The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-04-29 Info Packet CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY April 29, 2004 www.icgov.org I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IP1 City Council Meeting Schedule and Work Session Agendas IP2 Letter from City Manager to Douglas True, Vice President for Finance and Operations, University of Iowa: Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue Traffic Study IP3 Memorandum from Matthew Hayek, Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Chair: Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Update IP4 Memorandum from Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, to City Manager: Update on Visual Preference Survey IP5 Memorandum from Terry Robinson, Parks and Forestry, to City Manager: Spring Tree Removal Contracts IP6 City of Iowa City Quarterly Investment Report: December 31, 2003-March 31, 2004 IP7 Document from Chamber of Commerce Meeting: Project Fact Sheet IP8 The Green Bay News-Chronicle, Wisconsin: Madison Council Bans Smoking in all Bars and Restaurants IP9 Iowa City Police Department Use of Force Report: March 2004 IP10 Memorandum from Linda Severson, Human Services Coordinator, to Assistant City Manager: Award Given to City Channel 4/Community Television Service (CTS) Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County [Overhead Presentation at 5/3 Work Session] I PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES IPll Telecommunications Commission: March 22, 2004 IP12 Public Art Ad¥iso~ Committee: April 1, 2004 IP13 [:.¢onomi¢ Development Committee: March 30, 2004 IP14 Board of Adjustment: March 10, 2004 IP15 Planning and Zoning Commission: April 1, 2004 IP16 Historic Preservation Commission: April 22, 2004 '-~""'"'"'"~'"=~ CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF [OWA (~ITY April 29, 2004 www.icgov.org I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IP'I City Council Meetim ; and Work Session Agen¢ IP2 Letter from City Manager Douglas True, Vice Pres nt for Finance and Operations, University of Iowa: Study IP3 Memorandum from M~ Scattered Site H Taskforce Chair: Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Update IP4 Memorandum from Robed Miklo, flor Pla~ to City Manager: Update on Visual Preference Survey IP5 Memorandum from Terry Robinson, and Forestry, to City Manager: Spring Tree Removal Contracts IP6 City of Iowa City Quarterly December 31, 2003~March 31, 2004 IP7 Document from Chamber Meeting: ect Fact Sheet IP8 The Green Bay News-Chronicl Wisconsin: Madi Council Bans Smoking in all Bars and Restaurants IP9 Iowa City Police De 2004 IP10 Memorandum from Lit Severson, Human Services Coo~,nator, to Assistant City Manager: Award Given to 4/Community Television Se~ice (CTS) PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINI. IPll Telecommu Commission: March 22, 2004 \, IP12 Public y Committee: April 1, 2004 IP13 Econ¢ Development Committee: March 30, 2004 IP14 Board of Adjustment: March 10, 2004 IP15 Planning and Zoning Commission: April 1, 2004 IP16 Historic Preservation Commission: April 22, 2004 City Council Meeting Schedule and Work Session Agen(]as April 29, 2004 CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org · MONDAY, MAY 3 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 5:15p Special Formal Council Meeting (Dinner Provided) Separate Agenda Posted To Follow Council Work Session Special Formal Planning and Zoning Items Agenda Items · Neighborhood Centers Presentation · Council Appointments · Council Time · Identification of Priorities for Discussion · TUESDAY, MAY 4 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Formal Council Meeting I TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS I · FRIDAY, MAY 14 EmmaJ. HarvatHall 8:30a Special Council Formal Meeting Executive Session - Staff Evaluations · Monday, May 17 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · Planning and Zoning Items · Agenda Items · Council Appointments · Council Time · Identification of Priorities for Discussion · Tuesday, May 18 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00p Formal Council Meeting · Tuesday, June 1 TBA Special Work Session 7:00p Formal Council Meeting · Monday, June 14 6:30p Council Work Session · Planning and Zoning Items · Agenda Items · Council Appointments · Council Time · Identification of Priorities for Discussion Meeting dates/times/fopics subject to change FUTURE WORK SESSION ITEMS Regulation of Downtown Dumpsters IP2 C[lYo[ IOW,,~,clIY April 22, 2004 Douglas K. True Vice-President for Finance and Operations 105 Jessup Hall OFFICE OF THE University of Iowa CITY MANAGER Iowa City, IA 52242 Stephen J. Atkins Re: Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue Traffic Study City Manager stcvc-atkins~,iowa-city.org Dear Doug: Dale E. tlelling Assistant City Manager It iS my understanding that planning is proceeding between the City and the dal¢-h¢lling~iowa-city.orgUniversity for improvements in the Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue area. This is occurring consistent with the traffic study for the area which we recently funded jointly. The reconstruction of South Grand Avenue, which is being coordinated with the expansion of Hospital Parking Ramp 4, is currently under design and scheduled for construction next year. Consistent with your letter of February 26, 2004, City and University representatives, coordinated by JCCOG, have met and discussed the range of recommended improvements which are outlined in the Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue traffic operations study final report. Those subsequent improvements are currently under consideration and expected to be implemented in the short-term future. In ail, I think we are well on our way to significant improvements in the Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue traffic system, which will accommodate the future growth of the University, the City's traffic thoroughfares, and make access better for the neighborhood. Attached is a resolution adopting the Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue Traffic Operations Study Final Report which was approved by the City Council on February 17, 2004. In discussions with University representatives, it does not appear that there is a similar adoption procedure that can be undertaken by the University. With the City poised to invest in this area, it is important for us to have some indication that the University will also agree to use this report for planning guidance in the area. Perhaps a letter signed by you or the president would be such a mechanism for us to be assured that future plans in this area will be consistent with the recently completed report. Please let me know how you would like to proceed regarding this matter. Sincerely, Stephen J. Atkins City Manager cc: City Council Karin Franklin 410 E. Washington Street Jeff Davidson Iowa City, IA 52240 Rick Fosse Phone: (319) 356-5010 Ron Knoche Fax: (319) 356-5009 jccogtp/Itr/true4-18 doc I02-~7-04 Prepared by: Jeff Davidson, PCD, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5252 RESOLUTION NO. 04-52 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MELROSE AVENUE/GRAND AVENUE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STUDY FINAL REPORT. WHEREAS, cities may adopt plans directing the futura growth of their community to provide for the public health, safety, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed a committee to be formed with representatives from the City of Iowa City, the University of Iowa, and the Melrose Avenue Neighborhood Association to examine traffic operations in the Melrose Avenue/Byington Road/Grand Avenue area; and WHEREAS, the committee's work has been completed and a final report has been produced with recommendations on traffic operations in the Melrose Avenue/Byington Road/Grand Avenue area; and WHEREAS, it is desirable to use said report for the planning of traffic operations in the study area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: the Melrose Avenue/Grand Avenue Traffic Operations Study Final Report be adopted as a guideline for decision-making on the transportation system in the Melrose Avenue/Byington Road/Grand Avenue area. Passed and approved this 17th .day of February ,20 04 MAYOR Prd Approved by CITY bt_ERK ~ity-Att6~n~s Office ' It was moved by Champion and seconded by Vanderhoef the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Bailey X Champion X Elliott X Lehman X O'Donnell X Vanderhoef X Wilbum ppd adm,'res/melroseTOS .doc MEMORANDUM DATE: April 27, 2003 TO.' Iowa City City Council FROM: Matthew Hayek, Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Chair RE: Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Update On April 6, 2004, the City Council voted to form the Scattered Site Housing Taskforce. The scope of work for the taskforce will include studying the existing distribution, location and types of assisted housing in Iowa City and whether a scattered site policy should be considered by the City Council. If applicable, the taskforce could also examine possible policies for future distribution, location and types of assisted housing in Iowa City. As per Council's direction, the taskforce is comprised of a cross-section of community members representing multiple areas of