore decided to review apartment design and decided that infill guidelines should control the process and should be modified somehow for historic districts, whether by increased number of points or some other method. Gunn said he would like to see a couple of standards moved to mandatory and probably reduce what is left for points. Anderson said his feeling was that that may change from district to district, because what is mandatory for one conservation district may not be the same as for another conservation district. Gunn said it may, but this is written in generic, broad language so that he would not expect it to have to be modified district by district. He said the Commission should be Historic PreseNation Commission Janua~ 24,2000 Page 4 able to make some modifications that are across the board for all historic and conservation districts. Kugler said if the Commission is looking to have one document that has all the regulations, it might want to have a version of this included in there anyway. Mills said it may get changed a little bit in the review process. Anderson noted that item three asked if variance language should be included to give flexibility. Anderson said this referred to page four, the first full paragraph. He said he felt this was pretty broad. Gunn said the language came directly out of the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Kugler said the back of the apartment infill document on the last page in the very last section under item c - some language like that might be appropriate. He said it reads "alternative design solutions or exceptions to the standards will be considered." Kugler said variance would not be the appropriate term as a heading for this, since the City already uses it to describe something else. The consensus was to put this under an "alternatives" heading. Anderson stated that on page three the first bulleted paragraph mentions a "significant economic hardship". He said that is another reason perhaps for an alternative which is not in the ordinance. Anderson said there is not a definition for significant economic hardship. Gunn said that was copied from the guidelines that were adopted in 1990, with the noted exceptions. Anderson said the lack of a definition is a problem with the ordinance, as is the lack of a definition of "key structure". Kugler said he did not like the wording in the previous ordinance, as it seems to make it too easy to demolish a structure. The Commission discussed the possible definition of "key structure". Kugler said in the work on Brown Street and the proposed district, the consultant has defined things using key, contributing and non-contributing, although the National Register nominations do not require identification of key structures. He said some consultants have done it, and some have not. Gunn said if the first bullet were made contributing, it would deny demolitions except under extreme conditions, which may be what the Commission wants. Anderson said the Commission may want to have a designation for a key structure. He said it would be hard to imagine ever approving a demolition for a key structure in an historic district. Anderson said that would then mean the Commission would have to identify the key structures for every district. Widness said she thought this should be in the book but didn't think it should be on page three. She said page three explains what the book is about and how it is organized, and this throws in nuts and bolts information. Widness said she would put the demolition and handicapped accessibility sections in the back. Freerks asked if the demolition provisions would apply to both historic and conservation districts. Kugler said it would, as currently written, but he thought the standards should be looked at individually for each of the conservation districts. Gunn said in the proposed Longfellow Historic District, every property is listed as contributing or non-contributing. He said if that were also done in conservation districts, then it could apply uniformly. Gunn said that determination would have to be done building by building, if it were not done by the researcher. The fourth item concerns what handicap accessibility language should be. Anderson said the Commission, when dealing with the Summit Street property, had a memo from the City Attorney regarding this. Malkmus said many people questioned the memo. She said there might be Historic Pmse~ation Commission Janua~ 24,2000 Page 5 language from another place that has been sanctioned by the National Trust, one of the nationwide organizations that deal with historic preservation. Licht asked about the content of the City Attorney's memo. Anderson said it talked about how the ADA related to this - whether the Commission was stuck just looking at the Secretary of the Interior Standards or whether ADA was something the Commission had to take into consideration. Malkmus said the memo stated that the ADA would take precedence over historic preservation language, but Malkmus said other people have said this is not necessarily the case - that both should receive equal weight. Kugler said that part was probably debatable, but the ADA applicability is correct since the historic preservation program is a public, City-run program; it does need to comply in some way with the ADA. He said the Commission can't deny access to a building for someone with a disability, but it can regulate design issues. Gunn said it is debatable whether or not the ADA applies to a private home, but the position of the City is that it does. Anderson said the City is stating that ADA applies to the Commission's regulation of a home and to what the Commission can tell a homeowner. He said the Commission can't place a restriction on a homeowner that goes against the ADA, because the Commission is a publicly funded group. Licht said she has been to several ADA seminars dealing with historic buildings. She said the line that troubles her the most here is where it states that it may be required that these structures be placed at the side or the back of the building. Licht said the seminars have taught that such a requirement still appears to be discriminatory, and if there is a way to get something done at the main level that doesn't detract from the historic property, then you should go ahead and try to do that. She said this would refer to things that can be done with grade changes, without lots of rails and ramps. Licht said the alternatives need to be examined first, so that you don't appear to be discriminatory. Malkmus suggested leaving the last sentence off to be less specific. She said the accessibility issues are on a case by case basis. Anderson agreed that is an area where the Commission doesn't need to be specific. Kugler said that doesn't provide much guidance for the person designing something for the building. He suggested a page itemizing what is recommended and what is not recommended. Malkmus asked Licht if she would have time to create such a page, since she had the most expertise. Licht said she would help and would have Judy McClure with the state office review it. She said she would put it in the recommended versus not recommended format, because it gives some guidance without mandating certain things. Anderson said item five discussed listing all contributing structures for both demolition and design purposes in both conservation and historic districts. Kugler said the Commission does not yet have property evaluations for Lucas Street. Malkmus asked if a caveat could be added to that stating, "unless more historical information is discovered". Anderson said he thought a house could always move from the non-contributing to contributing section as more information became available. Anderson asked if the Commission wanted to identify key structures in districts. Widness said several things have to be defined, because a lay person picking up the guidelines will be lost. Anderson said the only place key structure is used is in the demolition section. Gunn said the Commission in general would have