HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-09-06 Bd Comm minutes3b(1)
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
JULY 13, 2011 — 5:15 PM
CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
APPROVED
Brock Grenis, Adam Plagge, Caroline Sheerin
Will Jennings, Barbara Eckstein
Sarah Walz, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Nick Benson
Lee Eno, Wim Murray, Julie Riggart
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL: Grenis, Sheerin, and Plagge were present.
A brief opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 8 2011 MEETING MINUTES:
Grenis moved to approve the minutes as amended.
Plagge seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 3 -0 (Eckstein and Jennings excused).
SPECIAL EXCEPTION:
EXC11- 00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Lee Eno for a special exception
to allow a reduction in the rear principal setback requirement for property located in the
Medium - Density Single - Family Residential (RS -8) zone at 1026 Fairchild Street.
Walz shared a location map of the property, a corner lot at the intersection of Fairchild and
Center Street. Walz said that the property is somewhat unusual in that it is a square lot and is
slightly smaller than the minimum allowable lot size for an RS -8 zone under the current code.
Another characteristic of the property is that the front setbacks are so deep as to make the
Board of Adjustment
July 13, 2011
Page 2 of 7
required rear setback impossible to achieve. Walz said that the because the north side of the
property comes closest to meeting the required setback it was designated as the rear property
line. Presently, the rear setback is 12 -feet whereas the requirement is 20 -feet. The proposed
addition is on the second floor of the building; however, because the existing first floor of the
house is already within the required setback area, any addition, even one on the second floor,
must have a special exception to reduce the setback requirement. Walz said that in this
particular case, the applicant is also requesting that the second floor addition be allowed to
cantilever out two feet beyond the first floor.
Staff believes that there is an unusual situation here, with the square corner lot and the deep
front setbacks for the house. Walz said that this case is unusual because what is actually the
rear setback functions practically as a side setback. She said that staff thinks this is a
reasonable request due to the unusual nature of the corner lot and the way that the house is
established on the corner lot such that there is a a practical difficulty in complying with the
setback requirements. Granting the special exception is not, in staff's view, contrary to the
purpose of the setback regulations because the subject lot is a reverse corner lot —the back of
the property abuts the side of the neighboring property.
Walz stated that the surrounding neighborhood is characterized by homes that are more
densely built and are closer together, typically at the side property line. She said that it is not
unusual in this neighborhood to have small corner lots or to see side setbacks of 10 feet or less.
The proposed addition is located above the existing first floor of the house and cantilevers out
two feet beyond the existing wall of the house. Walz said that this seemed to staff to provide
reasonable separation that would not interfere with light or air flow and or fire protection, while
still providing privacy and compatibility with the neighborhood.
Walz noted that she has provided the Board with a copy of a letter concerning the project which
had been written by a neighbor.
Grenis asked why the rear setback applied to the side -yard even though for all intents and
purposes it served as a side setback. Walz explained that except for lots which are double -
fronting, there is always a requirement for a rear setback. In this situation, on the short side of
to the block where the lots have been split in half, the setback functions as a side setback rather
than a rear setback because the neighbor's side - property -line abuts the rear property line. It is
still however considered a rear setback. Sheerin said that the Board still needs to treat it as a
rear setback, not a side setback. Walz said that the question is whether or not the Board feels
the rear setback can be adjusted. Though, she added, it is the opinion of staff that the function
of the setback is different based on the fact that the lots are laid out differently than lots would
typically be laid out.
Sheerin pointed out that the letter written by Julie Riggart addresses privacy concerns the
addition might raise. Sheerin said that in the letter- writer's opinion granting the special
exception for the decreased setback requirement would result in decreased privacy. Walz said
that staffs opinion is that it will not; this is based on the design configuration of the building and
the adequacy of the existing setback in terms of privacy, which is similar to a side setback.
Sheerin said that she thought that the second story nature of the addition may contribute to
privacy concerns. Walz said that staff believed like the ten foot setback is adequate.
Walz reiterated that staffs recommendation is to approve the special exception subject to the
condition that the setback reduction applies to the addition only, and subject to substantial
compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted.
Board of Adjustment
July 13, 2011
Page 3 of 7
Sheerin opened the public hearing.
Lee Eno, 1629 Esther Street, introduced himself as the operator of a company known as
Creative Improvements which would be doing the construction of the addition.
Plagge asked if the two -foot cantilever was vital to the addition or if the addition could be
constructed without it. Eno said that the removal of the cantilever would result in the loss of two
feet of the 12x14 -foot room. He said that while the square footage of the addition is not large, it
is functional for the purposes to which the homeowner's wish to put it. Eno said the costs of the
project would increase in proportion to the square footage the homeowners would gain from the
project.
Plagge said asked if the window could be on the east or the west side of the house instead of at
its current placement. Eno said that the window will not have a typical placement, as it will be
four feet off the ground, and is designed to provide natural light. Sheerin asked if it is possible to
put the window higher or make it a skylight instead. Eno noted that there has to be a certain
amount of structural support for the window, and he would be willing to place it as high as he
could without compromising structural integrity of the addition. Sheerin said she was just trying
to think of a way to provide the light while still maintaining the neighbor's privacy. Eno said that
the four foot height is a minimum; he will raise the window as high as he can without
compromising the structure.
Plagge asked if the final decision as to window height was up to the Building Official that would
be reviewing the site plan. Eno said that gable ends are not typically load- bearing walls; typically
side -walls where the trusses /rafters come down are the walls that are load- bearing. He said that
in order to proceed with the project he would have to be issued a building permit, which will
have been reviewed by the Building official.
Sheerin asked about the possibility of a skylight to provide natural light rather than putting a
window at that location. Eno said that in his opinion a skylight would not look right on that house
and would not really maintain the character of the home. Eno said that they are trying to make
the addition look like it is supposed to be there by doing such thing as using cedar shingles and
maintaining the roofline.
Wim Murray, 1026 Fairchild Street, identified herself as the owner of the subject property. She
said that the plans for the addition were actually designed by an architect with the idea of
keeping the addition and the home itself in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.
Murray said she does not want to do a skylight because it does not fit the character of the house
at all.
Sheerin asked if the glass in the window could be obscured in order to maintain privacy. Murray
said that the purpose of the windows is not for view, but for light. Murray shared photographs
which she said demonstrate that more of the neighbor's property could be seen from their
kitchen windows than could be seen from the proposed addition due to screening by a tree.
She also shared photographs of the neighborhood that demonstrated how typical it is for homes
there to be located very close to one another. Murray said that while they do not at all want to
make their neighbor uncomfortable, they also do not want to be held to backyard standards
when that space functions as a side -yard.
Julie Riggart, 509 Center Street, said that the pictures shared by Murray are not reflective of the
real view. Riggart said that this addition will allow a view directly into her backyard. She said that
Board of Adjustment
July 13, 2011
Page 4 of 7
the addition and the special exception will be a part of that property long after the Murray's have
moved on. Riggart said that the properties were both purchased with the current zoning and
setbacks in effect and it is only fair to apply the standards of the zone. Riggart said that at some
point the homeowners may just need to decide that the home is not large enough to raise their
family in, or find a way to put the additional bedroom somewhere else in the home. Riggart said
that the addition will present a hardship for her property, and will ultimately make it difficult to re-
sell. She said the two homes are very close together already.
Plagge asked Riggart's opposition was primarily to the window, or more to the structure itself.
Riggart said that the structure itself is objectionable. Riggart said that the house is too big for the
lot as it is, and the addition will further dwarf her little house by comparison. Riggart said that the
current zoning code came about because of issues like this, where people built and added on
whether or not it was appropriate for the lot size or the neighborhood.
Grenis asked whose property the tree was on. Riggart said the tree is on her property but it
does hang over onto the Murray's property.
Sheerin invited the applicant to respond.
Eno said that it did not seem fair that the neighbor could build within five feet of the applicant's
rear yard because the neighbor's setback is considered a side setback, whereas the subject
property cannot build ten feet from the neighbor because their's is considered a rear setback
even though it actually functions as a side -yard.
Murray said that her understanding is that the yard in question is considered their backyard
because their property has a Fairchild Street address. Walz said that is not correct; on a square
corner lot the property owner has the option of choosing which lot -line is their back property line.
In this case, Walz said, both of the frontages from Fairchild and Center Street are the same.
She said that the rear setback cannot be met on either side of the property, so the side where
they come closest to meeting the setback was used as the rear setback.
Murray said that her family is not adding onto the house willy - nilly, but are taking the addition
very seriously. They have hired an architect to make the design compatible with the existing
home and are planning on taking the home back to wood siding. She said that it is her
understanding that these improvements would actually improve the property values of hers and
surrounding homes. Murray reiterated that even with the special exception, her structure will still
be further from the lot line than Riggart's is required to be.
Plagge asked if the applicant could live without the window, or if she would proceed with
construction if the room had to be slightly smaller. Murray said she would not proceed with
construction. The cost of the addition is $40,000, and that is for what will be the smallest
bedroom upstairs even without reducing the size. Murray said that the house will still be a
modestly -sized house for a family of four at only 1,600 square feet. She said that she would be
willing to make the windows higher if the view was a concern, but even with them at a height of
four feet she did not think the neighbor's deck could be viewed from the bedroom. Plagge asked
if they planned to have windows on all three sides and Murray said that they do because it is a
very dark, north - facing part of the house and they think the windows will not only add light but
improve the appearance from the exterior.