expertise. The taskforce includes eight members from the organizations/groups listed belo;v: Housing and Community Development Commission Jerry Anthony and Matthew Hayek Iowa City Community School District Jan Left and Joan VandenBerg Johnson County Board of Supervisors Sally Stutsman United Way of Johnson County Jan Peterson Planning and Zoning Commission Don Anciaux Neighborhood Council Darlene Clausen The first meeting of the Scattered Site Housing Taskforce will be at 5:00 p.m. on April 29 at City Hall, City Manager's Conference Room. During this first meeting I am planning on providing the taskforce members with an overview of the scope of our work, a preliminary background of the existing assisting housing programs in Iowa City, and an initial reading list. In addition, I am hopeful that we can arrive at an established meeting schedule. If you have questions or would like to discuss this matter, please contact me at 337-9606. Cc: City Manager Karin Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development Doug Boothroy, Director of Housing and Inspection Services Steven Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator Steve Rackis, Housing Administrator To: Steve Atkins, City Manager From: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner Re: Update on Visual Preference Survey Between March 23 and April 10 the Visual Preference Survey was conducted at seven sessions held at West High School, City High, The Recreation Center and City Hall. Approximately 450 citizens, including 70 realtors and 20 members of the Home Builders Association, participated in the survey. As far as we know this is the largest number of citizens to have ever participated in any one Comprehensive Planning or Zoning public meeting process in Iowa City. We anticipate that the analysis of the survey will be completed the first week of May. A report will then be prepared for the Planning and Zoning Commission and a public presentation. At the suggestion of the Board of Realtors and the Home Builders Association, survey participants were offered the opportunity to submit general comments about the survey process. The compiled comments are attached. Comments of citizens are followed by comments submitted by members of the Board of Realtors and the Home Builders Association. ppdadmin/visual pref survey comments doc Comments from Citizens who participated in Visual Preference Survey 1. This survey is a great way to get public input for aesthetic guidelines for neighborhoods and commercial areas. Too much pressure is put on the city government by residential and commercial developers. Usually city government agrees to developer's proposars. 2. Don't make Iowa City look like Coralville-crowded, zero lot-lines, everything looks alike, made of cheap materials. Garage focused houses look bad too! 3. Much less introductory comments would have been appreciated. Variety of design throughout the neighborhood is key. Trees are important. Utility boxes need to be out of sight. 4. The garage should not be the prominent feature of a house. Wide porches are good. 5. I tended to rate the residential structures that were closer together without front garages at +1 's or +2' (on the scale of -5 to +5), but I would gladJy pick these aesthetically over anything with a yawning garage. I'm just not used to seeing houses so close together. 6. Too many with garages major frontages. Not enough individuality in many pictures. I do not like connected garages monopolizing the front of the dwelling. I also like more lot size than most of these pictures had. 7. Most important factors: access for pedestrians, buildings close to street/sidewalk; plenty of trees; medium to high density; outdoor spaces to interact; garages/cars less obtrusive. 8. In a city to have more interaction between the street and the residence the set back should not be much more than 20'. I like it when you can't tell where the parking is and if there is a garage that it be single and setback further or better yet with alley access. 9. Presenter was nervous, drew excess attention to herself, deserves and has potential for far more confidence. Get rid of the childish ideas, act professional- don't joke about the process. Some slides showed well how townhouses can be a far better choice than cramped lots with useJess valueless clearances (set backs). 10. interesting larger buildings that seem too urban for Iowa City. 11. There are too many houses/duplexes these days that are all garage out front-ugly. Wish there was more variety in design and style. A rot of the buildings today look like they have the right idea in terms of having some interesting line or details, but don't quite get the whole idea right. Often times the windows don't look placed right or the proportions are awkward. 12. All of this bad design makes me very cynical and depressed about the future of Iowa City. 13. Good neighborhoods have varied home types with classical styling. Homes are close to the street with wide sidewalks. Garages should not be seen from the street and accessible from the alley in the rear. Utility access and garbage should be on the arrey as well. Neighborhoods should be amicable to pedestrians by fostering walkability with porches and narrow residential side streets. 14. Much of the new construction in Iowa City showcases the garage-why? Home styles/colors/materials should vary in character, as the residents do[ Homes should be house neighbors and should make up neighborhoods-including porches! Get garages out of the way so neighbors can get together! Commercial buildings can have the same character and intent! Wouldn't it be great if people would identify a home or business by its look/color/character, rather than having to squint at the address number because they all look the same. Neighborhoods should welcome/appeal to people, not cars! ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 1 15. Overall, I felt like a large percentage of what was shown, whether commercial, multi-family housing, or single-family housing, was the same, and that was usually sprawl-inducing, cookie-cutter, auto- focused, un-aesthetically pleasing places. What's the deal? We could have saved everyone time with half the shots-really! I was also concerned about this aspect of the physical and comfort: aside from entering from the garage, I didn't see how someone with a wheelchair or other assistance could enter a house in a head-held-high way. I'm all for porches, understand-as they foster community- but for regulation standards, I wes concerned at the lack of ease of access. How about renovating dilapidated neighborhoods? How about more mixed use? How about the presenter not cutting off participants? The frontal garages have to go as a mainstream thing-disgusting. 16. Not showing old construction did not allow the audience to consider how buildings will age. The presenter does not seem very professional. I don't have much confidence in the company. Pedestrian accessibility is very important to me. Trees and landscaping are also important. Building materials can make or break a structure-bricks are good in general and vinyl siding is bad. 17. Liked disguised/hidden garages. We have too many split foyers now. 18. For the past 50 years we have been intent on turning our community into a vast wasteland with poor planning and abysmal design. It is no mystery what goes into making a vibrant town. We must begin to recover the principles of good urbanism. We must also recognize that aesthetic qualities do matter in enhancing overall quality of life. 19. They should have music with the slides! 20. I prefer the designs where the accessibility does not sacrifice the sense of neighborhood, community, and emphasis on alternative transportation. Pedestrian access from the front can be at ground level without having the garage at the front of the lot. 21. a. We have got to start hiding cars and garages. b. House styles that nod to our city's traditional housing stock are winners. c. Why do builders not paint the porch, balcony, railings and posts? d. Scale and mass can make or break a house. e. Setbacks and porches can be welcoming. f. Landscaping should cure our streetscapes of concrete. g. Very few houses had no steps-this will be a problem for older people, disabled, people with kids. 22. Walking is very important to me-it is my primary mode of transportation. 23. i'm glad the city is doing this! Commercial- if giant parking lots are necessary they should be better- landscaped and more pedestrian friendly. Multi-family- need to incorporate space for public and private intersection; design needs to consider scale.; Duplex/Single Family- house designs need to be more diverse; houses immediately become more attractive when the garage/parking is not in front, which makes alleys and underground parking good; front porches give residents a way to interact with others, which is very important; houses that are too close together are worse than houses that are right next to each other (row houses). 24. If the residential options are seriously being considered for future design, I'm very depressed. Please consider making lot sizes larger and minimizing ugly vertical looks. We are not a large urban area that has any serious space or income issues. Lets not turn Iowa City into a mass market, space limited visual ghetto. 