a hard time distinguishing key structures in most of the Historic P~se~ation Commission Janua~ 24,2000 Page 6 districts. Michaud said she felt that all 16 houses surrounding College Green Park would be key structures. Anderson suggested eliminating the term key structure. Licht said a key structure is a contributing structure. The consensus was to take the term out of the guidelines and leave it as contributing. Anderson said these guidelines, if adopted, would supersede the earlier guidelines. Malkmus said she liked the wording, "Before demolition will be allowed on the site, the Commission must approve a certificate of appropriateness for the structure that will replace the one being demolished." Licht asked if it is going to be before demolition is allowed that the Commission has to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the structure or simply before the demolition can actually happen. Anderson said he thought it should be before a certificate for demolition is granted. Licht said she thought before a certificate of demolition is granted, the Commission should see what is going to be the replacement. Gunn said that was what he intended. Kugler said all those things come under a certificate of appropriateness; there is a not a certificate of demolition. Gunn said instead of using allowed, it would read before giving a certificate of appropriateness for demolition. Anderson said before giving a certificate of appropriateness for demolition, the Commission would need to approve a certificate of appropriateness for what's going to be put up. Gunn said that was his intent. Kugler asked if the Commission wanted to let demolition be automatic for non-contributing structures or if it wanted to have the same provision about new plans being approved. He said in some instances, a non-contributing structure can be rehabbed or restored and then fall into the category of contributing. Anderson said the builder would then have to propose a plan of what he would put up before any demolition. Licht said that may not be a bad idea, because sometimes a demolition occurs and there are big gaps left in the neighborhood for a long period of time that become detrimental to the streetscape. Michaud said it would also be a deterrent to a hasty demolition, if a builder has to come to the Commission with plans for what should go in there. Malkmus said there could be drawbacks to that if a building burns down, but the owner doesn't demolish it completely. Anderson said a clause could be included that would state, "unless required for public safety". Michaud said the "before demolition" statement could be put at the end and bulleted, so as to be all-encompassing The consensus was to do that and to put it in a separate section as was done for the handicapped accessibility language. Anderson said item six questions whether synthetic siding should be allowed in certain circumstances. Malkmus said it is allowed in infill guidelines, as written, although not many points are allotted for it. She said people in the proposed conservation district in the Governor/Lucas Street area voiced positive feelings toward vinyl siding. Freerks said she likes the way the infill guidelines handled this issue. She said the single-family/duplex owners in the neighborhood are generally in favor of allowing vinyl siding, and people would like to have that option. Gunn said he didn't have a strong feeling about new structures or non-contributing structures, but writing a guideline allowing vinyl siding on a contributing structure in either an historic or conservation district should not be done. He said he would draw the line between contributing and non-contributing structures. Historic Preservation Commission January 24, 2000 Page 7 Anderson said at some point way in the future, historic districts and buildings may have original, vinyl siding. He said Gunn is proposing that vinyl siding never be allowed. Gunn said this could be accommodated by language stating, "if not original or contemporary to the district". Anderson said he would feel more comfortable with this if that language were added. Gunn said the Commission isn't talking about building new things or adding a lot of costs but is just saying paint your house instead of siding it to people with contributing structures. He said that argument should be made at every neighborhood meeting, and if the residents are adamant about using vinyl, the Commission will face that when it comes up. Kugler said there are existing, contributing structures with vinyl siding. He said College Green and East College Street would not have met the requirements for historic district if siding would have been something that tossed them out. Anderson asked if a permit were needed to replace siding, and Kugler confirmed this in historic districts. Anderson questioned the Commission not allowing someone to replace existing siding in an historic district. Licht said sometimes only half the siding needs to be replaced, and that could be the drawback. Anderson suggested having a grandfather clause to allow properties that are already sided to replace their existing siding. He said it seemed unfair to require all wood if only some siding needs to be replaced. Malkmus said the Commission could make an exception for repairing rather than replacing. Licht said most of the synthetic siding in existing historic districts is aluminum, not vinyl. She said that could be grandfathered in. The consensus was for the guidelines to call for no synthetic siding on contributing structures in both historic and conservation districts and to grandfather in already-sided properties to allow them to maintain their existing siding. Anderson asked for opinions on additions to primary contributing structures and whether or not they could have siding. Gunn said he would not want to allow siding on an historic property - the building itself or the addition. Michaud said the Commission allowed Hardi-Plank on Summit Street, and she felt that was a good compromise. Anderson said the guidelines would specifically allow for Hardi-Plank. He said the Commission agreed to grandfather in existing siding but asked about adding onto a house with siding. Licht said it would not look historic to match the 1940s aluminum siding and not the 1880's wood clapboard underneath. Malkmus suggested including a statement that the integrity of the design of the building would be the first priority. She said if they can match the vinyl or aluminum then that's okay, and if they can achieve that by another material that gives it stylistic integrity, that's okay too. Anderson agreed it may be better to say, if you can match fine, and if not, it will be judged on a case by case basis. Gunn said he would lean toward matching the original. Licht said it gets to be a design issue. She said she agreed that if you are going to put an addition on and can make it look enough like an addition but compatible, then the Commission should be aiming for getting back to the original type of siding. Licht said then if you did decide to pull the other siding off, you're not doing a whole siding process. She said she also thought it had to be on a case by case basis. Malkmus pointed out that in the Governor/Lucas Street Conservation District draft guidelines, it does allow for new, primary structures to have vinyl siding. Kugler said it would be a hard sell to not allow vinyl siding in a conservation district. Licht agreed, as it is a more economical way to build a new structure. She thought the only thing reasonably done in a conservation district might be to try to figure out a way to review the details of it. Historic PreseNation Commission Janua~ 24,2000 Page 8 Kugler discussed the potential Longfellow Historic District. He said there could be some recommended, disallowed, and not recommended and then a statement to see specific guidelines for what is allowed in each district. Kugler said the siding issue could then maybe be included in the district by district guidelines. Anderson said that was different from not