Walz said she wanted to offer a correction to something that was stated earlier. She noted that
Board of Adjustment
July 13, 2011
Page 5 of 7
from a zoning standpoint the subject house is not too big for the lot —it does not come close to
meeting the maximum coverage standards. She said that while the house was placed there
prior to current zoning regulations, the Board needs to decide whether or not the special
exception is reasonable and satisfies the criteria. Walz noted that the reason that the special
exception for setback reductions exist is because there are situations in town, particularly with
properties that were established long before current zoning, where the zoning does not fit. Walz
said that a special exception is not the same as a variance. Exceptions are written into the
zoning and the Board is given the authority to review situations on a case -by -case basis and to
decide whether or not it is appropriate and reasonable to grant the exceptions.
Walz said that at this point the Board could decide if it wished to proceed with a vote or if it
preferred to wait and have the benefit of a full board. She noted that in order for a special
exception to pass, three Board members must vote in favor of it. Since only three Board
members are present, that means that unanimous approval would be required. She said it may
be appropriate for the Board to wait to have two more members to consider the matter, or it may
proceed with the vote.
Grenis said that the specific proposed exception is not supposed to impede on the use or
enjoyment of other property in the vicinity, or substantially diminish or impair property values in
the neighborhood. He said this criterion continues to be a sticking point for him, given the
neighbor's concerns. He said that as the proposal stands now he does not think the criterion is
satisfied.
Plagge said that he has seen board's rule both ways on this issue. He said that while he does
not have a terrible concern with the actual structure, he does respect the privacy concerns.
Plagge said that if the window to the north was a half window that was six or seven feet up he
would be fine with the addition. He said he saw no problem with the other two windows being
full windows.
Grenis said that he would like to have a chance for the other two Board members to weigh in on
the issue. Sheerin said she would too as she thinks it is a tough call. Plagge asked if it would be
possible to get the Building Official's input on how high the window could go and still be
structurally sound. Eno said that if the height of the window and the view from the window are
the greatest concerns and a deferral was in order, then he would definitely explore some
options to alleviate those concerns. He said that the customer is quite adamant about the
natural light, and he would be willing to put together several different options without eliminating
the window altogether. He said that a month's deferral would certainly give him enough time to
explore options. Plagge asked if the deferral would present timing issues for the contractor. Eno
said they would not cause timing issues for him, but the homeowner was anxious to get going
with the project. Murrays said they had been hoping to have the project done before school
starts. Plagge said he would be happy to rule on the application this evening if that is what the
applicant desired. Sheerin asked if there was any way for the Board to come back to the
application before the next scheduled meeting. Walz said that she would have to check
schedules. Plagge said that he would be out of town quite a bit in the coming weeks.
Riggart asked if the applicant was not required to show that there would be some hardship to
the property in order for a special exception to be granted. Riggart said that whether the area in
question is a side -yard or backyard is irrelevant unless the applicant showed there was some
sort of hardship that would result from having to comply with zoning codes. Plagge said that his
findings of fact would include a finding that the property is unusual enough that such hardship
Board of Adjustment
July 13, 2011
Page 6 of 7
could be found. Riggart said that a higher window would not satisfy her privacy concerns.
Sheerin said that while she understands that Riggart's personal concerns are most important to
her, what the Board is examining is what is the best way for these two properties to co -exist in
this awkward situation. She said that she appreciated Riggart being there and taking the time to
express her concerns.
Murray said that it had occurred to her during the discussions that she would be fine with some
kind of stained - glass, fixed - windows, as that would be compatible with the period of the house.
She said that if that would satisfactorily obscure the view for Riggart's purposes, she would be
willing to compromise on the decreased natural light that would result. Plagge asked if that was
something that could be stipulated. Greenwood Hektoen said that wording could be included to
require an opaque glass in the windows. Walz noted that the maintenance of such a
requirement would be through the application for building permits or on a complaint basis.
Grenis said that he would still really like the other two members of the Board to weigh in on the
issue.
Greenwood Hektoen advised the Board to close the public hearing and invite a motion. Walz
asked if the public hearing could then be re- opened at the next meeting. Greenwood Hektoen
said that it could be. There was some discussion as to whether or not the public hearing should
be closed or continued until a certain date. It was determined that the public hearing would
remain open on the issue.
Grenis moved to defer the application until the August meeting or an earlier date as can
be arranged.
Plagge seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 3 -0 (Jennings and Eckstein excused).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Plagge moved to adjourn.
Grenis seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 3 -0 vote (Jennings and Eckstein excused).
Zo
w�
20
NW
W
Q Z N
Oo
0
W
Q
mQ
E
O
0
-0d
O O
NZ
� � O
U p)
X
ZZ N N
_ C N
C C E ffl
O O
< Z
aa) o
Q II II Z
II II W � II
X00 i
}
W
Y
Dx0xx
co
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
c�
X
X
XXX
X
X
X
X
N
WT-
C
U)NCO
�N
�
OOOOO
T-
T -
T-
W a
N
N
N
N
N
H X
O
O
O
O
O
W
C
C
Y
•cn
N
CV
CD
CU
L
U
W
C
"
�
c0
c`o(,
cd
W
u
U
N
E
O
L
O
=_
fB
C
Z
m
m
Q
U
E
O
0
-0d
O O
NZ
� � O
U p)
X
ZZ N N
_ C N
C C E ffl
O O
< Z
aa) o
Q II II Z
II II W � II
X00 i
}
W
Y
3b(2)
MINUTES Approved
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 2010
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
410 E. WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IA
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Roffman, Steve Buckman, Andrea French, Scott
McDonough, Matt Neumiller, Chad Campion
MEMBERS ABSENT: none
STAFF PRESENT: Doug Boothroy (Director, Housing and Inspection
Services), John Grier (Fire Marshall), Jann Ream
(Code Enforcement Asst. acting as minute taker)
OTHERS PRESENT: none
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended by unanimous vote (6 -0) to rescind Section R313 of the 2009
International Residential Code.
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Roffman called the meeting to order at 4:OOPM
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the May 3rd, 2010 meeting were reviewed. Buckman moved to
approve the minutes. McDonough seconded. Minutes were approved by a 6 -0
unanimous vote.
Discussion and possible recommendation to Council regarding an amendment to
rescind Section R313 of the 2009 International Residential Code.
Doug Boothroy stated that the memo from Tim Hennes included in the agenda
was a good summary of the issue. Basically, when the 2009 International
Residential Code was adopted, Section R313 was amended to provide for
protection of lightweight construction such drywall protecting engineered trusses
and floor joists. This amendment was based on the assumption that the State of
Iowa would be requiring fire sprinkler systems in single family homes. The State
is no longer going to require sprinkler in single family homes. To allow time to
Board of Appeals
August 2, 2010
Page 2 of 2
address the protection of lightweight construction, the effective date of the
amendment was changed to January 1, 2011. In May of 2010, the International
Code Council held their final action code hearings for the 2010 International
Codes and approved a requirement to protect lightweight construction effective
when jurisdictions adopt the 2012 code. A committee comprised of staff, the
Home Builders, the truss manufacturing industry and area Building Officials has
met and the consensus of the committee was that more information on
lightweight construction was required from the industry and that the adoption of
requirements for the protection of lightweight construction should wait until the
adoption of the 2012 International codes.
Buckman added it is good that all of the local jurisdictions are working on this
together so that the requirements, when adopted, will be the same across all of
the local jurisdictions —Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty and Johnson County.
He reiterated the need for more information from the truss industry (such as burn
times of timber and manufactured joists) before an informed decision can be
made. Boothroy agreed that more information is critical before making a
decision.
McDonough asked Grier what the opinion of the Fire Department was concerning
the issue. Grier stated that the multi-jurisdictional approach was a good thing and
that the department will work with the committee to arrive at an outcome
acceptable to everyone.
Roffman stated that holding off until the adoption of the 2012 codes would give
the City a chance to thoroughly research the issue so a decision would be based
on scientific fact not speculation.
MOTION: Champion moved to recommend to Council that Section R313 of the
2009 IRC be rescinded to allow more time to review the new requirements with
the adoption of the 2012 IRC. Neumiller seconded.
VOTE: The motion was approved 6-0.
ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Roffman adjourned the meeting at 4:11 PM
"irperson, boqr ,Kof Appeals Date
N
is
d
Q
Q
Q
O
.O
L
O
m
.O
L
O
V
d
O
V
C
.O
a�
5
O
r
vZ
�
d
D
0
0Z
O
Z
0
r
OZ
—
—
—
—
0
—
—
—
—
—
a�
dZ
N
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
Q
0
�Z
0
c
�
3Z
0
X
X
X
X
O
X
cv
0
Q.
Z
a
0
m
0
d
Z
U.
0
c
�
RZ
N
W
.—
N
N
�-
M
O
X
O
N
o
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
W
r
M
�
r
M
r
cM
�
r
M
r
cM
CN
r
co
�
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
W
F-
..
cn
U
O
N
W
cu
c
o
p
C
X
j
c
-0
E
Q
�
aci
E°
a
_4
=
E
N
o
+.
c"
c
O
E
E
Z
�
ci
o
CU�
a
a)
4)
cn
.n
o
cu
m
cu��UZ
a)
v
2
�-
N
ca
Z
o
a>
aa)
c
0
-cy—
c
w
acu
ii
��
w
I�
c
n
3b(3)
MINUTES Approved
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, AUGUST 1, 2011
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
410 E. WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Roffman, Scott McDonough, Andrea French,
Matt Neumiller (by speaker phone)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chad Campion
STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), John Grier
(Fire Marshall), Sue Dulek (Asst. City Attorney),
Jann Ream (Code Enforcement Asst. acting as
minute taker)
OTHERS PRESENT: none
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Recommended by unanimous vote that the number of Board of Appeals
members be reduced from seven (7) to five (5) persons.