25. All of the rows and rows of similar houses are horrid. Actually use Iowa City shots, what is presently here is not aesthetically or architecturally appealing. 26. Too much jabber up front about the firm. 27. Lot sizes for new construction, need to be larger. Houses are piled one on top of another, need to at least be 1.5 times the current size (2x would be better). ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 2 28. Hard to judge parking areas when you couldn't see them most of the time. Numbers should be at top of screen instead of bottom. Speaker: find a better phrase for "you guys." 29. You need to define the endpoints of your rating scale. 30. Put a limit on consultant comments, especially background. Put slide numbers on upper right. 31. Thanks for doing this. I hope you let those of us who live outside town count. Many people who shop and work in Iowa City live outside the city limits but spend lots of time here. 32. With new construction, all landscape is inadequate and bleak. 33. Very few of the residential units are handicapped accessible (or not obviously). That's a big consideration in Iowa City. 34. Great opportunity, thanks for giving me a voice (albeit a tiny little Cindy-Lu Who voice). 35. The introduction was too long. It's been a long day. 36. Would like to see commercial uses near campus zoned for fewer bars, have businesses and other natures. Common negatives for me: housing facing the street with a blind-eye (huge garage door), Houses too close together- small lots, buildings too close to the street, Buildings with main arteries that are inaccessible for people with wheelchairs. Universally design is important, regardless of style. The lack of trees makes a building in a neighborhood look bleak, industrial. Monotony of street fronts, home, apartment units- are depressing. 37. Overall- like the variety of buildings- don't like all the same. Don't like garages at the front, too much pavement and looks like a large white wall. Like wide sidewalk with boulevard-landscaped between sidewalk and street. Phone poles and wires are ugly, but so are the boxes-put them in back if possible. Allow wide enough roads for street parking. Buildings set back from the street-don't like circles at the end of roads. In Commercial- hate ramps, like lots. Signs get hidden by trees in 5 years of growth. Fine line between being able to see the sign from the road so you are not hindering traffic when looking for something but not so big that you can see it from the moon. 38. Single family houses with small, front yard porch, parking in back, Old World look preferable for all garages. Big yard in front, varied building materials instead of everything looking the same, Landscaping makes a huge difference makes it feel settled more than like they just cleared a lot and plunked down a row of conforming homes. 39. I attended the 5:30 pm version at City High on 3/31 which was well attended. I found it to be a useful, thoughtful exercise. I commend the city for having the survey and hope that some "gold" can be panned for the purposes of future planning. One additional thought I had about it was the issue of accessibility which was not reflected formally in the survey. A good friend has mobility issues and so I found myself looking at many of the dwellings and saying, these are great looking, the are nice for most pedestrians, etc., but found, for the most part that most examples that were shown were not of a universal design/not accessible, particularly through front doors because of steep steps or narrow appearing doorways. Obviously I am not talking about those structures that ha(/e garages in front or back that are connected to the structures, but I suspect they are, in practice, not terribly accessible either. I hope that when building code is revisited that issues concerning universal design and, general, accessibility are considered carefully, not only for commercial builds, but for multiple family, and single family dwellings. Iowa City already has an aging population (which some consider to be an attractive "market" for home ownership promotion) and based on projections for the future (20% of the US population by 2035 will be 65 or older/numbers of persons with physical disabilities in Iowa (as of 2000 census) equaling 101,000 (or 25% of all persons over 65 in Iowa). Coupled with this are those of all ages who have physical disabilities (both of a permanent and temporary basis). ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 3 40. What an outrageous editorial in the Press-"Citizen". Thanks for organizing the survey: it was interesting to see how close to the architectural abyss we are. 41. Good instructions; seemed very well organized. I looked for features that would promote neighborliness and feelings of community. These are the features to include in that category: an inviting walkway, porches, sidewalks, shade/rain protection, curves in the design. I prefer interesting line and accents. Clean lines are nice, but only lines are not enough! Houses need character-they don't need bare faces. Likewise with yards, they need curves for elevation not just fiat squares of grass. Facing the street with massive garage doors is the best way to shut down a neighborhood. Rows of look-alike houses may be affordable, but they deaden the spirit. 42. This is a great idea. Talk can only go so far, this should produce some good data for some real positive improvements. Wish we'd done this in 1960... 1970....1980... Thanks! 43. The pre-survey presentation seemed like a sales pitch-directed toward the builders and real estate folks. None of the slides were even modestly modern buildings. Why not even one or two prairie style buildings? 44. I like the idea that in the single-family dwelling section there were smaller cottage-like houses. I believe there should be more homes that are smaller, yet with character, available in Iowa City so that those of us of moderate income don't have to live in less-than-desirable 2-3 bedroom ranches. 45. A bit skewed due to age of buildings and the comment, "we choose what we get to vote on." Where's the progressive models-bike lanes renewables? 46. My general comment is that I don't mind density, but the garage-scapes drive me crazy. Narrow lots are okay as long as a pedestrian can walk for more than 20 feet without a driveway. 47. Most of the photos were from recent construction. A much bigger priority is preserving order/historic buildings. I saw very few large trees, this is important to have! So many of the residential photos showed houses that were dominated by a garage, nothing uglier! 48. The garages are too many, too big, and too ugly! 49. Road curvature looks good. Rooflines make a difference; Window details make a difference. 50. The introduction was too long. Make your points and stop. 51. We need less preamble to this session. 52. Only one commercial site was a +5, the rest were varying degrees of awful. Residential single- family was in general horrendous, except for a few. Townhomes and apartments were relative degrees of bad to worse, except for a few somewhat respectable ones. I scored only a few +5's. Where has architectural integrity gone? 53. This is a good idea. Generally, I would like to see specific discussion of this like building materials, density, etc. 54. Enjoyable experience, no buildings were very impressive overall. 55. Balconies-Yes, Porches-Yes. Please do not have large garages as front doors. Plan ahead-mature trees! Trees in parking lots-yes! Native plants/prairie landscaping-yes! Uniform housing-no! More pedestrian gathering places. Can parking be on top of commercial buildings? 56. Too much reliance on green lawns, prefer native plants. More balconies, especially downtown. More street side cafes, etc. Hide parking rather than display. Prefer buildings to be varied. ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 4 57. Start slower with slides at the beginning of the program. -5 to +5 seems a wide range to grade their quality. 58. Perhaps too much introduction-could cut down and read handout. Its clear there are very different directions the city could go. I'd prefer pedestrian friendly, well-landscaped spaces, with few front- facing multiple-car garages. 59. Wishes: include sidewalks, bike paths, parks, green areas, so people can walk, socialize, exercise, and know their neighborhood. Reduce emphasis on huge garages and parking pads. Make entrances welcoming- include windows. Add a variety of shapes, colors, and materials. 60. There may have been some built in bias to some single-family homes-for example- some had mature trees, others none. That is more a function of the land before its developed- trees will grow if planted. 61. The obvious: good design and good landscaping-especially trees make all the difference. Iowa City needs a design review board for all public buildings including apartments and houses. Too many ugly buildings already litter our town. 62. I have an obsession with garages at the front- especially when they are so pronounced that is all you see when you come up to the house. 63. I do not like apts., houses, etc. that have garages in the front. Seems as those buildings have little more than garages. 64. Fun and Easy. Efficient format. Seems like I have seen more innovative multiple-family housing in other cities. It would have been nice to be able to "vote" for such stuff. 