allowing siding in historic districts at all, except when grandfathered in. Gunn said if the distinction is made between contributing and non-contributing, then the vinyl siding is disallowed on contributing structures in both historic and conservation districts. Licht said she agreed. Anderson said the Longfellow District has smaller houses with more siding. Malkmus suggested putting them together to say that if it's a contributing structure there will be no vinyl siding, but every district may have its own guidelines. Anderson said that's what Kugler is saying is to put under siding on the main one, "Generally synthetic siding is to be discouraged; see details." Anderson said some districts would then have siding, and some wouldn't. He said this would be mailed out to the districts to get feedback, but asked if the Commission prefers to say that no contributing structures anywhere shall have synthetic siding. Gunn thought the Commission should make that argument and try to get the agreement out to every district. He said if they're dead set against it, then he didn't think the Commission would have a choice, but nowhere in the Secretary of the Interior Standards does it say vinyl siding is approved for contributing structures. Anderson suggested trying that then to see what happens, especially if there is a grandfather clause in consideration of people who already have synthetic siding. Anderson read the seventh item regarding wood or clad wood windows versus vinyl or aluminum windows. Licht said you can get a clad window that is acceptable. She said the Secretary of the Interior Standards and most of the people at the State Historical Office would rather see them painted, because it gives a different kind of reflectivity. Licht said, however, that a lot of the clad windows can be painted to reduce the sheen from a vinyl or metal material. Licht said what is more important than this verbage is the discussion of the actual dimensions of the window sash. She said Andersen Windows makes a sash that is very skinny all the way around, and it looks horribly inappropriate in an historic structure. Licht said she thought the Commission should define the characteristics of an historic sash dimension. She said then if vinyl or clad is allowed, the Commission should encourage people to paint them an appropriate color. Gunn asked Licht if she were comfortable with clad wood windows. Gunn said there are extruded vinyl and aluminum sashes, but he has never seen one that looks good. Licht said she had not either. She said she would prefer to have them ordered primed and then have them painted, especially on contributing structures. Anderson asked if the Commission would want to grandfather in existing windows. Gunn did not think it would be necessary in this case, as it will only apply where it is a contemporary window. He said if they're replacing a window, they should use something contemporary to the historic property, and that's the only place it applies. Malkmus suggested including a statement that the dimensions of the stiles and rails should match as closely as possible. Licht said the Commission discussed preserving existing windows by repairing them first and then talked about replacing the windows but doesn't talk at all about Historic PreseNation Commission Janua~ 24,2000 Page 9 replacing just a single sash, which sometimes needs to be done. Gunn said he could add that. Licht said other than that, it was fairly well covered, and it might just need to be clarified where it says replacement windows and trim must accept paint. As a general point, Anderson said the chart did not appear to cover landmarks not in an historic or conservation district. Malkmus said they are all together on the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Anderson said he thought it should also be listed on the chad that they would be reviewed under the standards for rehabilitation. Licht agreed that would be a good inclusion. Gunn said there is all kinds of compatibility language so that he thought these should be put in, but separated. Gunn said if you read through it, it refers to its context, its neighborhood. Anderson said that can be done at the beginning, just including a paragraph stating that landmarks shall use the same guidelines, except anything dealing with neighborhood compatibility wouldn't apply. Anderson said he had questions beyond the items mentioned by Gunn. He suggested that some places the term disallowed should be changed to not recommended. Shope said paint was mentioned several times as well as color of shingles, which she did not ever recall discussing. Gunn suggested another meeting to finish up the checklist. Anderson asked everyone to make a list of items to discuss and submit them to Kugler or himself so that they can be compiled to eliminate duplication and make a complete list for discussion. He said that discussion could take place at the next meeting. Kugler asked if Commission members would like to hold another special meeting to discuss the guidelines. The consensus was to hold another meeting on January 31 at 5:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. ppadamin\min\hpcl -24.doc 04-04-00 MINUTES ' "~'~A~ THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2000, 5:30 PM , CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lars Anderson, Richard Carlson, Frank Gersh, Mike Gunn, Doris Malkmus, Pam Michaud, Linda Shope, Sue Licht, Marc Mills, Michaelanne Widness MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Scott Kugler OTHERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:40PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None SECTION 106 REVIEW- 1713 WILSON STREET Kugler noted that a survey has not been done of this area. The building was built in the 1920's. Kugler also noted that most of the work is interior except for the windows. Three windows will need to be replaced with larger windows to meet egress requirements. Malkmus noted that there are homes in the neighborhood that do have some significance due to their age; although this home does already have aluminum siding. MOTION: Widness made the motion stating that the home is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Gersh seconded the motion. The motion carried on a 9-0 vote. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS PROGRAM The first issue discussed for the program was the speaker. Anderson suggested Mary Beth Slonniger. He said that she had made a good, yet short presentation at a recent meeting he attended. Malkmus thought a reinforcement of the downtown theme would be a good idea for the presentation. Kugler suggested someone from the State Historical Society. Another thought would be a past juror who was good; a person from Burlington a few years ago was good and gave a knowledgeable and entertaining presentation. The main street director of Iowa was another thought. Widness thought that a speaker for downtown might be counterproductive. Widness suggested Marlys Svendsen since she would be a perfect person as she is doing a downtown survey. She suggested an exception be made for a repeat presenter. Malkmus inquired about someone from Dubuque since they have a similar situation as Iowa City. Kugler said he could speak with the staff person. She also suggested Marshalltown since they are re-doing their downtown. Widness suggested John Shaw. Anderson pointed noted he has worked on the Englert project. Malkmus said she had heard him speak about compatible and incompatible renovations. It was decided that Shaw would be the first choice. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Minutes February 10, 2000 Page 2 Widness commented that sometime Bob Hibbs with his postcard program would be a good presentation in the future. Licht arrived at 5:50 PM. The commission then discussed the search for award nominations. Kugler said that he has some candidates, but the list has not been compiled. He also recommended that the members put together lists as well. This needs to be done in March so that homeowners may be contacted. The search will be publicized for nominations from the public. It was agreed that the list would be put together within the next couple of weeks. Commission responsibilities were then discussed. Anderson said he thought Johnson County would be participating in the program. He volunteered to set up a planning meeting. Malkmus said she would reserve the program location. Old Brick would be a location if they have curtains up. It was agreed that Preucil School of Music would be the first choice. Mills suggested the auditorium at McBride as an option. Kugler noted that the Masonic Lodge and Court House are other options. Widness volunteered to do the draft of the review and duplicate the program. Mills said he would do the setting up of equipment and chairs. Friends will do the invitation. Refreshments will be done by Widness. Michaud volunteered to set up the information table with Licht doing the follow-up letters. The proclamation presentation will be tentatively done by Anderson. Widness said she would contact Iowa State Bank to assist with the refreshment expense. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC DISTRICT STREET SIGNS Kugler noted that he had handed out some options for signs at the past meeting. He said Friends has offered some money or the City could put up the money. There is a one-time cost as the signs are replaced every seven or eight years on a regular basis. It was agreed that Kugler would bring some other sign design options to the commission for consideration. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT GUIDELINES Kugler passed out information with building styles that could be used for the guidelines. Malkmus also submitted a summary of guidelines that adapt to the in-fill guidelines. They also looked at the conservation district report. Kugler said he would put together the ordinance. He suggested that someone needed to write more about the importance of making the area a conservation district. Gersh volunteered to expand the report. It was suggested that photos need to be taken on Lucas Street between Bowery and Burlington. Kugler said that he felt it would be a good idea to give the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council the district report with a clear set of guidelines for Governor Street included in them. Malkmus said that she was unclear about the building size in the guidelines. Kugler said that he did confer with the city attorney on this issue. She had some concerns about the restrictions based on the zoning ordinance upper limits depending on the size of the lot. Kugler said he is waiting on an opinion on this issue. Licht said that she had some concerns about the sizing restrictions with an inappropriate addition. Malkmus suggested language stating "the size of an addition or new construction shall be judged by the commission based on the appropriateness to the existing structure and the size of the lot. A rule of thumb would be that the residence not exceed 4,000 feet and increased more than 100%". It was agreed that giving parameters with a softer language would be the best approach in this issue. Anderson left meeting at 7PM. Gunn said that he had not revised the historic district guidelines. He confirmed that the historic landmarks would be covered by the guidelines. Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Minutes February 10, 2000 Page 3 Malkmus said that there is language suggesting that there will be large multi-family dwellings in these neighborhoods. They would like them to be compatible with the existing buildings. The in- fill guidelines have items that are mandatory like front setback, lighting, parking, parking below building and building orientation. There is also a section for design point items. She said the commission tried to more narrowly define these items for the conservation district. It was determined some of the things in the optional point design items should be put in the mandatory section. Roofline, modulation, porches and double hung windows would be considered. Gunn said his objection on a mandatory porch would be that it may not be appropriate to the building. He went on to say that he thought they were looking at the in-fill guidelines as one modification that could be used in all districts as they are met. Kugler noted that the in-fill guidelines will go to the Planning and Zoning Commission at their March 2nd meeting. He said that they are good guidelines, however he expects that they will get opposition from the homebuilders association and developers. He recommended that commission write letters or attend the meeting. Malkmus said that she feels it is important to get something in place for the conservation district as the pressure on the properties is really increasing. Kugler said he felt the report is do-able. He feels the guidelines needs to done as proposed. He said that he thinks it needs to wait until the historic district and in-fill guidelines have been approved. They all may be meshed after approval is obtained. Kugler brought up the levels of review in the district. It was decided that the items falling under intermediate review would be window replacements, roofing, rear elevation and siding. Kugler said he would draft a list. Gersh left at 7:20PM. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES MOTION: Michaud moved to approve the minutes with the change on page two from the January 13, 2000, meeting with Malkmus seconding the motion. The motion carried 8-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION/DISCUSSION Historic Preservation Commission Role and Responsibilities: Kugler passed out an e-mail from Kerry McGrath, GLC Coordinator, regarding the Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 1999. McGrath asked for support from the commission members for this bill. Kugler again noted the Planning and Zoning meeting on March 2, 2000, at 7:30 PM, at which time the apartment in-fill guidelines will be reviewed. ADJOURNMENT Michaud moved to adjourn the meeting with a second from Carlson. The meeting adjourned at 7:33 PM. Submitted by Le Ann Dunne-Tyson ppdadm/mi n/hpc2-10-00 .doc 4b(4) IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY Agenda item 3A SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES 5:00 P~I - February, 14, 2000 2xn FLOOR CONFERENCE ROONI Members Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Mar,v McMurray, Shaner Magalhies, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Linda Prybil, Jesse Singerman, Jim Swaim Members Absent: Others: David VanDusseldorp, Adam Lowenstein, Julie Pulkrabek, Alan Slang, Architects Joe Huberty and Chuck Engberg This special meeting of the Board of Trustees was convened at 4:35 p.m. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the schematic designs and cost estimates with the architects, Joe Huberty and Chuck Engberg. Architects presented a run-through of the presentation they had planned for the 7:00 pm meeting with the City Council. They reviewed the process used to get us to the point where we were ~vorking with the "West~vard Ho" expansion. They distributed a hand-out of the schematic design. There were questions regarding the construction process and the continuation of library operations during the renovation and building period. Trustees were pleased with the plan. The Foundation is committed to raising a significant amount towards this project. Martin thanked the architects on behalf of the Board. Meeting was adjourned at 6:00 pm. MINUTES Agenda item 3A IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING February 25, 2000 - 5:00 PM 2"d floor Conference Room Present: Winston Barclay, Linda Dellsperger, Mary lVlcMurray, Shaner Magalh~-es, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Jesse Singerman, Jim Swaim Absent: Linda Prybil Others Present: Fred Lucas, Press Citizen; Nathan Hill, The Gazette CALL MEETING TO ORDER President Martin called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approve minutes of special meeting of January 13, 2000 Approve minutes of regular meeting of January 27, 2000 Both sets of minutes were approved unanimously after a motion. McMurray/Parker UNFINISHED BUSINESS Building Project There was an earlier question concerning construction cost escalation. Craig included a memo describing how the architects came up with their figures. If necessary, Craig will inquire more. Another memo included in the packet detailed what homeowners could expect to pay in additional taxes. The Finance Director provided information. A discussion took place about selecting a date for a referendum vote. Were there any possibilities other than the general election in November? There is an advantage to putting it on the ballot with a general election. It would be costly to have a special election when there is a general election coming up. State law does not allow it to be on the School Board election ballot. Barclay thinks it would be to our advantage to be part of a general election. Trustees wondered whether or not there would be a concern with having satellite voting here if Library expansion was on the ballot. There was consensus that November 7 should be the date. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A February 24, 2000 Page 2 Dellsperger moved that we recommend November 7 to City Council. Barclay seconded it. It passed unanimously. The next item for discussion was a dollar amount to be placed on the ballot. Eckholt was asked for an update on fundraising. He reported that the assessment study is moving ahead quickly. The case statement is almost ready. Interwie~vs will start week of March 20. The goal is to have a report completed by April 26. The preliminary case statement has a figure of four million; two for the building and two to add to the endowment. This may be optimistic which is why a study is being done. If we raised $1.8 to $2 million, the bond issue could be for $15 million. Eckholt believes that we can raise $2 million for the building. There does exist a legal question about whether or not we can reduce the amount of the referendum by what we anticipate raising and what the retail space would earn. The bond expert may consider that the bond wilt have to be for 18.4 million dollars since that is what the building will cost. A consideration might be based on what we expect property tax payers to pay. With revenue coming in from sale of the retail space and private fund raising, we may choose a recommendation that would not cost the taxpayers more than a certain amount. Martin asked for a discussion. There was a recommendation to deduct $1.5 million off the project and make it a $15.6 million dollar project. Swaim suggested that if we are not successful by Sept/Oct and have raised only one fourth of the amount we want to raise we should re-think our position. It was felt that we could not wait as long as Sept/Oct. Swaim is in favor of placing the entire amount on the referendum. The estimate for the sale of the retail space is based on realtor's figures for the sale of space in the new parking ramp by the Senior Center. By resolution, City Council sets the referendum date and approves the language. Craig reported a discussion with Atkins regarding the Board having a recommendation to present to the Council meeting on March 21. Parker thinks that we do need to know what the bond expert will say. Craig explained that the area of bonds is a specialized area and there are differences in types of bonds, etc. With the understanding that the bond expert's information may cause the City to overrule a recommendation, we can request an amount for a bond referendum. It remains an informal decision until Council adopts a resolution that sets a date and amount. Negotiations cannot continue for the Lenoch & Cilek building until we have an election date. Martin asked if people felt we needed more information before we can set a dollar amount. Parker made a motion that we commit $1.5 million; and proposes a bond figure of $15.6 million. Discussion: Singerman is uneasy about planning for fund raising and asking for money based on the architect's escalation cost. However this figure is based on a cautious estimate of what we can raise and could be much more. If more is raised the bond amount can be reduced, money can be placed in the endowment, or put it into the building. Although $15.6 is less than $17.1, it does not make a significant difference in the annual cost of the tax which could be between $55 and $62 per year for the owner of a $150,000 house. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A February 24, 2000 Page 3 Singerman would favor a $16 million figure. Trustees felt a lower bond amount might have a better impact on the public. McMurray was in favor of the $15.6 million and seconded the motion. Martin called for a vote. All voted Yes. Craig will write a memo to Atkins and City Council. The informational brochure is still in draft form. It will be available in the library as an informational piece. It has been reviewed at the City Attorney's office. Once we have a referendum date and amount it will be amended. A question was raised about using kids' faces on the cover. Our policy has been that when we take a group shot we can reproduce it whereas we would ask permission if it was a single shot. Craig does not feel it is an issue. Park "N" Read The assessment is that it has been a positive experience. From november through January $1,034.95 has been spent. Abuse is minimal. Most people are very appreciative. There has been a very small amount of negative feedback. Barclay moved that we extend it, advertise more and study again by August 1, 2000. Dellsperger seconded. At some time Swaim would like to see it expanded to include Saturdays. It would cost more money but would be a good family day. Hearing no amendments to the motion, Martin called for a vote. All voted Aye. New Business Policy Review: Hours of Service for FY01 Calendar appears very similar to the current year. Inservice Day was evaluated recently. Most staff felt it was a valuable resource. The majority of staff wanted to keep it at a full day; and identified training issues that can be productively addressed at Inservice Day. It was noted that 812.3, C needs to be amended to include the 1-5 p.m. for Sunday hours that we currently offer. Moved approval as amended. Parker/Magalh~,es. All were in favor. Policy Review: Volunteer Policy Eckholt's memo explains the recommended changes. This policy raised a question regarding screening adult volunteers. Swaim informed the Board that the State is waiving criminal record check fees for certain groups. Although Swaim is content with the policy, he recommended that we look into it and consider asking applicants to voluntarily go through it. No volunteers work unsupervised with children at the Library. He recommended we take this up with the Iowa Library Association and encourage them to work with the State to have this waiver apply to libraries. This will be an agenda item to discuss at a later date. Parker moved approval of the policy. Dellsperger seconded. It was passed unanimously. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A February 24, 2000 Page 4 Staff Reports Deanne Wortman is retiring as of March 3, 2000 to pursue her art interests. During her 20 years at ICPL, she has been the founding spirit in our involvement in Arts Day, Children's' Day as well as many other programs that have become institutions. Spelling Bee - This was covered in Eckholt's report. Martin read a communication from Eckholt to Board thanking them for their support. Relay for Life - A memo from Lubaroff and Milster thanking the Board for their support and reporting on the success of the Library Team in raising over $3500 for cancer research. Meeting Room A availability Craig was successful in booking April and May board meetings in Meeting Room A. June was hooked for a group. Craig does have a concern that this procedure takes the meeting room away from the public. Unless it is a special meeting and event, we could meet in the Board's Conference Room. Swaim suggests that we book the large meeting room from 5-6:30 and then move up to this Conference Room. We will continue thinking about it. Proposed state property tax freezes. Craig included information in order to make the Board aware of the possibility of this freeze affecting the $8.10 levy which affects the library budget It would also affect the City's credit rating. Des Moines plans for library facilities. Craig included an editorial that described Des Moines' plans for a $37 million dollar library building project. Development Office Report Eckholt's report was included in the packet. Eckholt is pleased with the progress of the annual fund. He's anxious to get. everything in by June 30 to reach their goal. Readings Internet article. There recently was a public vote in Holland, Michigan. Passage of it would have directed the City to deny funding to libraries if they did not put in Internet filters. It failed. Craig reminded the Board that this is an issue that is not going away. It is very possible that the Iowa legislature may try to attach a requirement for filtering to receipt of Enrich Iowa funds. ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A February 24, 2000 Page 5 Craig included a printout of a speech on the construction process document from the Public Library, Association's web page for the Board's reading pleasure. President's Report Appoint Nominating Committee Martin appointed Dellsperger chairperson of nominating committee. Barclay and McMurray will serve. Announcement from Members Singerman reported on her "office hours" shift. It was pretty slow; with only one interested patron. It was suggested that they might attract more patrons if they could be at a table in the lobby. Craig explained that the display walls in lobby are booked up to the 1st of May and the architect's drawings are so large. Trustees could sit in the lobby and direct interested patrons to the smaller meeting room and go over the drawings. Committee Reports Barclay reported that Swaim and he met with the Icon news editor. An article appeared today. He is writing a guest piece for the Gazette that should run promptly. Dellsperger is working on contacting service groups. Building Committee met with the editorial board of Press Citizen. Craig presented building plans. Committee felt it was positive and helpful. Barclay is working on booking a guest spot on Dottie Ray's show. Swaim asked if we had received a copy of the Mayor's state of the City address, which did not mention of the Library. People from the public need to encourage the members of the City Council to stand behind the project. A discussion was held about follow-up on our promise to look at outreach services and other sites as they are appropriate. Craig suggested we can discuss this further when Logsden's report on current outreach is ready. We then can go to City Council and public with recommendations. One of the points we would make in a campaign is that we would not begin to discuss expanding services until we have the necessary space in the current library to support all projects. We must begin the process of evaluating this issue now although we need to keep it low key so as not to distract from the referendum. We have information from David Smith as to when a branch is appropriate. Craig thought that when we get the numbers from the 2000 census would be a time to seriously explore this issue. Basically expansion of the city limits that takes people further away from the center of the city is a time to begin planning for a branch. We will put it on the agenda for April. Craig can talk to the planning staff or invite them to come to the meeting. We ICPL Board of Trustees Agenda item 3A February 24, 2000 Page 6 want to diffuse the notion that it is a choice between downtown or branch library although we need to be clear about our support of a downtown library. Communications Anonymous Letter for Board's information Disbursements Review Visa expenditures for January, 2000 Approve Disbursements for January, 2000 Moved approval. Barclay/Singerman. Unanimous Set agenda order for March meeting. Adjournment 6:45 p.m. was adjourned. MINUTES IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2000 - 5:30 PM CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty McKray, Cathy Weingeist, Jim Pusack, Terry Smith, Steve Hoch STAFF PRESENT: Dale Helling, Andy Matthews, Bob Hardy, Mike Brau, Ty Coleman OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Carl Sefl, Rene Paine, Phil Phillips, Rick Karnes, LaNae Juffer, Dale Simon, Mary Jo Langhorne, Miriam Bennett RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Fisher reported that next Thursday another episode of the series of programs with Hancher What Makes It Great will be held in the Library Meeting Room A at 7 p.m. It will be made available to other libraries over the Iowa Communications Network. Hoch said that he has had very poor service from the ~Home cable modern network. After one outage Hoch had to wait half an hour to reach the customer service center. He was informed that a refund would be issued, but after three months and several calls, no refund has been issued. The Iowa City cable fi-anchise requires that refunds be issued for outages over 18 hours and provide notification to all subscribers that they are entitled to refunds if outages occur. Juffer said that currently the call center is staffed by @Home in Chicago. A local call center will begin operations and these problems should be rectified. Karnes said the target date for taking calls locally is May 5. Paine reported that PATV would offer a workshop designed to provide practical advice for people to make better use of their camcorders through the City Recreation Department this Saturday at the Recreation Center. it is hoped that the programs at the Recreation Center will draw people who might not attend a regular PATV workshop. Iowa City will be hosting a regional conference of the Alliance for Community Media April 14 and 15. Bennett reported that SCTV would be moving into a larger space within the Senior Center. Hardy introduced Ty Coleman, the new Community Programmer. InfoVision has a new site called Iowa City 2K that highlights the major construction projects and compares what the areas look like now and what they will look like when complete. Among the projects are the third floor of the Civic Center, the Peninsula, the Northeast Planning District, and the multi-use parking ramp. Helling said that the City, Coralville and PATV met recently to discuss PATV's contract. Helling noted the letter in the meeting packet from PATV indicated they prefer a 2-party agreement. Coralville would like a three-party agreement, but the City made it clear at the meeting that they do not anticipate there would be any changes in the way PATV operates in the community. PATV will continue to operate community-wide, not just Iowa City. Functionally, the only difference between a two and three party agreement as they operated in the past is the presence of some equipment in the Coralville library. Paine said that Coralville wanted a number of things included in the contract, including when certain types of programming would be cablecast. Coraiville wanted additional services in Coralville but were not forthcoming with any additional funds. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Smith, seconded by Pusack to approve the January 24, 2000 minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher noted that a written report on the activities of the library over the past month was included in the meeting packet. AT&TREPORT The new general manager of the Iowa City system, LaNae Juffer introduced herself and Rick Karnes, the local Technical Operations Manager. Hoch said that he has had very poor service from the @Home cable modem network. After one outage Hoch had to wait half an hour to reach the customer service center. He was informed that a refund would be issued, but after three months and several calls, no refund has been issued. The Iowa City cable franchise requires that refunds be issued for outages over 18 hours and provide notification to all subscribers that they are entitled to refunds if outages occur. An outage for a single subscriber may not be significant, but if the system goes down for everyone, it is a significant loss for the community. Juffer said that currently the call center is staffed by @Home in Chicago. A local call center will begin operations and these problems should be rectified. Pusack said that the fact that subscribers have to wait 20-30 minutes on the phone even to report an outage is quite serious. It would be helpful if the local office was instructed to take those reports rather than refer them to the toll-free @Home telephone number. Some interim arrangement before the calls are handled locally is needed. It is not satisfactory that the Commission is told the problem will be solved eventually. Karnes said the target date for taking calls locally is May 5. Pusack said that the bandwidth of the service varies greatly from moment to moment and asked if them was a way AT&T measured the speed of the service, It is misleading to customers to advertise a very fast connection that is only marginally better than a telephone connection much of the time, Pusack asked if the level of service is uniform across the city. Hoch said that has tried to stream video at 300 kbs and it might perform fine for three minutes but when the speed drops subscribers loose what they were watching. @Home's performance will not allow video streaming. Karnes said a new router was installed on February 14, which has increased speeds. There are localized problems that are being corrected. The service should be able to deliver more consistent speeds than those described. McKray noted that the franchise calls for additional local access channels. There may not be a need for additional channels at this time, but AT&T and the Commission should be aware that there are provisions for additional channels. Matthews and Brau said that the City is aware of the provisions, but does not desire to request additional channels at this time. MCLEOD REPORT No representative was present. ECC REPORT Langhorne distributed a packet of information on the education channel's programming. In 1985 the ECC contracted with Kirkwood Community College to provide the bulk of programming on the channel with the stipulation that other members can cablecast programs when they wish. Langhorne introduced Carl Sefl who provided an overview of the programming provided by Kirkwood. Sefl distributed a packet of information. Kirkwood's channel is in about 81,000 households. Kirkwood's programming is preempted in Iowa City for other programming such as the School Board meetings. The vast majority of the daytime hours are programmed with credit classes. A computer runs screens with information on events at Kirkwood, programming on the channel, and other relevant information when programming is not running. Kirkwood's public radio station KCCK runs undemeath the screens. Career education programs also play prominently in the program schedule. Other purchased programs, such as Creating Model Schools, also receive time. Kirkwood events, such as special lectures and athletic events are occasionally cablecast. The arrangements with the Iowa City Community School District have worked well. The program schedule is available on Kirkwood's web page as welt as the local television guides. Hoch said that the program schedules of all the access channels should be linked on web sites of Iowa City, the Library, PATV and the schools. Hoch suggested utilizing a billing insert with web addresses that include local access program schedules. LEGALREPORT Matthews said there was nothing significant to report. PATVREPORT Paine reported that two production interns are working with PATV. Recently they taped the Winter Carnival and the Gloria Steinham lecture. Listing PATV's programs in the digital program guide is still being pursued. A workshop designed to provide practical advice for people to make better use of their camcorders. The workshop will be held this Saturday at the Recreation Center. It is hoped that the programs at the Recreation Center will draw people who might not attend a regular PATV workshop. PATV will have a booth at the Business Fair. It is anticipated that a nonlinear editing system will be available to producers within a year. Iowa City will be hosting a regional conference of the Alliance for Community Media April 15 and 15. Conference brochures were distributed. SENIOR CENTER REPORT Bennett reported that SCTV would be moving into a larger space within the Senior Center. This will facilitate studio productions. SCTV received some video equipment from the library that they no longer needed. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE REPORT Hardy introduced Ty Coleman, the new Community Programmer. Twenty-six new programs were cablecast in January. Fifteen of those were produced by the Media Unit. Five major project videos are in progress. InfoVision made the State of the City address from the mayor available immediately after it was given. Information on the new City Councilors has also been added. A new site called Iowa City 2K highlights the major construction projects and compares what the areas look like now and what they will look like when complete. Among the projects are the third floor of the Civic Center, the Peninsula, the Northeast Planning District, and the multi-use parking ramp. PATV CONTRACT Helling said that the City, Coralville and PATV met recently to discuss the contract. Helling noted the letter in the meeting packet from PATV indicated that they preferred a 2-party agreement. The City has not yet responded, as the City wanted to get feedback from the Commission. Helling informed Coralville City Manager Kelly Hayworth that the contract would be on this meeting's agenda and if he wished to express Coralville's concerns. Hayworth indicated he did not think anyone from Coralville would be attending. City staff has no strong recommendation one way or another. Pusack asked if the negotiating in good faith language in the contract has been met. Helling said that appears to be the case. There is nothing that forces any of the parties to come to a three-party agreement. Coralville would like a three- party agreement, but the City made it clear at the meeting that they do not anticipate there would be any changes in the way PATV operates in the community. PATV will continue to operate community-wide, not just Iowa City. Functionally, the only difference between a two and three party agreement as they operated in the past is the presence of some equipment in the Coralville library. Paine said that Coralville wanted a number of things included in the contract, including when certain types of programming would be cablecast. Coralville also wanted additional services in Coralville but were not forthcoming with any additional funds. After the meeting, the Board decided a two-party agreement would be in PATV's best interest. A letter was sent to Coralville stating that if Coralville wished to work with PATV in a new way that a separate agreement could be pursued. Smith asked Matthews if the negotiating in good faith clause in the contract has been met. Matthews said that a great deal of time and effort has been expended working towards a three-party agreement and a good faith effort has been made. Matthews said that staff should be able to move toward finalization of the contract with the direction provided by the Commission. NEXT MEETING A special meeting will be held March 6 to discuss the local access survey at 5:30 in the Civic Center. ADJOURNMENT Pusack moved and Weingeist seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was a 6:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mike Brau Cable TV Aide MINUTES IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONg/IISSION SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 6, 2000 - 5:30 PM CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Betty McKray, Cathy Weingeist, Jim