Recommended by unanimous vote that the Board of Appeals eligibility criteria be
changed to allow 1) a member who is qualified by experience and training in
building construction if a qualified trade representative does not submit an
application within 3 months of the vacancy announcement and 2) up to two (2)
persons who are not eligible electors of Iowa City if they are owners or
employees of a trade contracting business in Iowa City and if a qualified trade
applicant, who is an eligible elector, has not submitted an application within 3
months of the vacancy announcement.
MuriZ�7:��]�1i
John Roffman, acting as temporary chairperson, called the meeting to order at
4:20PM
ELECTIONS:
Roffman requested nominations to elect officers for 2011.
MOTION: McDonough nominated John Roffman for chairperson. French
seconded.
VOTE: Motion was approved 4 -0.
Board of Appeals
August 1, 2011
Page 2 of 3
MOTION: McDonough nominated Andrea French for Vice- chairperson. Roffman
seconded.
VOTE: Motion was approved 4 -0
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the August 2nd, 2010 meeting were reviewed. McDonough moved
to approve the minutes. French seconded. Minutes were approved by a 4 -0
unanimous vote.
Discussion and possible recommendation to Council regarding an amendment to
the Iowa City Board of Appeals By -Laws and City Appeals Ordinance.
Hennes stated because of recent difficulties finding eligible candidates to fill two
vacant positions on the Board, that two amendments be considered —one
amendment to the Board of Appeals by -laws and one amendment to the Appeals
ordinance. The changes being proposed are to reduce the number of board
members from seven to five and to allow the qualified trade representative
eligibility requirement to be waived if an application by such an eligible candidate
is not submitted within three months of the announcement of a vacancy.
Roffman suggested that perhaps the Board should also consider broadening the
residency requirement to allow those trade professionals who are headquartered
in Iowa City but may not live within City limits to be eligible candidates as well.
Discussion occurred concerning this proposal. Hennes stated that City Council
had considered this previously but had maintained the residency requirement.
Roffman said that there were several trade contractors whose businesses were
based in Iowa City and did the majority of their work in Iowa City but lived outside
of City limits. It seemed to him that these contractors had a real involvement in
building in Iowa City and shouldn't automatically be excluded because of
residency. Roffman said that, in his view, having knowledge and expertise in the
building industry was more important than residency. Dulek suggested that if that
was a direction the Board wanted to go in, that they set a limit on the number of
non - resident members. Wording was suggested that would incorporate the
proposed changes with also allowing a minority (no more than 2) of the Board
being made of up of a trade business owner and /or employee who do not reside
in Iowa City if an eligible resident has not made application within the 3 month
period.
MOTION: French moved that a recommendation be made to City Council that
the number of Board of Appeals members be reduced from seven (7) to five (5).
McDonough seconded.
VOTE: The motion was approved with a unanimous 4 -0 vote.
MOTION: McDonough moved that a recommendation be made to City Council
that the Board of Appeals eligibility criteria be changed to allow 1) a member who
Board of Appeals
August 1, 2011
Page 3 of 3
is qualified by experience and training in building construction if a qualified trade
representative does not submit an application within 3 months of the vacancy
announcement and 2) up to two (2) persons who are not eligible electors of Iowa
City if they are owners or employees of a trade contracting business in Iowa City
and if a qualified resident trade applicant, who is an eligible elector has not
submitted an application within 3 months of the vacancy announcement. French
seconded.
VOTE: The motion was approved with a unanimous 4 -0 vote.
Other Business: None
Adjournment: Chairperson Roffman adjourned the meeting at 4:40 PM
'Chairperson, Board of Appeals Date
3b(4)
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
JULY 14, 2011
EMMA HARVAT HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Frank Wagner, Tom Baldridge, Andy Litton, Ginalie
Swaim, Pam Michaud, Alicia Trimble (absent for 1033 Seventh Avenue)
MEMBERS ABSENT: David McMahon, Esther Baker, Dana Thomann
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Chery Peterson
OTHERS PRESENT: David Wieseneck, Mark Kennedy
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
None.
CALL TO ORDER: Acting Chairperson Swaim called the meeting to order at 5:20.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Michaud mentioned at the Commission's December meeting they had approved a certificate of
appropriateness for window replacements at 215 East Washington Street. Michaud said the
bidding process has been prolonged and that the manager of the building believes he needs a
certificate of appropriateness from the State. Miklo said staff has talked with him; Peterson
mentioned she was going to call the State and see if they have any requirements and get back
to the manager.
Miklo mentioned that Chery Peterson will be consulting with the City on preservation planning
and will attend Historic Preservation Commission meetings as necessary. Miklo also introduced
Nick Benson as the minute taker for the meeting and a student interning in the Planning
department.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
1033 Seventh Avenue
Miklo said this is a pretty straightforward application and that the staff is recommending
approval. Swaim asked if the owner would like to discuss the application and the owner
declined.
MOTION: Ackerson moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application
for a proposed alteration project at 1033 Seventh Avenue. Baldridge seconded the
motion. The Motion carried on a vote of 6 — 0 (McMahon, Baker, Thompson, Trimble
absent).
Historic Preservation Commission
July 14, 2011
Page 2
818 N. Linn Street
Peterson mentioned the property is in the Brown Street Historic District. Peterson stated this is
an addition to the rear of the house on the second floor and a new garage attached to the north
side of the house. Peterson showed a picture of the house and mentioned there is currently a 1
car attached garage that was an addition to the house. Peterson said there is also a 1 story
addition to the rear of the house. The proposed project is to make the 1 story rear addition two -
stories, and the garage will be torn down and replaced with a two -car garage and connecting
breezeway to the house. Peterson said the applicant is going to use similar detailing and
materials as is found on existing house. She mentioned there is an error in the drawing and that
the shape of the house is maintained.
Peterson said the applicant is meeting the intent of the guidelines and recommended approval
subject to the Chair reviewing and approving the detail of the cantilever off the rear of the
house. Miklo mentioned staff had received new drawings from the contractor that will address
this issue. Kennedy noted that they would like to use the same eyebrow detail as the first floor.
Ackerson asked whether the second floor addition would rise up parallel to the first floor
addition. Kennedy noted it will rise up parallel on the side of the house with the air conditioner,
but will extend two feet further than the first floor addition on the other side. Kennedy said he
didn't think it would disturb the look and feel of the house. Michaud asked whether that the
small porch would be kept, and the contractor said yes. Kennedy stated that all the
architectural details of the addition will match the original existing home. Swaim asked whether
bathroom window will be reused. Kennedy said it will be used as master bath window, and will
be set horizontal rather than vertical. Swaim asked whether there will be three windows rather
than 4 in the master bedroom addition, and Kennedy said yes. Kennedy mentioned the
windows will be trimmed just like the other windows in the existing structure. Michaud asked
what kind of siding will be used and Kennedy stated that cedar siding will be used.
Miklo said the case generally meets the primary guidelines; the garage is offset so as to indicate
it is an addition, the addition is set in at least 1 foot from the side, which is appropriate, and the
finishes are complimentary to the original. He said staff was comfortable recommending
approval subject to the conditions provided in the staff report. Swaim asked whether the
driveway will be a single car approach. Kennedy mentioned that it will be a single -car approach
that broadens to provide entrance for the two -car garage. He noted there are drainage
problems due to a deep ravine at the edge of the property so they will have to re -grade the land.
Baldridge asked whether driveway would be made of permeable pavement. Miklo said that the
soil is problematic, and questions it aesthetically in a historical setting since it has a rather
modern look. He said the pavement is limited anyway. Michaud asked about the conditions for
approval, and Miklo said staff doesn't have the particular brands or products for the addition and
that staff recommends these be submitted for approval to Peterson and the chair.
MOTION: Baldridge moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application
for a proposed addition project at 818 N. Linn Street as presented, subject to the
condition that cantilever details, garage door specifications, window specifications and
product information for shingles and siding be approved by the Chair and staff. Swaim
seconded the motion. The Motion carried on a vote of 7 — 0 (McMahon, Baker, Thompson
absent).
Historic Preservation Commission
July 14, 2011
Page 3
109/111 S. Summit Street
Peterson stated this is a new structure and is a garage /carriage house. She said the structure is
located in the College Hill Conservation District. Peterson noted that the current house is a
duplex and is almost a full -story above the street. The garage structure will also be a duplex
with two separate garage compartments at street level, and two separate studio spaces on the
second level. Peterson noted that the second level will line up with the first level of the duplex.
Peterson said that the proposed garage structure has the same roof pitch and same details at
the eve as the duplex, with cement board siding and stucco at the garage level. Peterson
showed a photo of the door selection from Overhead Doors. Peterson said the small rectangle
on the side - what looks like a window - is an air conditioner /heater, and will be located around
the back of the garage and will not be showing on the front, which faces Washington Street.
Peterson noted that revised drawings show the garage /carriage house as 28 x 28.
Swaim asked how much space would be between the proposed garage and the existing duplex.
Peterson said 11 feet. Michaud asked how far away from the neighboring houses this proposed
structure would be. Peterson said they are maxing out the allowed buildable area, so around 5
feet from the property line. Michaud asked what direction the garage doors would be facing,
and Peterson responded that they face Summit Street. Michaud asked where the entry doors
are located, and Peterson said they are on the back of the garage. Peterson noted that there
are sidewalk stairs proposed down the bank from the garage structure to Washington Street.