65. All streetlights should be shaded to eliminate light pollution. Mature trees help a lot. Houses need to have a variety of colors. Porches and window boxes add depth and a sense of welcoming. Overall, disliked much more than I liked. A sad state of affairs, I'm afraid. 66. My "pedestrian amenities" rating was fairly iow for most slides. Even if sidewalks are present, if they provide nowhere to walk to (or from) they are of little value. Placing businesses nearby neighborhoods provide a pedestrian option; thus adding a community feel. Parks work similarly, and small neighborhood parks should be added to more developments. 67. Overall, I liked landscapes that were more pedestrian friendly. As a general rule, I'm against"urban sprawl." As a U of I alum who is also an Iowa City resident, I feel like Iowa City's integrity is threatened by the University's need to expand. Does Iowa City cater to the students from Illinois who pay out of state tuition, who are here for four years, or to residents who spend the rest of their lives here? 68. I like a lot of the homes with porches, but I have friends who would be limited in their ability to get in the front door. Particularly in an area where a lot of people are retired that has a large population of disabled, its essential to have flat surfaces or side/back doors that are accessible. (Perhaps some have them) Builders need to be reminded that it snows and is icy here so a lot of steps and very long driveways are difficult. There were very few slides that showed new buildings in an old style- when old buildings are knocked down then they should be replaced with buildings that fit in with the style/construction materials (brick/stone/etc), not replaced with a Cape Cod yellow vinyl building. Buildings that are too high block the sun/sky, which is not good for the community, makes it more difficult for ice to melt, etc. Strip malls are ugly and use up too much land. There were very few (if any) slides that encouraged people to walk/bike/skateboard to commercial areas. Some large parking lots didn't always show markings on the street for safe crossing for pedestrians. I recognized a lot of slides of unattractive homes from Iowa City- I think architects can do better, but people buy them because they don't have a lot of choice. 69. Really nice to see so many younger (30 to 45) people. ppadmin/visL~al pref survey comments.doc 5 70. Developers often say that new developments are difficult to envision because mature landscaping doesn't soften them, but one can see that much of landscaping is not designed in a way that it will mature. Much of commercial landscaping is not well maintained/manicured. 71. All units looked a bit cookie-cutter all the same. Any slide that showed use of color/breaking of space appealed to me more than the "welcome to my garage" slides. 72. The main focus of the home should not be the garage and driveway. Buildings should be set back from the street. 73. I thought the initial introduction was too long, we didn't need all their credentials. I thought that some of the commercial properties were shown to project a negative image. I thought the parking was poorly handled, you were left guessing about the parking. I refused to mark anything negative about parking because it was not shown. 74. "Garagescape" curse was featured a bit too often. But some nice ways of hiding the front garage were shown. 75. Much of the architecture shown depends on how the owner sees the building in the setting. Sense of community is made through variety and not sameness. Good design does not cost big money. Flexible zoning must not direct style or encourage sameness. Modern buildings should be allowed to be next to old and traditional buildings; this is what gives the city its personality. 76. It appears to me that we haven't improved much on the wonderful homes of my childhood. I grew up in a neighborhood were the house squarely faced the sidewalk and didn't disappear behind a garage. I grew up in a neighborhood with front porches where neighbors gathered. I think current suburban housing is depressing. I wish the city council were braver and followed the interests of the community and not the Homebuilder Association. 77. I prefer sites with less pavement, where garages aren't paramount and they are the only things you see. Homes should house I~eople, not cars. What the Iowa City Homebuilders seem to be building is CRAP. I'm not surprised that the city council-which is conservative- seems to be against citizen participation. Maybe campaign finance is needed. 78. Explanation of sample slide very useful. 79. There must be a way to assist builders to create varying designs, better colors, require more trees, and still work on cost. We want to have a beautiful community, for example, the townhouses/condos- Deerfield Commons- are well done. 80. Landscaping certainly makes a positive difference- even in commercial areas. Some variations in design help break up streetscapes. 81. Generally, large spaces devoted to or dominated by parking/garages seem very unpleasant, both from a practical and aesthetic point of view. Repetition is very uninteresting and seems detrimental to the appearance- rowhouses and the like would often be much more pleasant as single houses or with some variation. Iowa City seems much more attractive in general than what was shown on the slides. Commercial areas seem unpleasant, particularly if they are surrounded by a lot of parking. Size of house/lot/building does not matter to me in terms of aesthetics. 82. Thank you for your time. Thank you for asking for our feedback. To keep Iowa City vital and familiar, we need to create homey, family spaces. Create community through porches and people will want to shop in the shade or meander along pleasant walkways. We need to be attentive to our aging population and skin cancer (need trees and shade and awnings). 83. It might be helpful to show what you expect to be extreme examples first, so as to give voters a sense of range. Lot size was often not apparent. Knowing placement on a lot would affect evaluation. ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 6 84. Thank you Iowa City for bringing this to the people. Please think carefully about ways to prevent "builder farms." Those structures that have endless vinyl, endless concrete and little character. The Peninsula Project is a step in the right direction. Natural landscapes are a welcome alternative to groomed turf grass yards that consume too much water and are often covered in harmful chemicals. 85. Decks on multi-residential make a building look nicer. Warmer colors rather than bright white apartments. Houses should be within "talking distance" from the sidewalk. Front porches on houses are great. 86. I think garages should be behind houses, accessed by alleys. We need more Moffit houses and houses made of real brick. Old houses should be saved, touched up, and used in some way more often. Too much new development. 87. Modern life is already alienating enough. Could we please try to build a community?l? I am also concerned that the binary between residential and business continue to be upheld. Can't we construct communities that bring these together? Oh, and how about a bike lane!? 88. Multi-use areas are very important to me- te help decrease our dependence on cars and oil. I also think that mixing shopping with business and home is beautiful and good for communities. Downtown Iowa City is gorgeous that way. I am concerned that there were no shown bike lanes or friendlier areas for people who do not want to drive. Houses that are closer to other houses are friendlier and ideal. I hope that scorers know that I judged that "parking areas" in terms of beauty (which they have none, not convenience). Therefore parking lots and huge garages are ugly, useless spaces to me. They're a sign of the degradation of our species. Seriously! 89. I was glad to hear there was a good number of people participating in the survey. 100+ people in the 5:30 session on 3/30/04. Allowing for variety in color and design even if in a small range is better than cookie cutter housing any day. Mature landscaping makes a big visual difference. Having a garage or stored parking is nice, but disguising it at least is worth it for visual appeal. #61 gets high marks for that. Commercial buildings were more appealing when they have good pedestrian features. #7 gets points for that. 90. Iowa City does not need more space dedicated to cars. Habits will change only when habitats change! Iowa City does not need cookie cutter housing. 91. Smaller houses with traditional architectural details and old-fashioned neighborhood feel. That's what we need. Get cars around to the back. Make areas pedestrian-friendly. Bring homes together- focus on human contact and common areas. Resist developers excessive uniformity and car- culture, soul-less big-hair monstrosities. Design matters. It's the human aspect in all this that frequently gets lost destroyed by developers-HELP! 92. Many of the images I saw that I liked did not have visible garages. However, if these same areas had alleys, I'm not sure I would like them as much. Alleys, many times, are neglected and have maintenance issues. Some homes were obviously more money and were not in the same category. Obviously- bigger lots, better materials make a difference. Good for Iowa City for doing this survey! 