Pusack, Terry Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Hoch STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Dale Helling, Andy Matthews, Bob Hardy, Mike Brau OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Rene Paine, Phil Phillips, Mollie Marti, Lisa Werner, Arthur Miller RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. LOCAL ACCESS SURVEY Shaffer noted the letter of introduction in the meeting packet that outlined what is to be measured by the survey. Development of the survey instrument was shaped by the 15 minute time limit for conducting interviews. The draft survey instrument, a detailed cost estimate, and a contract were also included in the packet. Weingeist asked why respondents were not informed that the interview would take 15 minutes at the stag of the interview. Miller said respondents are generally given a rough idea how long the interview will take, but that is not included on the instrument. Werner said that the length is always disclosed if the respondent asks. Miller noted that most interviews would take significantly less than 15 minutes. Wemer said interviewers would bring respondents back to relevant topics if they stray too far on open ended questions. Marti said that interviewers would restate of summarizes responses, if needed. Weingeist asked what the question on how long the respondent had lived in Iowa City was to ascertain. Miller said research has shown that those who have lived in a community longer are more hooked into local communications and follow local events closer. Miller hypothesized that the longer someone has lived in Iowa City, the more likely they will have made use of the services of the local access channels. The question is a good indicator how attached or integrated the respondent is to the community. Marti said that it is also a good warm up question. Pusack said the phrase "local access television" could be problematic. The meaning may not be clear to the public. "Local cable television" may be better. It should also be clear that the interview is not about the cable operator, AT&T. Matthews suggested "local access cable TV channel". Marti said that interviewer have definitions available if respondents ask. Providing examples would intert~re with question 2 that asks respondents to name the access channels. Miller said there is merit in starting out with questions in which the knowledgeable person will know exactly what you mean and those unfamiliar with the topic will not be able to tell you anything. At that point you can give them examples and get more specific information. You don't want to give the appearance that you want the respondent to tell you something when they don't really know. ADJOURNMENT Pusack moved and Weingeist seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 6:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Wm. DZe~*~haff~r Cable TV Administrator 4b(8) POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - March 14, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Chair J. Watson called the meeting to order at 7:08 P.M. ATTENDANCE Board members present: P. Farrant, P. Hoffey, J. Stratton and J. Watson; member absent: L. Cohen. Staff present: Legal Counsel C. Pugh and PCRB Assistant S. Bauer. Captain T. Widmer was also in attendance. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey to adopt the Consent Calendar, to include: a. Minutes of 3/7/00 meeting Motion carried, 4/0, Cohen absent. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL · Receive PCRB Public Report #99-05 · Receive PCRB Public Report #99-06 · Receive PCRB Public Report #99-07 NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS None PUBLIC DISCUSSION None MEETING SCHEDULE · Special Meeting March 28, 2000 - Chief Winkelhake will attend this meeting to update Board members on the process of data collection on race-based traffic stops. · Regular Meeting April 11, 2000 · Special Meeting April 25, 2000 BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION S. Bauer - reported the web site address for the municipal directory. Bauer was directed to report changes/additions on the PCRB page. C. Pugh - reported she has still not made contact with E. Dilkes regarding//99-08 and #00-O1. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by P. Farrant 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, 4/0, Cohen absent. Open session adjourned at 7:15 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Regular meeting resumed at 8:15 P.M. Motion by P. Hoffey and seconded by P. Farrant to approve PCRB Public Report #99-05, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Cohen absent. Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Hoffey to approve PCRB Public Report #99-06, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 4/0, Cohen absent. Motion by J. Stratton and seconded by P. Farrant to approve PCRB Public Report #99-07, as amended, and forward it to the City Council. Motion carried, 4/0., Cohen absent. PCRB staff was directed by Chair to include a copy of the PCRB Standard Operating Procedures in the next packet for review and update. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by P. Hoffey and seconded by J. Stratton. Motion carried, 4/0, Cohen absent. Meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M. MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: Joanne Hora, Jay Honohan, Bill Kelly, Allan Monsanto, Charity Rowley, Carol Thompson, and Deborah Schoenfelder MEMBERS ABSENT: Lori Benz and Mary Kathryn Wallace STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Buhman, Linda Kopping, Susan Rogusky, and Julie Seal. GUESTS PRESENT: Jackie Hess, and Stan Good. CALL TO ORDER Honohan called the meeting to order at 3:05. MINUTES Motion: To approve the January minutes as distributed. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None RETREAT REPORT- Honohan The retreat minutes were reviewed and accepted by the Commission, In order to promote continued effort in attaining the goals and objectives identified at the retreat, it was suggested they be reviewed by the Commission on a regular basis throughout the year. PARKING FACILITY/SKYWALK STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE - Hora As of today $50,000 has been raised to support the construction of the skywalk. The committee is waiting to hear how the City of Coralville will respond to their request for a contribution to the skywalk fundraising effort. The Committee also plans to request additional funding from the Board of Supervisors at the Board's next meeting. AT&T media services soon will be airing advertisements to help promote and raise money for the skywalk construction. In response to the recent Press-Citizen adicle, the Committee asked Commissioners to consider writing a letter to the editor stating why the skywalk is essential for the Senior Center. The Committee will prepare a response to the article and present it to the City Council at their next meeting. SENIOR CENTER UPDATE Operations - Kopping Kopping reviewed tentative timelines and sub-committee assignments for the Senior Center accreditation self-assessment process. Kopping asked Commissioners for names of people who might be willing to serve on a committee. MINUTES 2 SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2000 The Fire Sprinkler Installation and Ceiling Tile Replacement Project is nearing completion. An extensive punch list still needs to be complete before final payment will be made. The Furniture and Redecoration Project is in progress. Changes related to this project will be apparent in the near future. Programs - Seal An update of March programming was presented. Volunteers - Rogusky An update of volunteer programs and opportunities was given. COUNCIL OF ELDERS - Hess A report from the Council of Elders was given. CITY COUNCIL - No report was available. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A report of the Board of Supervisors meeting was given Motion: To adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Monsanto/Hora The meeting adjourned at 4:30.