Swaim said proposed design of the garage looks very modern. Miklo noted that staff is not
recommending the design as presented. Rather, Miklo said staff is recommending 3 windows at
the front elevation so as to pick up on the window design of the duplex house.
Wagner signed in as an applicant, and said that they are hoping to design the windows and
garage doors to be complimentary, and paint the doors black to match the window trim and the
door on the house. Swaim noted that there are going to be a lot of windows and wondered if 3
was too much. Peterson noted that the scale of the windows needs to be studied, but she
believed the windows in the drawing are too large. Miklo said the thought of doing 3 windows is
to mirror what is going on with the rest of the windows in the house. Michaud asked if the
windows are divided - light, and Wagner said that the upper floor windows are 9- light, and the
windows below are casement. Peterson noted that the guidelines say that the outbuilding
should not outshine the main building, so ornamentation should be simple. Michaud asked
whether there should be 3 casement windows in a row, and Miklo said whether the windows are
casement or awning is less important than the proportions. Miklo said the idea is to have a little
bit of space between the windows. Ackerson said if there are 3 below, there should be 3 above.
Miklo noted the guidelines discourage a garage this close to the street and having garage doors
face the street. However, there is no other choice here, so garage design is important. Miklo
also said that to break up the large expanse of paving staff recommends patterned paving be
used in the driveway. Swaim asked whether the windows needed to be spaced differently.
Peterson said the staff recommends that final design of the windows be approved by staff and
the Chair because these drawings are preliminary. Swaim said she is fine with staff and Chair
working it out.
Swaim asked whether storms would be black or white. Wagner said the trim is white but that
the storms will be black and the garage doors will be black. Ackerson asked how high the
garage is compared to house. Wagner said the soffits of the garage will be same height of
porch, so the garage windows will match up. Michaud suggested the 3 windows above the
garage should be like the first floor windows of the house rather than the square windows.
Historic Preservation Commission
July 14, 2011
Page 4
Miklo said the square windows are consistent with prairie -style homes. Wagner mentioned he
could have the architect do renderings of both styles of windows and let the Chair and staff
review the options. Swaim said she originally thought same as Michaud with regard to putting
first floor style windows above the garage, but stated this might put too much attention on the
garage. Miklo asked if Wagner was open to having windows above the garage that were similar
to the first floor windows. Wagner stated he is open to whatever the Commission and staff feels
is most appropriate. Ackerson asked if the units above the garage will be apartments. Wagner
replied that they will be work or artist studios and that nobody will live in the units.
Wagner asked if the Commission would discuss the issue of siding on the proposed structure.
Peterson said she had listed that the siding was going to be either cement board or LP
SmartSide siding. Wagner said that is correct and that they are trying to make the
garage /carriage house siding similar to the existing house. Wagner said he would like the
siding boards to have a smaller reveal than on the existing house, and Peterson said that since
the garage /carriage house will be smaller than the house, it makes sense for the siding to be
scaled down. Michaud asked what is underneath the siding on the current house. Wagner said
it was originally stucco.
Michaud questioned the two doors facing 925 Washington asked whether there are side doors.
Wagner said there are not side doors. Michaud asked if there is a door leading out from
basement of the duplex to the garage. Wagner said there is no basement door to the garage.
To summarize Miklo said there are some details to work out regarding the siding, but the main
issue is the design of windows on Summit Street side. Miklo suggested Wagner present 2
alternates — one showing 3 small windows and one showing 3 larger windows — to the Chair and
staff and let them decide. Miklo also recommended details regarding the pavement and siding
be approved by Chair and staff. Michaud asked about overhang and roofline of the proposed
garage /carriage house. Wagner mentioned that the pitch is the same as the duplex and the
overhang is slightly smaller than the duplex.
MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for
a proposed project at 109/11 Summit Street, subject to the conditions that the final site
plan, including information on retaining walls, driveway, and exterior stairs, final building
elevation plans, window specifications, and product information for shingles and siding
be approved by Chair and staff. Baldridge seconded the motion. The Motion carried on
a vote of 6 — 0 (Wagner abstained McMahon, Baker, Thompson absent).
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY STAFF AND CHAIR:
732 Grant Street
Peterson said this is a small house with one window on the front elevation that is rotten and
needs to be replaced. Miklo stated this is a non - contributing structure. The Chair signed the
certificate of appropriateness earlier this week.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 9, 2011:
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
June 9, 2011 meeting, as written. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of
7 — 0 (McMahon, Baker, Thompson absent).
Historic Preservation Commission
July 14, 2011
Page 5
OTHER:
Miklo stated that AT &T has approached the City about applying for a special exception to put a
cell phone tower on Longfellow School which is a special exception in a public zone. He noted
that it will require approval by both the Board of Adjustment and the Historic Preservation
Commission because it is in a historic district. Miklo said there are guidelines in the zoning
code about how cell phone towers should be handled. Miklo noted the Commission is not being
asked to approve the tower tonight, but rather being asked to give guidance on the design of the
tower. Miklo showed drawings submitted to staff depicting how a tower might look if disguised
as chimney. He noted that AT &T is using the Horace Mann School chimney as precedence.
Miklo said there are two ways to handle cell phone towers, and one of them is just to put up a
plain, unadorned metal tower. He stated the zoning code says that if the tower is attached to an
existing building, it should look like part of the building. Miklo noted the clock tower along
Mormon Trek Boulevard as an example of a cell phone tower that is disguised. Miklo said staff
has had discussions on whether or not to disguise the cell phone tower as a chimney or just
leave it as an unadorned pole and asked for the Commission's input.
Michaud said disguising the pole as a chimney would be false sense of history. Ackerson said
historic issues aside, a chimney looks better than a metal pole. Peterson said her main concern
was about the height of the proposed chimney and questioned whether it would be too tall in
terms of historical accuracy. Miklo said the exact height is not known and that it is the type of
question that can be asked of AT &T. Miklo noted that this item will likely be back on the
Commission's agenda in August.
Miklo also said that there would be another item on the agenda as FEMA and the University of
Iowa are working on two projects where a Section 106 review will be needed. He stated FEMA
and the University of Iowa would like to have a public hearing and use the Commission as the
venue for the meeting. He said the two projects are the Sabin School and the fraternity on River
Street; both of these buildings would be removed to accommodate University projects. Miklo
explained that because these buildings have been determined to be National Register eligible,
there must be a 106 review process. Miklo noted that the Commission does not have a say in
whether or not the buildings come down, but they can provide guidance to FEMA on potential
steps to mitigate the removal of the buildings.
Wagner asked about removing chimneys in historic districts. Trimble said the guidelines for
removal are how visible the chimney is and if it is contributing to the structure.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm.
Minutes by Nick Benson
z
O
m
�o
O�
UO
ZU
Ow
awe
U ` -
>aN
wo
NZ
w w
a�
U Q
O
H
x
E
2
0
o
N Z
U D
X C
w .�
E
az°
w
Oz
le
x
x
o
x
x
0
x
x
o
x
x
ti
o
x
0
x
x
0
0
x
x
x
0
T-
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
o
x
o
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
M
x
x
x
x
O
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
o x
x
o
0
o
x
x
N
x
x
o
x
x
o
x
x
o
x
o
r
a
X
M
�t
N
M
Nt
d'
N
N
d'
M
N
w
C
w
0)
N
\
M
CY)
N
\
M
0)
N
\
M
a)
N
\
M
0)
N
\
M
0)
N
\
M
0)
N
\
M
0)
N
\
M
a)
N
\
M
�-
0')
N
\
m
0)
N
\
M
H
Q
z
z
w=
z
O
V
Q
cQ
G
L
G
Q
m
w
W
Q
m
i
O
Z
o
o
z
Q
z
a
o
zO
=
a
o
Q
z
0
a
Q
o
Z
Q
°
v
a
L
m
Q zQ
LL
m
Z
3
E
2
0
o
N Z
U D
X C
w .�
E
az°
w
Oz
MINUTES
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
July 19, 2011
Lobby Conference Room
APPROVED 3b(5)
Members Present: Orville Townsend Sr., Dianne Day, Diane Finnerty, Harry Olmstead, Martha Lubaroff,
Wangui Gathua, David B. Brown, Howard Cowen, Connie Goeb.
Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers.
Others Present: Charlie Eastham, Julie Howard.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None.
CALL TO ORDER
Commissioner Chair Day called the meeting to order at 18:00.
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE May 17, 2011 MEETING:
Olmstead, moved to approve.
Townsend seconded.
The motion passed 7 -0. Finnerty abstained. Cowen not present.
ANNUAL REPORT
Commissioners added "policy recommendation on immigration to the City Council' to the upcoming goals for
FY2012. Commissioner Cowen requested addition of stats in summary portion. Bowers will make all additions
and send final draft to the Commission prior to final submission.
HUMAN RIGHTS BREAKFAST
Commissioners voted on the keynote speaker. Olmstead, Lubaroff and Goeb will serve on the subcommittee.
The motion passed 9 -0.
IMMIGRATION SUBCOMMITTEE
Commissioner Finnerty presented a time line to Commissioners given the tentative date of the work session
with the City Council. The subcommittee will work on a final report which will include survey results. Bowers will
provide any additional survey information to the subcommittee as well as the information that relates to
identification needed for City services.