93. Build our community for people, not cars. We need narrow streets with houses near sidewalks and street. Integrate our commercial businesses with residential. I want to be able to walk everywhere. And while I am walking, I don't want to be afraid of being hit by a car. More shrubs and trees. They make our community feel good and make people get out and meet their neighbors, go for walks. Narrow streets and sharp corners slow down traffic. New houses today, are boring, cookie-cut, snout-like goiters built as monuments to our cars. We need small, inviting houses that are actually designed for how people live. Right now most houses are just warehouses for our stuff. How about a few alleys so garages can be in back of the houses? ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 7 94. I want to see fewer garages. Houses should look like people live there instead of cars. How about use of alleys. It would allow cars, garbage cans, etc. to be located in the rear of houses-out of sight. Narrower streets are nice and cozy and encourage people to walk and drivers to slow down. Mix of structures is great- commercial, apartments, single-family all mixed together. Please design our city to be pedestrian friendly. It would be nice for people to be able to work, shop, and live in the same area without having a car. I would like to see more variety in house designs. Smaller houses with lots of character are hard to find. Not everyone wants a 4-5-bedroom house. Porches are great and encourage community. Place houses closer to the street and make streets narrower. It feels cozy and welcoming. 95. Where are the bikes? I commute by bike. Recreational trails don't cut it. Why no mixed use? I used to walk to Seaton's, now I walk to the co-op or bike. These are critical to my enjoyment of Iowa City. Deluxe Bakery on Summit is great! Go neighborhood business! I was glad to see sidewalks in nearly all of the residential areas. The more appealing ones had things to look at and variety. This encourages walking. Somewhere to walk to, a destination, helps encourage walking. Variety in housing/building style-good. Variety in exterior cladding is an easy way for developers to introduce interest. Look at the brownstones in Chicago, Boston. If you look carefully, they are very repetitious, but exterior differences increase interest. The revival of the sidewalk cafes downtown is great. I love to spend the summer evenings there. Don't financially punish businesses for pouring out onto the street in good weather. This helps to bring the city to life and people downtown. 96. Garages out front look like showing your backside. Sidewalks right next to the street make pedestrians vulnerable. Flat-fronts on multi-family buildings are boring; can show more variety with combination of materials and colors. Trees in parking areas add so much comfort to the eye. Houses can be more closely spaced if there is variety in distance from the street. If the same house plan is used over and over again, variety could be achieved by changing orientation, plantings, and colors of roof, siding, and siding material. 97. They should have music with the slides- some easy jazz or Yanni. I think we should "cheer" for which ones we want and you should have an applause-o-meter. All parking should be vertical. Plenty of stop signs to slow traffic. No one-story buildings or parking lots- total waste of space. Urban sprawl equals trouble for all. Slides #7 and #17 were the only good ones. 98. Thank you for the opportunity for input, your work, and the refreshments. Please save us from uniformity and the tyranny of the garage. Please employ a variety of styles and colors. 99. The overall affect is very different if cars included in the picture. In a way one accepts "parking" as okay if cars are not visible, but when you see them you realize how awful they are. 100. Light is as impodant as green. Zoning that allows building height that decreases light and view of the sky up front, looks problematic. I do not use a car. Pedestrian amenities are important to me- having just garage entrances to look at is very alienating; interactive facades that responds to the passers by are very nice; not having a sidewalk is alienating. I love organic spaces- undulations, visual interest, curved walks, use of stone to create raised beds; Flat even green spaces are not much better than concrete. Formless buildings are hideous; they make me feel like a thing instead of a person. Sense of place is great. Physical arrangements, landscaping, architecture that encourages community and interaction are great. The three worst things you can do are having just garages at street level, blocking natural site lines to sky, and creating gated communities that prevent through pedestrian flow. I rated the places where the garages were not visible (+) on parking. This is not because I mind seeing cars. It is because I HATE just having garages at eye level. In fact, I missed there being any cars in sight where there were none, but it was nice to have the human side of the house facing the street. Having grass on both sides of sidewalk is very nice and has a very different feel than the sidewalks built along the street. Having trees around is very important. 101. Landscaping, especially mature trees, makes a huge difference to overall attractiveness. The Newberry Street slide has a wonderful vibrancy. A curving street helps, somewhat, cut down the impact of "cookie-cutter" homes. The lighting in the pictures and angles had, perhaps, too great an impact on my reactions. Some of the singles were unobjectionable, as shown, but impossible to tell whether they were really a part of a row of clones. "Cookie-cutter" developments really unattractive. Positive response to individuality and differences in setback, greenery, or the least bit of architectural interest. Far too many where garage is the dominant feature. Obviously, economics is a huge issue, but somewhere these must be some more imaginative, aesthetically pleasing approaches to moderate cost housing. 102. Shame on the planners. Plaza towers is a humiliation for the City Council and the Planning Department. How does one person bend the rules to put 16 stories in a three-stoW city? Shame on all of you. The sun will be gone, there will be ice on the sidewalks and no one will shop here in the winters. If you want shoppers, then clean the roads, clear the sidewalks, provide awning, provide tables outside, and don't allow one developer to ruin public money given to the library for a sunny building. STOP PLAZA TOWERS. Enlist the urban planning department at the UI. 103. If I couldn't see something (parking, pedestrian amenities), I gave a negative. Went a little too fast for me. 104. My concern about new development always comes around to resolving pedestrian access vs. parking. Many of the slides provided pedestrian access but, honestly, who actually walks in any of these developments? Where do people park? At least in Boston there is public transit. Mostly, I'm very concerned that a lot of developments provide for cars and not for people. This survey separated commercial development from residential, but we really need more mixed-use zoning. Especially on the vacant lots that are now being developed. 105. Would be good to provide a category on accessibility. 106. I think setback should have been an option. With landscaping it was difficult to imagine grown larger. The angle of some of the photos surely made the appearance look different. 107. A little hard to comment on landscaping because of the new construction- not time for some of the plantings to grow. Building size relative to lot size was not desirable in several cases. I know the arguments pro and con, but this is an issue that zoning requirements can speak to. 108. It was very difficult to find meaningful differences between commercial buildings- no real winners. When you suggest that some people view parking which are not visible may be preferable; it may skew the results. I don't think that very many people will give negative results when no parking is shown but a lot of those people might not like new construction without including adequate parking. 109. I realize I really dislike the designs that are all garages right up to the curb. I tried to allow for greenery in bloom regardless of the season, sometimes that required imagination. As a rule, the streetscapes with single repetitive design I rated negatively. 110. Thanks for offering the opportunity to participate. Its stimulated good conversation, maybe future developers will listen. 111. I appreciate buildings that are classic design. Really dislike the building where garages are the focal point of the street. They are like huge garages with little houses as an after thought. No one sees the homes. I like the concept of the alley. 112. On many of the slides pedestrians had to compete with cars even when there were sidewalks. If there are alleys, cars will not compete with pedestrians. 113. Very good to offer this. I was glad to be here and offer my "two cents." 114. Please give us anti-monotony laws. We need variety. ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 9 115. Need variety in style/design of buildings with in neighborhood. Pedestrian friendly is a priority. Mixed use is needed. Set garages back- should NOT be dominant feature. All new houses should have: landscaping thoughtfully done, larger lot sizes, and windows on all sides of building. Eliminate "cookie cutter" design. Need neighborhood parks/greenspaces. Need trails for walking and biking. 116. Thank you for doing this. What is currently being built in and around Iowa City is so butt-ugly and graceless that it is embarrassing to me to show it to visitors. Local builders should travel to other cities where good new construction is going on (Madison, WI) to see what can be done. The apartment buildings downtown are too close to the street. The setback needs to be greater (e.g. apadments on Burlington and Gilbert Streets). Also, typically, new construction fenestration is aesthetically bad: proportions, placement, and general lack of character. 117. Appreciate getting a chance to have input. 118. In general, for residences, I prefer to see designs that facilitate neighbors seeing each other and visiting. Residences with minimal front yards and/or garages that dominate the front side discourage visiting or even seeing neighbors. Where do kids play together? Thank you for offering the program. 119. Too large a rating scale. Pedestrian amenities too broad needed to be more specific. Would have liked to have seen same houses/buildings with different scenarios. 120. Very interesting process. I appreciate willingness to look outside what is standard in Iowa City and consider design layouts that are not currently represented. Would like to see ideas for more mixed- use areas. 121. Took too long with instructions; get moving quickly with the survey- people are giving up free time on a Saturday. On some signs you could see where parking was. 122. Thank you. 123. Good job, folks. The process is good. The slides were well selected. 124. Clearly if you match this with rating you'll see: (a.) I prefer variety in streetscapes. (b.) I like varied landscaping and street trees. Many slides were of new situations where obviously nothing had grown up. But it often seemed like there was nothing even started. (c.) I don't like an endless row of garage doors or similar architecture. I miss back alleys. (d.) Most streets were aesthetically sterile. I understand that arises from Iow-construction-cost considerations, but I still don't like it. (e.) I liked mixed use single-family and multi-family; that produces warmth. (f.) There was no evidence of common park-like green spaces and nearby minor commercial activity. 125. Good mix of building types. This was a great tool for builders and developers to determine likes and dislikes of public - can use to determine if it is economical to build. Not much other relevance if economies are not a part of analysis. Visual preference is not market preference. Should not make visual preference the sole factor- Iowa City will be a very expensive place to live. 126. I share a car with several people so my main concerns are pedestrians/bicycle friendly planning. Having large garages in the front are very ugly. I would like to see wide sidewalks with buildings to the back. 127. Thank you for doing this. As a long time resident, I don't like a majority of the improvements to Iowa City the last few years. The city is no longer "my city." This process gives me hope. Please keep East Jefferson and East Market from becoming all rental properties - apartments and duplexes. 128. Good show- thanks for the opportunity for input on various structures. Don't like homes that are built all the same in style and size. Remember a barracks. 129. Well done, well conducted, good variety! ppadmin/wsual pref survey comments doc 10 130. We appreciate the ability to have input on this important process. We also understand the need for realism, not pure fantasy. Having said that, I found the sea of slides incredibly depressing, un- imaginative, soul-less, and grotesque- with only a few exceptions. If none of the choices have street life or opportunities for people and pedestrians to interact socially, this process will amount to choosing only the lesser of pretty evil options. I would recommend that some more varied examples be presented so that people can at least imagine something better. Only if they see compelling options can they begin to agitate for them. 131. If parking did not show, I left it blank. If there were sidewalks I marked (+). 132. First, thank you for caring to get public input. In general, the single-family homes, duplexes and townhomes do not have enough setbacks or enough space between homes. 133. Thank you very much for doing this survey. 134. It would have been more interesting to see houses mixed in with other types of buildings. In each group there were only buildings of one type. 135. Thank you se much for offering the Visual Preference Surveys to Iowa City citizens. My wife and I had a wonderful time and felt like we had a say in the development of our community. This is yet another example of the progressive and thoughtful nature of our Iowa City council members and Planning and Zoning Commission members. This type of concern, this type of reaching out to the community, is what keeps us happily living in Iowa City. Comments from members of Home Builders Association and Board of Realtors 1. Some commercial buildings/areas don't have to be people friendly. Location has its place for different type of commercial use. Multi-family units are okay, needs to be affordable and needs access. Nice buildings and greenspace cost money, most people who live in multi-family and duplexes do so because of cost. Survey is somewhat bias as more expensive homes de look much better and have a lot more landscaping. We still need diversity within the community. Landscaping is personal and should not be mandated. Style of home should be personal and not be mandated. Good safe home in a safe neighborhood at a good price is more important than how it looks. 2. My favorite style of home is the craftsman style. Unfortunately this is a very expensive style to build and is not the favorite of many. We currently are building in the Wild Prairie Estate and have a cul- de-sac, we have three different styles of homes on the cul-de-sac. 3. I do not see hew this survey is useful. I have a degree in design and sell real estate. There were many very bad examples used because there were slanted toward a particular viewpoint. The garage views were poor. The best garage applications were in the more expensive homes only. The architecture was a mixed bag and featured no cutting edge designs. You should have shown a broader architectural range and building age. All slides were bereft of architectural way findings and "neighborhood" icons or signposts. Very disappointing. 4. (a.) Even though the ages of properties were similar, the use of or lack of use of landscaping plays a big role in appearance. Some properties (particularly single family) could have looked a lot better with landscaping to soften the look. (b.) The photos without cars in driveways looked better, however, in reference to marketability. Most buyers want an attached garage in our climate for convenience. (c.) The "angle" of the photo in some shots made me dislikes the property- side Icad garage, etc. 5. Still question about affordability versus visual aesthetics. Would be good to see specific costs relevant to looks. In most cases, good landscaping seemed to balance negatives of boring design or too much concrete. Not sure any of the examples truly represented affordable housing. Is it a myth? ppadr~n/visual pref survey comments doc 1 1 6. Supply and demand is the key to what is built and sold. Area being built in directs what it can afford. We looked at one building at a time- what does the area look like? Cost- what will the area support? 7. While I applaud the city for wanting or having a vision for the city. I feel that this should be left to the private sector. The only requirement should be complimentary existing "taste" in local market. 8. I prefer all "Cadillacs" to "Chevys." Of course, I prefer Brick to vinyl. Landscaping is wonderful- is that "zonable?" Meters in front yards do not add any aesthetics. Affordable housing is priority. 9. Many of the pictures were subject to taste and personal preference. I would never want to live in a community that looked the same on every street. I feel there should be a good mix of design available. My suggestion would be conformity within development, but diversity of styles through the city. 10. Many of the homes looked nice and interesting, but too close together. Do not like the rowhouses. Even affordable can have character. 11. I like where you're going with this. A little more time, charm, landscaping, and thought makes a huge difference on the feel of the community. We need more charm in our new construction (even if prices have to go up on homes). Commercial parking in Iowa City/Coralville is a huge issue though. Improving the flow is much needed and will be even more needed later. 