FACES OF IOWA CITY
Bowers has the brochure and will send out to speakers by August 1, 2011.
JUVENILE JUSTICE
Bowers is working on scheduling a series of programs on this topic. The hope is to hold the first sometime after
Labor Day. Finnerty will assist on this project.
LGBT RIGHTS IN UGANDA
Olmstead reported that 75 people attended the program and that the program was well received. Julie Howard
also provided thoughts on the program.
REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Olmstead mentioned that Access 2 Independence will hold their annual Celebration on the
passage of the ADA at the Coral Ridge Mall on Saturday, July 23rd.
ADJOURNMENT
Townsend moved to adjourn.
Human Rights Commission
July 19, 2011
Page 2 of 3
Olmstead seconded.
The motion passed 9 -0 at 18:58.
Human Rights Commission
July 19, 2011
Page 3of3
Human Rights Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
Meetin Date
f - -- - -- - --
NAME
--
M
EXP.
1/18
2/15
3/15
4/12
T5/176/21
7/19
8/16
9/20
10/18
11/15
12izo
.-.._..._.._.-- - --
Dianne Day
1/1/12
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Wangui
Gathua
1/1/12
O/E
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
O/E
X
Martha
Lubaroff
1/1/12
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
4
Howard
Cowen
1/1/13
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
Constance
Goeb
1/1/13
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Harry
Olmstead
(8 -1 -2010)
1/1113
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Orville
Townsend,
Sr.
1/1/14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Diane
Finnerty
111/14
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
David B.
Brown
1/1/14
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting /No Quorum
R = Resigned
- = Not a Member
Z(6�)
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED
JULY 21, 2011 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Elizabeth Koppes,
Michelle Payne, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: Wally Plahutnik
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Nick Benson, Becky Soglin, Sarah Greenwood
Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Levy, James Clark
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 6 -0 (Plahutnik excused) to recommend approval of REZ11- 00005,
an application to rezone approximately 10 acres at 50 Dublin Drive from OPD -8 to OPD-
RM12, subject to substantial compliance with the site plan and elevations submitted, and
the addition of fenestration as approved by staff.
The Commission voted 6 -0 (Plahutnik excused) to recommend approval of an
amendment to the Zoning Code clarifying the definition of an enlargement/expansion as
it relates to alcohol sales- oriented uses.
The Commission voted 6 -0 (Plahutnik excused) to recommend approval of an
amendment to the Zoning Code to allow pet supply stores in the Intensive Commercial
(CI -1) zone.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
REZONING ITEMS:
REZ11- 00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Melrose Retirement Community,
LLC, for a rezoning from Planned Development Overlay Medium Density Single Family
(OPD -8) zone to Planned Development Overlay Low Density Multi - Family (OPD /RM -12)
zone for approximately 10.0 acres of property located at 350 Dublin Drive.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 2 of 9
Miklo introduced Nick Benson, a graduate student in Urban and Regional Planning doing an
internship with the Planning Department. Benson presented the staff report.
Benson explained that the rezoning is being requested in order to allow for nine additional
assisted living units. Currently, the property is at its maximum allowable density with 80 total
units.
Benson said that the Comprehensive Plan does contemplate that this property could be zoned
multi - family residential in the future, and the application to rezone to RM -12 is consistent with
the Comprehensive and Southwest District plans.
Benson shared a site plan of the existing and proposed facilities. He explained that the southern
wings are assisted - living and the northern wings are designed for independent living with a
commons area joining the two facilities.
Dublin Drive is a collector street to the west of the property which runs north to Melrose. Benson
said this street has sufficient capacity for the proposed assisted living addition. He said that
there is currently a private drive that runs around the property. Benson said that in terms of the
proposed addition, the biggest obstacle to it has been the storm -water detention facility that runs
along the south and east sides of the lot.
Benson said that the materials and scope for the proposed addition are similar to the existing
building. Benson said that the applicant would be addressing the concerns brought up at the
informal meeting by Commissioners concerned about the lack of windows on the northeast and
southwest sides of the building.
The proposed addition will jut out from the southeast part of the property. The applicant has
proposed extending the private drive out to the south in order to allow for the additional wing.
Benson said that the Commission had expressed concerns about whether there would be
sufficient parking during construction. He said that there is a significant excess of surface
parking available, so parking during construction will not be an issue.
The storm -water detention facility is a large one and runs to the south and east of the property
and will need to be modified with the addition. Benson said that the Engineering Department will
be working with the applicant to reconstruct the detention facility, and the Department feels that
the remaining issues with the site and the detention facility have been resolved.
Staff recommends that the application be approved. The changes are compatible with the vision
laid out in the Comprehensive Plan, and are an extension of the uses that are already there.
Freerks opened the public hearing.
Frank Levy, President of Newberry Management and Development Company, which co -owns
with Mercy Hospital the existing facility, spoke on behalf of the application. He said that there is
currently a waiting list for the existing assisted - living facility, which houses 22 units. Leevey said
that the relatively small size of the existing facility is due to space constraints rather than
strategic planning. Leevey said that the local demand for assisted - living units is strong enough
to warrant the $2 million project. He noted that those looking to move into the independent - living
wing often take into account whether there is availability in the assisted - living wing. He said that
many residents do this kind of transition planning for the future.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 3 of 9
Freerks said that the proposed plans reflect a nice development, but when the Commission saw
that windowless expanse on two sides they were concerned about the building fitting in with the
existing neighborhood. She asked for more information on the decision not to place windows on
that side of the building. Levy said that the wall in question is configured as a bed -wall. Levy
said that putting full windows on that wall would likely mean reconfiguring the bedroom
orientation which could result in having to lengthen the building. This would be wasteful in terms
of space and expense. Levy said that small square windows high above the bed placement may
be possible. He asked if it would be possible to discuss it with his builder and then submit
something to staff for approval. Dyer said that the windows could add some nice light to the
rooms as well.
Leevey next addressed the concerns about parking during construction. Benson noted that the
property has significantly more parking than what is required by the code. Miklo said that the
parking will exceed the zoning requirements throughout construction.
Eastham said that his understanding is that the current zoning allows eight units per acre on the
site, a maximum which has already been met. Leevey said that was correct. Eastham said the
proposed zoning would allow for 40 more units on -site, though only nine are being proposed.
Eastham asked if there were plans to build more units at a future date. Leevey said that the
existing assisted living wing is only one -story and the proposed addition is only one -story. He
said that there are no plans for a second story or additional units. He noted that if the
Commission wanted to place a restriction on the number of units that could be added, then he
believed that the applicants would be agreeable to that. Freerks asked if the site was not
already restricted somewhat by its terrain. Benson said that the storm -water detention facility is
especially restrictive and prohibitive of additional expansion. He noted that any reconfiguration
of the detention facility would require a review by the Commission.
Freerks said she was not certain what the language should be for adding light and windows on
the end of the building. Miklo suggested that the application could be approved subject to the
addition of clear -story windows on the end elevations subject to staff approval. Leevey said that
what is being proposed by the Commission seems fair and will probably have a positive impact
on the project.
There were no further comments on the issue and Freerks closed the public hearing.
Weitzel moved to approve REZ11- 00005, an application to rezone approximately 10 acres
at 50 Dublin Drive from OPD -8 to OPD -RM12, subject to substantial compliance with the
site plan and elevations submitted, and additional fenestration as approved by staff. It
was noted that the discrepancy with the detention facility noted in the staff report has
been resolved.
Eastham seconded.
Freerks said that she believed this would be a nice addition. She noted that there is a great
demand for this kind of housing and the Comprehensive Plan does anticipate that use in this
area. She said that this would be a great addition to the community.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0 (Plahutnik absent).
REZ11- 00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Apartments Downtown for a
rezoning from Low Density Single - Family (RS -5) zone to Low Density Multi- Family (RM-
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 4 of 9
12) zone for approximately .88 acres of property located at 2218 Rochester Avenue.
Miklo introduced Becky Soglin, a student in Urban and Regional Planning, who is interning in
the Planning Department and presented the staff report.
Soglin explained that this property is at the intersection of First Avenue and Rochester Avenue.
The request is for rezoning from RS -5 to RM -12. The Comprehensive Plan shows low- density
multi - family zoning for the property, given its close proximity to city services and bus routes. The
Comprehensive Plan also supports this type of multi - family housing at the intersection of two
arterial streets.
Soglin said that the property immediately to the west is zoned RS -5. The entire area on the
other side of First Avenue is in the Northeast District and is zoned RM -12.
Soglin shared a location map with the Commission to show the location of buildings on the
property and nearby. Freerks asked if the elevations showed any slopes that would be
considered steep or need to be protected and Soglin replied that there are no environmentally
sensitive concerns on the site.
Soglin said that multi - family would be compatible with the existing neighborhood. Soglin said
that there is no information at this point concerning the historical importance of the existing
home. She said that it is a brick bungalow built in the 1930's, but neither the City nor a private
citizen has filed to have it considered a local landmark. The building is also not currently on the
historical register.
Soglin said that because that area is heavily trafficked, there have been concerns about where
to place a driveway for a multi - family dwelling unit. Staff recommends that the driveway comes
off of Rochester, and that an easement is added to the western border to facilitate a shared
driveway in the future if need for one arises.
The applicant has submitted a concept plan for a 12 -plex of three - bedroom units with the
garages in back. The building would be subject to the Central District Site Development
Standards which includes requirements to place the drives and garages so that they are not
visible from the street frontage. Balconies would not be allowed on the side adjacent to the
single - family homes. Soglin noted that the site plan had not yet been fully reviewed by staff as it
had just been submitted that afternoon.
Koppes asked why only Rochester was considered a frontage in this case, as opposed to a
double- frontage, given the presence of First Avenue as well. Miklo said that both streets would
have frontages. Miklo said that they would have to review the site plan against the standards in
terms of garage placement. He said there might be some kind of an exception for a corner lot.
Staff recommends that the rezoning be approved subject to the conditions relative to the access
on the drive and the easement.
Freerks noted that because the property is in the Central Planning District, staff would be
reviewing the site plan according to those guidelines.
Payne said that it looks as though there is inadequate visitor parking for a 12 -plex under the
current plan. Miklo said that could be a legitimate concern given that there is no parking along
Rochester or First Avenue.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 5 of 9
Koppes asked what the rules would be governing the headlights of cars shining into the nearby
residences. She said the driveways seemed very close to the residences. Koppes said she was
concerned because any buffer afforded by the existing trees would be removed when the trees
were taken down. Miklo said that the code requires three -feet of buffer for a driveway and ten -
feet of buffer for a parking area. He said that staff would have to review this when the site plan
is submitted. Freerks said that it was good to voice these kinds of concerns so that the applicant
could see ahead of time the thought - processes of the Commission members. She said that
even if the neighboring properties were rezoned at some time in the future, the Commission
needs to take into account only what the current zoning is for those properties.
Payne asked if the plan is to fill in the drop -off in order to bring the garages up to the level
indicated in the site plan. Soglin said that the drop -off is a little more gradual than indicated by
the site plan, but the applicant could better address that concern.
Dyer said that her concern was the plans for a big, chunky garage facing First Avenue in a
residential neighborhood and adjacent to Hickory Hill Park. Soglin said that there are standards
that would govern the appearance of the structure in order to make it suitable for the residential
neighborhood. Miklo said that he did not believe there were any standards that would govern
the garage design, though if that was a concern for the Commission they could certainly make it
a condition of the rezoning. He said that one thing staff will be looking at is whether the parking
area is adequately screened from the street view. Miklo said that if the Commission was
concerned about buffering the neighbor to the west and the appearance from First Avenue they
could put conditions on the rezoning that address those concerns.
Dyer said that she believed all of the other multi - family structures in that area have parking
underneath, surface parking, or both. Soglin said that the property immediately to the north has
garages above - ground, while others have them underneath.
Koppes asked why this application is not being linked with the concept plan in the same way
that other properties just to the north of the subject property were linked to their concept plans.
Miklo said that the property to the north was a planned development and, as such, had to go
through the design review process. Miklo said that staff discussed the possibility of requiring a
concept plan, but decided that the fact that the property was governed by the Central District
Plan was adequate. Miklo added that the Commission could certainly make design review a
condition of the zoning if it cited a reason to do so that concerned the public good. Koppes said
that she thought the two frontage roads were two pretty good reasons but she would see what
the applicant had to say.
Eastham asked if making the building into an L -shape rather than a square or a rectangle would
alleviate any of the parking visibility issues. Miklo said that it might but it was difficult to say
without having specific dimensions and plans.
James Clark, 414 East Market Street, spoke on behalf of the application. Clark said that the lot
itself would probably be sheared down five or six feet to reduce the back slope to the lot line. He
said the garage designs facing First Avenue will have a very nice design and will be tied in with
the nearby apartments. Clark said that there would be proper screening and buffer along the
driveway, in excess of the requirements. Clark said that the design of the building is not yet in
place, but he is aware that every fifty feet there must be design elements employed to break up
the fagade. He said that the garages will be in back in order to keep the cars as hidden as
possible.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 6 of 9
Payne asked if Clark had thought about visitor parking. Clark said that he had not considered
that, but he would look into it further. Milko explained that with three - bedroom units, the
developer is required to supply two parking spaces per unit. With this structure, the two spaces
are provided in garages; such an arrangement does not take into account visitor parking. Miklo
said that was probably a good thing to look into as the application moves forward, especially
considering there is no nearby on- street parking. Freerks said that it may be worth deferring the
application in order to give staff and the applicant time to address that issue. Clark said he too
agreed that visitor parking was needed.
Eastham asked if Clark had any comments regarding the possibility of making the building an L-
shape rather than a rectangle. Clark said that the lot is not big enough to get that done. He said
that he had tried different configurations, but the rectangle shape fits best.
Freerks asked what the landscaping plans were for the property. Miklo said that for residential
building one tree is required for every 550 square feet of building area. Soglin said that there are
additional requirements related to the corner lot and visibility. Clark said that the building too
must be set back in such a way as to maximize visibility.
Koppes asked if there are plans to have a sidewalk leading from the building to First Avenue.
Miklo said that one is only required if there are doors on that side. Soglin said there is not an
entrance on the east side. Koppes said she would like to see the Commission look at this
project in terms of a double- frontage and a gateway into Iowa City. She said that the garages
are a big concern for her, and she would like to see an entrance on the First Avenue side as
well. Clark said that the garages could be made to look very decorative and tie into the decor of
the building. Miklo said that the application is well within the 45 -day limitation period, so if the
Commission wishes to defer in order to work out concerns there is plenty of time to do so.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Koppes moved to defer to REV 1 -00009 until the August 4th meeting.
Payne seconded.
Koppes said she was very concerned about the double- frontage and wanted to make sure the
Commission considered this property as a gateway into the city. She said that she would like to
see more specific design plans before voting for approval. She also said she was a little
concerned about headlights from the driveway bothering nearby residents. Miklo said that the
Commission could require a buffer if that was a concern.
Payne said she would like to see the issue of visitor parking addressed.
Eastham agreed that the visitor parking should be more clearly defined and should be
reasonably adequate for the use. He said that there should be a screening requirement on the
west side of the lot. Eastham said he is also concerned with the design of the garages, and
would like to see something that was at least compatible with the buildings to the north. He said
that the appearance of the building from First Avenue is also a concern for him.
Dyer said that the whole neighborhood is pretty attractive even though a number of the buildings
are multi - family. She said that the duplexes are attractive and there are nice big setbacks of the
multi - family units. She said the proposed site plan looks too crowded to her.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 7 of 9
Weitzel said that he agreed with everything that had been said by other Commissioners. He
thanked Soglin for clarifying the historic status of the existing home.
Freerks said that she thought there were many ways to address the concerns expressed by the
Commission and she looked forward to seeing a little more solid plan come together in the
coming weeks.
A vote was taken and the motion to defer carried 6 -0 (Plahutnik excused).
CODE AMENDMENT ITEM:
Discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Code to clarify the definition of
enlargement/expansion as it relates to alcohol sales- oriented uses.
Miklo said that the state recently changed laws pertaining to liquor licenses and convenience
stores. In order to clarify how the City controls the enlargement and expansion of non-
conforming uses, staff suggests that an additional line be added to the definition to read: For
Alcohol Sales Oriented Retail Uses, any change in the type of liquor license that would increase
the types of alcohol or alcoholic beverages that can be sold is considered an
enlargement/expansion.
Freerks opened the public hearing. No one wished to comment and the public hearing was
closed.
Eastham moved to recommend approval of an amendment to the Zoning Code clarifying
the definition of an enlargement /expansion as it relates to alcohol sales- oriented uses.
Weitzel seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0 (Plahutnik absent).
Discussion of an amendment to the Zoning Code to allow pet supply stores in the
Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone.
Miklo said that the CIA zone is intended for intensive commercial or land consumptive uses;
however, pet supply stores are consistent with other uses permitted within the zone.
The public hearing was opened; no one wished to comment and the public hearing was closed.
Payne moved to approve an amendment to the Zoning Code to allow pet supply stores in
the Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone.
Koppes seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0 (Plahutnik absent).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: July 7th, 2011:
Koppes moved to approve the minutes.
Planning and Zoning Commission
July 21, 2011 - Formal
Page 8 of 9
Eastham seconded.
The motion carried 6 -0 (Plahutnik excused).
OTHER:
A new schedule for which Commission members would attend City Council meetings was
discussed and redistributed.
ADJOURNMENT:
Weitzel moved to adjourn.
Koppes seconded.
The meeting was adjourned on a 6 -0 vote (Plahutnik excused).
z
N
Cl)
OV
tU W
ZW�
V -r-
z z N
Oa
N
ad z
Z_ r
za
z
IL
E
`O
7
d
O
U
Z C
X
LU .- N
_ C N
C C E
N CU O
_a
U)
w
xo'oz
w
Y
N
x
X
X
X
X
LLJ
O
X
ti
ti�
X
X
X
X
0
0
o
x
X
o
X
X
x
w
X
X
X
X
x
�
X
cn
i
X
X
X
x
w
X
un
_
�
�
�
x
x
x
x
�
X
T
NX1XOXXxx
d
X
X
x
X
x
X
x
X
xxxxox
Mx
XXXXxx
ti
X
x
X
X
O
X
X
N
N
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
w
COQ
—MN00M
w
J
�
�
�
-
�
�X00000000
wQ
J
w
=
J
=
Z
a
w
w
J
w
nIX
ou4a
42
0-
w
J
=
J
=Z9w
d
Hw
waDe�-waz=�
2cnwrnwo->-
4m>-
OOV
aw0a5W
Z
a
-
J
=
zm0wwYaa3
C�YF
ova1cd
U)
2z�
OG
=IXww:)N
�-w
wa
.v)wrnwa
Pwaz
=F-
a
>>-
aw0a�W
zmowwYaa�
E
`O
7
d
O
U
Z C
X
LU .- N
_ C N
C C E
N CU O
_a
U)
w
xo'oz
w
Y
w
X
X
X
X
x
�
X
�xoxxxxxx
co
N
X
!