12. Please focus on building- we were told it's not about architecture. I felt we were comparing houses pictured from the side with pictures of houses from the front, street-view, not front on. It is about the architecture.. . is it affordable? I live in Coralville but own properties in Iowa City. 13. If the amount of value of this survey is not all that applicable to the entire zoning ordinance, then why is there a statement stating "important survey?" If this survey isn't usually done with a zoning re-write then who chose to spend $8,000 for this? 14. The picture angles are skewed toward side and back Icad garages. Front Icad garages are taken at an angle- side and back Icad head on- unfair assessment. Trying to lead people to an opinion. 15. Landscaping influenced my comments. Found myself liking property because of owners gardening. Couldn't get a feel for the commercial due to size of slide- could not visualize parking. 16. I personally like Victorian, craftsmen, etc. styles but we need many different styles due to price point and preference. 17. It is not the business of the government to stipulate what designs can and cannot be. Quit trying to control every facet of people's lives. Very loaded. 18. You need to keep the homes similar as opposed to showing a huge house with a yard and then a bunch of small homes cramped together. Do not speak about any slides. Unless you point out things on every slide! 19. Visual Preference is just that, a preference. How can a preference be dictated? The buyer has always been the force for chance and should remain that. Style should not be dictated. A big brother approach is wrong. Conformity should not be the norm in Iowa City. Design is a result of creativity. How dare the city try and squash creativity. 20. Families are different; therefore housing should be different. Cheapening housing expense by repeating same building one after another denies the families the individuality each can achieve and should be able to afford. 21. To me this appears to be comparing apples and oranges. Aisc poor turnout. People do not seem to care. ppadmin/visual pref survey comments.doc 12 22. It seems that the market can determine the kind of houses are developed. In addition, I have looked at houses of controlled housing and they all look the same. Nice, but no thanks. 23. Now that I have taken the survey, I can honestly say that the survey was a complete waste of time. The city has wasted valuable resources paying for this. I think the city will use the results of this to dictate how people build in the future based on appearance. Karin Franklin told use we should (2 weeks ago) not pay attention to architecture-yet the instruction sheet for the survey said to pay attention to architecture. At least the people conducting the survey were friendly. 24. Issues of setback and garage in front obvious. Not many pictures of homes that are set back from street so we can't comment. Concern that the survey is skewed. 25. I hope this is only a very small part of the zoning process. It appears obvious what people like and don't like. We should show all types of housing incorporated into the code. Overall, the city got robbed for whatever they paid for this. I moved to Coralville in 1999. 26. It is hard to view preferences when you need to account for affordability, practicality, along with parking. We all want things nice. I don't think the photos address the lower-middle class very well. 27. This is just unbelievable! I tried to come to this very objectively, but it was, in my mind, a waste of time and city expense. The slides were very obvious in regards to the direction the city staff wants the code (and survey results) to go. Once again, Iowa City will be implementing rigid restrictions, trying to over regulate what people should want and buy regardless of affordability. We have an excellent balance of mixed housing now; more restrictions will continue to drive builders and their taxpayers outside of Iowa City. I sell to clients from first time home buyers to high end, and most are not able to distinguish how skewed this survey is, where as, realtors and builders input should be heard! 28. SUBJECTIVE- Pretty not practical. Sufficient parking is vital. Costs for amenities and who will pay the increased costs? Parking needed, access and parking. Some too close. Angle of shot influences how it looks. Not knowing where the parking is makes it impossible to evaluate. Making decisions influenced too much by appearance, only affordability a big question. Agree that there is a buyer for everything. 29. I feel that his survey was definitely obvious as to what people want versus what is affordable. I don't feel that individual homes should be looked at, but overall neighborhoods. 30. It is important for the city planning to consider all aspects of planning erosion control, future growth. Some of these concerns are important for both future reasonable growth and government, but it is also important to consider costs of development and the end buyer. We need to be careful that we don't regulate ourselves so much that the costs are so high to develop and then sell, buy for the end. The survey seems slanted. If you take two photos, same price homes and compare the difference between- front load garages and back load, that is a better comparison. Landscaping. 31. Cost is not a consideration and should be. What is the consideration for market demand? City staff indicated survey was not about design and consultant was opposite. Could not see much parking or access which is important. Mature landscaping makes a big difference. No utilities in front make a difference. 32. 'Foo subjective to be of real value. This seems to be designed to evoke a particular response probably the response the planning department is looking for. 33. Zoning is meant to keep people/businesses out - not here - over there. What can people afford to buy, rent, and have a business in? Iowa City has something for everyone and that is how it should be. Let the market decide what they want. Iowa City should ask itself, "why have we lost so many people and businesses to other communities?" 34. Zoning Issues- not design issues; why is the City addressing design within the parameters of zoning. Are there setbacks? Clearly, pictures not taken in February- green grass, flowers, at least not in the Midwest. 35. And the answer is - if you spend more money on building materials and buy a larger lot and plant more mature trees - TA DA! You have a house with more curb appeal. If you - the City - plant more trees in the boulevard you have more curb appeal. If you the builder or home owner plant trees and evergreens you can have as much curb appeal in your mid-priced home as the more expensive one. Slides were obviously skewed to off street garages. And why the City would do that after the Peninsula is beyond me. 36. The pictures appear to be taken at skewed angles. The pictures taken just of garages are not attractive pictures taken. 37. We have a chance in Iowa City to begin to implement neighborhoods (even inexpensive ones) that feel better, that have more of a sense place. We need to turn around the current trend in some areas of just getting by, living in a space behind a massive garage and waiting for the time one can move somewhere that is more neighborly feeling. Much of the new architecture is not architecture at all, just boxes for people behind boxes for cars. The City deserves some praise for tackling the subject that raises hackles but also raises the standard of living pleasantly for people. 38. Really difficult to separate items. Foresee how landscaping will look. Some pictures more clear. Angles made a difference not in how well I liked something, but how confidently I cared to answer. Although I mentioned there were a lot of definitions of items that you were looking for, that was difficult to remember; example: what does pedestrian amenities mean? It was stated that this survey was not scientific, could not say what people voted a certain way. What is the point then? Way too many influencing factors not well controlled. Very easily can be used in a biased manner. 39. I think this survey is not realistic because of the affordability factors. 40. Many of these homes were all alike, too close with no variation. Some of the homes are not as bad, but too close together. 41. I feel very manipulated. I get it- front porches in and garages to the back. Landscaping makes a huge difference. 42. We should let the market decide development, not the government. Consumer will like the more expensive options but will not want to pay extra. 43. Not sure what use it was. Subjective basis only. The more money the nicer the home. Development often has to conform to market demands, density, prices. It will always be hard to meet everyone's expectations. 44. Why are we doing this? Will this determine if it will sell? How will this effect cost? 45. Depending on angle of photo influenced how I viewed the property. Was drawn to houses without garages. Do not like zero lots. Saw nothing that was great. Seemed slanted against multi-family. 46. Maybe shorten intro speech, already a long process. 