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
M
X
X
x
X
x
X
x
NX,XXXxxx
T
co
�wy�Cp—MN��M
w
w
J
w
wQ
J
=
J
=
Z
a
w
nIX
ou4a
42
0-
w—
—�
z�
=GCWw:)N
d
Hw
waDe�-waz=�
2cnwrnwo->-
4m>-
aw0a5W
zm0wwYaa3
E
`O
7
d
O
U
Z C
X
LU .- N
_ C N
C C E
N CU O
_a
U)
w
xo'oz
w
Y
MINUTES
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE
THURSDAY, MAY 5`h, 2011
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL
Members present: Terry Robinson, Susie Thurmond, Mark Seabold, Rick Fosse
Staff Present: Marcia Bollinger, Rebecca Raab
Public Present: Jill Harper, Shay and Porsche (City High students)
Not in attendance: DaLayne Williamson, Patrick Carney, Jan Finlayson
CALL TO ORDER
Robinson called the meeting to order at 3:35pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
No new business
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 3 2011 MEETING
3b(7)
APPROVED
MOTION: Fosse moved to approve the March 3, 2011 meeting minutes as presented. Seabold
seconded. Motion passed 4:0
REVIEW OF GRANT WOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ART PROPOSAL
Harper and students presented the Grant Wood Neighborhood Art proposal to the group.
Robinson suggested a few changes based on his staff's experiences with similar art at
Pheasant Hill Park, including making the tops more difficult to vandalize. Harper agreed the
shape of the concrete was important and said they were flexible with that design. Harper
proposed a time frame and said that most of the work could be done at City High as an
after school program. Fosse asked how the column was attached to the foundation and Harper
said that the cement column and base were all once piece. Bollinger asked what ideas Harper
had for a design and Harper said that the neighborhood organization had expressed interest in
imagery that reflected the neighborhood and also the phrase `Sycamore Greenway'. Bollinger
said that a student had proposed lighting the sculptures and the group all expressed support of
the idea. Various members proposed ideas for lighting the sculpture and Harper said she would
look into this. Members discussed the best shape for the columns and methods for pouring the
concrete. Harper asked members if the budget proposal looked appropriate and all members
agreed that it did. Harper also mentioned that Fas Trac students may be involved and members
agreed that this was ok.
MOTION: Fosse motioned to approve the proposal and Thurmond seconded. Motion
passed 4:0.
REVIEW OF WEST HIGH DONATION STATION ART PROPOSAL
Bollinger reviewed the current status of the West High Donation Station Art proposal. She said
she had received a few proposals from students, but planned on working to solicit more. The
group agreed.
Public Art Advisory Committee
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Page 2 of 3
KIDZ TENT
Bollinger reviewed Kidz Tent and asked if members were interested in participating. The group
expressed interest and Bollinger said she would work with her intern on collecting donations.
UPDATE — NORTH MARKET PLACE LITERARY WALK POETRY IN PUBLIC BOOKMARKS
PROJECT
Bollinger showed the members photos of the BookMarks project and provided an update on the
project's progress. Bollinger said all books would be displayed June to October 2011. The
group was pleased with the progress of the project and had no comments.
Bollinger updated the group on the progress of the North Market Place Literary Walk saying the
art pieces were progressing well and would be installed in June /July 2011. Bollinger said she
anticipated that there would be a dedication ceremony organized.
Bollinger said that Poetry in Public was also progressing well and that posters would be installed
in public in the next few weeks. Bollinger said the program did not have the capacity to do the
art program component this year and the committee agreed a new, simpler format was needed.
Bollinger said she hoped to work on this more in the coming years and Harper said she would
like for her students to potentially participate.
OTHER?
No other business
ADJOURNMENT
Fosse moved to adjourn at 4:20p
a�
E
0
0
'tS
U
p
P64
a)
E
0
Uo
Z, N
O Li
.U) >1
>Co
Q M
< O
0 p M
a)
7 L f0
b
0
U
Wo
U N
p O
^p O
p N
=,
A
U
b
�
W
W
00
W
�
_
Q
Q
p
O
M
u
u
cn
II
II
�
II
o�
o_
CIA
d-
O
M
O
N
O
Q
00
.--q
�
d'
N
•-+
O
N
s..
O
O
O
O
O
p
d
•�,
M••�
p
e�
++
U
�C
z
z
9z
A
U
b
�
W
�
_
Q
Q
p
O
N
u
u
cn
II
II
�
II
Approved Minutes
May 2011 3b(8)
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
MAY 19, 2011
ROOM 208, IOWA CITY /JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER
Members Present: Jay Honohan, Sara Maiers, Chuck Felling, Michael Lensing,
Rose Hanson
Members Absent: Merce Bem -Klug
Staff Present: Linda Kopping, Kristin Kromray, Michelle Buhman, Emily
Light
Others Present: Joe Burkle
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM. Jay Honohan chaired the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 17, 2011 MEETING:
Chuck Felling was absent from the February commission meeting.
Motion: To accept the minutes from the February 17, 2011 meeting. Motion
carried on a vote of 510 Maiers/Felling.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA:
None.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS:
Jay Honohan will visit the Board of Supervisors. Michael Lensing will attend a
City Council meeting.
u_ ' : •1 • 4 AT I .:-q Tkifi
Kopping reported that Mary Wiiemann resigned from Elder Services recently. This
has delayed the nutrition program lease negotiations. In addition the state is in
Approved Minutes
May 2011
the process of consolidating the Area Agencies on Aging. This change may
further impact the nutrition program.
VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION EVENTISENIOR CENTER CLOSING:
June 1 & will be the date of the Volunteer Picnic in lower city park at shelter 8.
Games will start at noon. Food and entertainment will be from 24PM. The Pitt
Smokehouse and BBO is catering the event with entertainment by the
Goosetown String Band. Invitations were sent to 481 volunteers that served in
2010. In the event of bad weather the rain location for the event is the Johnson
County fairgrounds building A. Kopping invited all commission members to come
help.
The Senior Center will be closed June 10-12 for maintenance on the assembly
room floor. Craig and Corbin will be fixing some broken planks, cleaning and
resurfacing the floor. The chemicals used in this process produce strong fumes
creating the need for the closure.
LOSS OF JEAN MARTIN: SCC REPLACEMENT AND REPLACEMENT OF
Kopping reported that Jean Martin passed away. Kopping inquired if any
commission members knew anyone who would be interested in filling Martin's
position on the Commission and as Senior Center Steering Council
representative.
Chuck Felling agreed to become the Steering Council representative.
OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW:
Michelle Buhman reported that she is on the Johnson County Livable Community
Visibility Action Team that is focusing on LGBT elders issues and making sure
our community is open and welcoming to this group of people.
In April the Visibility Action Team, in partnership with the Senior Center and
others, put together a screening of the movie GEN Silent at the Bijou Theater. In
addition this group is looking at providing cultural competency training at care
facilities. Also they are hoping to put together a publication for GLBT elders that
will list services and opportunities in Johnson County that are welcoming and
inclusive.
Buhman would like the Senior Center to become a SAGE affiliate. SAGE stands
for services and advocacy for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered elders.
Currently SAGE affiliates are only non - profit organizations. Even though the
Approved Minutes
May 2011
Center is a governmental entity it will still be considered since the Center is grant
eligible. The first step in this process would be to do focus groups and surveys of
GLBT elders in the community to see what kinds of services and programs are
needed. Buhman will report to the commission about any SAGE related work.
Motion: To endorse the SAGE program and authorize the Center to become
a SAGE affiliate to support advocacy for GLBT elders. Motion carried 5/0.
Lensing/ Hanson.
Buhman reported that she is working on the Johnson County Livable Community
Fall Prevention Committee. This group has received a Wellmark grant for a Sure
Steps program. In the fall Buhman will be doing some pre and post testing of
Senior Center members who are involved in fitness classes.
Buhman has two students this summer. One is Joe Burkle, who will be leading a
national parks class and observing how the Senior Center operates. Nicole
DeSmidt continues to work for the Center as a work study student.
This September is the Senior Center's 3& anniversary. The kickoff for the 30th
anniversary is a senior art show. Other events include the new sign unveiling,
membership appreciation dinner, a dance and a film festival.
The Senior Center is putting on a musical, Icaria. This will be held at the Englert
May 26"' -28th and has many Center members involved in the production.
Don Coffman, the New Horizons Band director, is leaving the University of Iowa.
The New Horizons Band has a transition team in place to help with this change.
There will be two temporary band directors this summer until a permanent
replacement is found.
Emily Light reported that Peter Grau is going to continue this summer as director
of Voices of Experience. There is no director for the fall yet, but Peter may stay
on until one is found.
Light reported that she worked with 27 student volunteers this spring. They
assisted in many different projects including the quilt raffle, a bingo social, the
cell phone recycling project and volunteering in the computer lab and fitness
rooms.
Light reported that she attended, along with other volunteers, training for the
advanced care directive initiative.
The Senior Center has a new counseling student. Dominique Casper will be here
this summer and next school year. She will provide one on one counseling and, if
there is interest, group counseling.
Approved Minutes
May 2011
The Community Outreach Committee, which Light is the staff contact for, has
started a speaker's bureau called Center Ambassadors. Volunteers will go out
into the community and speak at different community events about the Senior
Center and what it has to offer.
Light said that there is a new TV commercial out and she has received positive
feedback.
Summer programs that Light has put together include a pizza party cooking
class, a video production class and the laughter yoga club.
For the 3& anniversary Light is organizing a film festival that will be kicked off
with a silent film accompanied by live music at the Englert. The rest of the festival
will show films related to senior issues and films produced by Senior Center
members.
Light and Honohan will collaborate on a new volunteer program which will collect
candy for the troop pantry. Honohan's nephew is in the Army and recently told
him that he was very excited to receive candy while far from home.
Kopping reported that the front step project is continuing to move forward.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Maiers reported she visited the City Council in April.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 5/0. Maiers /Lensing.
m V-
N T-
50
C_ N
W
'C r2
m
O
L—
Q
Ll
O
.N
�E
E
00
V
V � O
0 N
a.
c
WE
� C C
m.ApA O O
a¢¢zz
u n 1:� 2 u
XOOz
Y
X
X
X
X
X
N
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
Z
z
Z
z
z
z
z
N
X
X
X
X
X
Q
X
X
X
X
X
�
V—
N
N
r
V—
V—
V—
N
M
_�
M
M
M
M
M
M
cm
CN
a
a
a
a
a
F-
C
to
vl
m
C
O
J
�L
LL
=
O
E
�
Y
Z
�Y
U
N
�
A
-`i
V
2
c�c4�
W
n
c
WE
� C C
m.ApA O O
a¢¢zz
u n 1:� 2 u
XOOz
Y
3b(9)
IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION APPROVED
MONDAY, JUNE 27,2011--5:30 P.M.
CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST. -TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hans Hoerschelman, Alexa Homewood, Nolan Klouda, Saul
Mekies
MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Bergus
STAFF PRESENT: Mike Brau, Bob Hardy
OTHERS PRESENT: Michael McBride, Beth Fisher, Lee Grassley, Josh Goding
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL
None at this time.
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
Hoerschelman said he is interested in investigating the current status of broadband in Iowa City
including providers, technologies, and provider performance. The Commission could conduct a
study and present it to the City Council. Grassley reported that Mediacom has just completed a
project to move all their telephone service in- house. Previously, Mediacom had relied on Sprint.
Hoerschelman asked about the status of getting local calls going to a local call center. Grassley
said staff is being added at the regional call center but they are not yet fully staffed. Mediacom
hopes to have 100 high- definition channels available by the end of the year. Hardy said there has
been a lot of discussion behind the scenes at the House of Representatives regarding the CAP
Act. Those involved in the discussions with Congressional staffers report they are getting many
positive responses. Hardy said he will be meeting with Goding to reach out to other access
channels across the state to ask them to contact their Congressman. Hoerschelman suggested
that the Community Television Group try and set up a meeting with Representative Loebsack.
Hardy said it might be beneficial to contact the local state legislators to talk to Loebsack as many
of them have utilized the access channels. Hardy reported just today the rate review of the basic
tier rates has been completed. The maximum permitted rate for the basic tier will be $15.48 and
the operator selected rate will be $14.04. Hardy said the effort has saved subscribers a fair
amount of money. Rates in the unincorporated area are almost twice as much as those in Iowa
City.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Hoerschelman moved and Homewood seconded a motion to approve the amended May 2011
minutes. The motion passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS
Hoerschelman said he is interested in investigating the current status of broadband in Iowa City
including providers, technologies, and provider performance. The Commission could conduct a
study and present it to the City Council.
SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
CONSUMER ISSUES
Hardy referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet and said one complaint was
unresolved. It involved what rights a consumer has regarding what personally identifiable
information Mediacom retains about them. Mediacom would not provide that information.
Mekies said that many complaints involve the inability of subscribers to access or communicate
with customer service representatives. Grassley said as Mediacom added new products customer
service representative utilization became an issue that needed to be addressed. Mediacom moved
the third shift customer service representatives to the first and second shifts and hired a firm in
the Philippines to cover the third shift. Grassley said there have been a small number of
complaints about language skills. Hardy said he is getting more complaints on this issue.
MEDIACOM REPORT
Grassley said he anticipates that with regards to making a comparison of Internet service in Iowa
City with other communities that Iowa City will look good. Mediacom is in a proactive position
with respect to Internet capacities. While there may not be a great demand for the 105 MB
service now offered, in the future there will be applications that will utilize that much bandwidth.
This is an area in which Mediacom is performing well, but the customer service aspects could
use some improvement. Mediacom has just completed a project to move all their telephone
service in- house. Previously, Mediacom had relied on Sprint. Hoerschelman asked about the
status of getting local calls going to a local call center. Grassley said staff is being added at the
regional call centers but they are not yet fully staffed. Call centers in Iowa are in Cedar Rapids,
Mason City, Moline, Ottumwa, West Des Moines, and Red Oak. Hoerschelman asked about
DNS redirection on the Internet service and if there are any plans to return to using deep packet
inspection. Grassley said he will make inquiries and get an answer. Hoerschelman said many
webmasters dislike this as they have custom 404 error messages that direct users within their site.
Grassley said that the transition to all digital transmission went very smoothly. About 80,000
digital to analog converters were provided to subscribers. Hoerschelman asked if channel
realignments are finished. Grassley said more are coming. Mediacom hopes to have 100 high
definition channels available by the end of the year. Hoerschelman asked about retransmission
consent agreements. Grassley said Mediacom's agreement with Sinclair is for about another 18
months and that change is needed on retransmission consent at the federal level.
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT
McBride said he will have an annual report for the next meeting. In the last 12 months a total of
569 new programs were cablecast of which 299 were student productions. The Daily Iowan
produced 201 5 -15 minute newscasts. UITV produced 219 programs of which 43 were fine arts
programs. There were 350 submitted programs. The coach's weekly news conferences will
continue to be covered until Learfield can sell advertising spots. At that point UITV will not be
able to cablecast them. It is anticipated that next year's program schedule will be much like the
past year. Mekies said the quality of UITV programming has shown improvement over the past
year.
KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE
A written report was provided.
PATV REPORT
Goding passed out copies of the series program schedule on PATV . Two new series, a Spanish
language program and a talk show with Yale Cohen, have been added. A new editing station has
been added. A new high definition camera has been purchased. Two new interns have joined
PATV. 150 kids visited PATV's booth at Arts Fest. PATV staff will be recording at Jazz Fest
this weekend. The next board meeting is July 21 at 7 p.m. One board position is open. The
Alliance for Community Media annual conference will be held July 27 -29. Goding and two
board members plan to attend. The next guideline class will be July 3 at 7 p.m. Hoerschelman
asked if there have been any discussion about getting an optical link with Mediacom. Hardy said
he has started discussions. There are a number of issues, including who would pay for it and
need at this time as most programs are currently shot in standard definition.
SENIOR CENTER REPORT
Hardy said Light had a conflict and could not attend.
LIBRARY REPORT
Fisher said an annual report will be available for the next meeting. Thirteen live programs are
planned for June and July. Four of those are adult programs and 9 are children's programs.
ICCSD REPORT
No representative was present. Brau said Hoyland was on vacation. Mekies asked if Hardy has
received any indication from the superintendent why the policy regarding Education Exchange
was changed. Hardy said he did not inquire, but will do so. Goding said Education Exchange is
not being produced in the summer and that the programs have been originated at City High and
have not been including other schools. Mekies asked about coverage of the West High
graduations. Hardy said he will find out if the West High graduation was covered.
CITY CHANNEL REPORT
Hardy reported InfoVision is being modified to make it better able to provide video. The City
Manager program "In Focus" is now available on the main City website. The program is located
in the portion of the site that corresponds to the content of the program. Work has started on
getting the access channel's programs schedules on a single website and on the Press Citizen
website. Market Music and the Friday Night Concert Series are again playing on the channel. A
program on an airplane race for women was recently recorded. "In Focus" recently recorded its
third program. Hardy said he is working with the legal department regarding the collection of
personal information by Medicom mentioned in the Consumer Issues agenda item. A resolution
should be available by the next meeting. Hardy is working with the library on a streaming music
project and is exploring getting a steaming license for the City. The cost is about $600 -700.
CAP ACT
Hardy said there has been a lot of discussion behind the scenes at the House of Representatives.
Those involved in the discussions with Congressional staffers report they are getting many
positive responses. Hardy said he will be meeting with Goding to reach out to other access
channels across the state to ask them to contact their Congressman. Hardy said he did not send
the letter approved and signed by the Commission because the American Community Television
group indicated that they wished advocates to make personal contacts with their Representatives
when they were in town. Hoerschelman suggested that the Community Television Group try and
set up a meeting with Representative Loebsack. Hardy said it might be beneficial to contact the
local state legislators to talk to Loebsack as many of them have utilized the access channels.
RATE REVIEW
Hardy reported Brau has finished a review of the basic tier rates. The maximum permitted rate
for the basic tier will be $15.48 and the operator selected rate will be $14.04. Hardy said the
effort has saved subscribers a fair amount of money. Rates in the unincorporated area are almost
twice as much as those in Iowa City. Hardy said Brau did a very good job on the review, which
is a complicated process.
ADJOURNMENT
Hoerschelman moved and Mekies moved to cancel the July meeting due to the absence of many
people involved. The motion was approved unanimously. Homewood moved and
Hoerschelman moved to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 7:00.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Brau
Cable TV Administrative Aide