47. My job is to build the best-looking homes for the money and keep them affordable for the consumer. In each price point of home, if you add more than $5,000 in amenities, you will drive the Iow-income folks out of town. The goal is choice for all income brackets, many Iow-income folks can't get single-family because the entry is $180K. ppadn~ n/visual pref survey comments.doc 14 48. Multi-family and single family homes vary in price, size, and design. First time homebuyers are looking for moderately price homes that may not have all the amenities but still meet their needs based on costs. Slides of beautiful town homes and duplexes are shown in your survey. Have you checked into the cost factor and feasibility of being able to afford these structures? Does the City of Iowa City want affordable housing for everyone? Builders in this community have set excellent standards. Developers and builders are taking the risk to build in this community. They have proven they are building what the market wants because new home sales are at a high point. Check building permit for the state; we excel in new home sales. Lastly, we are building homes for our clients. These are homes that families are proud of. Our quality of life is excellent and Iowa City is a great place to live. Does the City think we are building unattractive homes that aren't selling? Many of us would be out of business if we didn't meet the needs of our clients. Building for future generations is great in concept, does the city want to fund what they think the buyer wants in 5 to 10 years, or does the risk stay solely with the builder and developer? Iowa City needs diversity. We have many commercial users. These users need different buildings that accommodate their business needs. Yes, sometimes not so attractive parking lots are needed. Brick facades, beautiful parking areas and glass fronts don't work for lets say commercial users that need loading docks, parking, places to store large equipment, etc. We can all point to pretty pictures with architectural detail, beautiful landscaping, expensive materials, but is that feasible for the entire community. Summary: Balancing the Costs and Benefits of Design is Critical Market Driven demands should be reviewed. Is the housing market strong in Iowa City? Federal and state funding is decreasing. Are you relying on the housing industry to pick up this shortfall buy build to city design standards? (Comment fl48 was prepared before the commentator took the survey.) ppadmin/visual pref survey comments doc 15 IP5 Department of Parks & Recreation M and Division of Parks, Forestry and CBD E m o r u m TO : Steve Atkins ~ From: Terry Robinson t,f~, Re ' Spring Tree Removal Contracts CC : Terry Trueblood We are in the process of dealing with our spring tree removal comract. Each year in the spring and fall we contract for the removal of trees that we have inspected and found to be hazardous for various reasons, In each case we contact the adjacent hom~/protnnv~ owners to let them know about our decisions and what the problems are with eachtree. Typically we do not have to comact owners, instead they call us aboUt atree because they .are concerned. Frequently we will not remove the tree even though the owners request it; because it is not hazardous but requires pruning. In otlua' instances we may notice that a tree is bad and point it out to the owner who is unaware of the situation In any evem we do not remove any trees with out serious consid~ation about what we can do to "make it better". Only after we exhaust all of our reasonable options do we give up on the thought of saving a tree and consider removal If someone has questions about a specific tree I will be glad to answer them. CITY OF IOWA CITY QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT DECEMBER 31, 2003 to MARCH 31, 2004 Finance Department: Prepared by: Brian Cover Senior Accountant OVERVIEW The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield. The primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The City's investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that cash management procedures anticipate. In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed with the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six month U.S. Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for riskless investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum standard for the portfolio's rate of return. The average return on the six-month U.S. Treasury Bill, as obtained from the monthly publication Public Investor, was 0.99% at 3/26/04. The investment program seeks to achieve returns above this threshold, consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. Investments purchased by the City of Iowa City for the first quarter of this year were 48 basis points higher than the threshold. Rates on new investment purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the first quarter were approximately 5 basis points lower than investments purchased at this time last year. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which banks lend to each other. The Federal Reserve kept the target of the federal funds rate at 1% for the first quarter of 2004. The rate is unlikely to rise until after the November election and may wait until 2005. Factors keeping the Federal Reserve from raising rates include slow job growth, the presidential election, and Iow consumer price inflation. The quarterly investment report lists investments by fund, by institution, by maturity date, and investments purchased and redeemed. New official state interest rates setting the minimum that may be paid by Iowa depositories on public funds in the 160 to 364 day range during this quarter were 1.00% in January 2004, 0.90% in February 2004 and 0.90% in March 2004. Federal Funds Rate 7.00 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 EXHIBIT A CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE 3/31/2004 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE VAN KAMPEN GOVT MUTUAL FUND 22-Jul-85 N/A 200,000.00 VARIABLE NORWEST BANK SAVINGS 01-Dec-99 N/A 200,000.00 VARIABLE IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST IPAIT 13-Jun-02 N/A 2,000,000.00 VARIABLE IPAITANELLS FARGO IPAIT 29-Nov-02 N/A 2,147,819.31 VARIABLE LIBERTY BANK CD 23-Jun-03 02-Apr-04 2,150,000.00 121 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 23-Jun-03 09-Apr-04 750,000.00 1.17 US BANK CD 22-Jul-03 16-Apr-04 2,150,000.00 107 US BANK CD 22-Jul-03 23-Apr-04 750,000.00 1.09 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 22-Jul-03 30-Apr-04 2,150,000.00 115 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-Aug-03 07-May-04 750,000.00 1.23 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-Aug-03 14-May-04 2,150,00000 127 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-Aug-03 21-May-04 750,000.00 1.23 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-Au9-03 28-May-04 2,150,000.00 1.27 LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Feb-04 28-May-04 3,000,000.00 1.35 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 12-Mar-04 28-May-04 5,736,00000 1.11 WELLS FARGO SLGS 05-Nov-02 01-Jun-04 56,671.00 1.98 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-04 190,347.39 2.67 UICCU CD 18-Sep-03 04-Jun-04 750,000.00 1.51 UICCU CD 18-Sep-03 11-Jun-04 2,150,000.00 1.51 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 14-Mar-03 14-Jun-04 7,487,399.76 1 32 UICCU CD 18-Sep-03 18-Jun-04 750,000,00 1.51 UICCU CD 18-Sep-03 25-Jun-04 2,150,000.00 1.51 LIBERTY BANK CD 10~Feb-04 30-Jun-04 2~000,000.00 1.42 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 12-Mar-04 30-Jun-04: 2,600,000.00 1.12 LIBERTY BANK CD 25-Feb-04 30-Jun-04 3,000,000.00 1.27 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 03-JuP03 01-Jul-04 977,423,00 1,19 UICCU CD 18-Sep~03 02-Jul-04 750,000.00 1.51 WEST BANK CD 08-Oct-03 09-Jul-04 2,150,000.00 166 WEST BANK CD 08~Oct-03 16-Jul-04 750,000.00 1.66 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 17-Oct-03 23-Jul-04 2,150,000.00 1.40 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 17-Oct-03 30-Jul-04 750,000.00 140 IOWA STATE BANK CD 17-Oct-03 06-Aug-04 2,150,000~00 1.50 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 17-Oct-03 13-Aug-04 750,000,00 1.43 IOWA STATE BANK CD 17-Oct-03 20-Aug-04 2,150,000.00 1,55 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 17-Oct-03 27-Aug-04 750,000.00 150 IOWASTATE BANK CD 30-Oct-03 03-Sep-04 2,150,00000 155 IOWA STATE BANK CD 30-Oct-03 10-Sep-04 750,000~00 1.50 IOWA STATE BANK CD 21-Nov-03 17-Sep-04 2~150,000.00 1.52 UICCU CD 16-Dec-02 24-Sep-04 616,146.00 261 HILLS BANK CD 25-Feb-03 24-Sep-04 21,346.50 238 UICCU CD 13-Nov-03 24-Sep-04 750,000.00 1~51 IOWA STATE BANK CD 2%Nov-03 01-Oct-04 2,150,000.00 1.50 UICCU CD 13-Nov-03 08-Oct-04 750,000.00 151 UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Nov-03 13-Oct-04 2,150,000.00 1.50 UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Nov-03 13-Oct-04 2,150,000.00 1.50 IOWA STATE BANK CD 13-Nov-03 15-Oct-04 2,150,000.00 1.55 WEST BANK CD 16-Jan-04 15-Oct~04 500,000.00 1.45 IOWA STATE BANK CD 13-Nov-03 22-Oct-04 750,000.00 1.57 IOWA STATE BANK CD 13-Nov-03 29-Oct-04 2,150,000.00 1.62 WEST BANK CD 19-Dec-03 05-Nov-04 750,000.00 1.39 UICCU CD 19-Dec-03 12-Nov-04 2,000,000.00 1.52 UNION PLANTERS CD 19-Dec-03 19-Nov-04 750,000.00 150 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 19-Dec-03 24-Nov-04 2,000,000.00 1.42 WELLS FARGO SLGS 05-Nov-02 01-Dec-04 57,231.00 2,16 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-04 274,005.59 1.47 FARMERS & MERCHANTS CD 19-Dec-03 03-Dec-04 750,000.00 I~45 US BANK CD 08-Sep-03 25-Feb-05 961,187.50 1.90 US BANK CD 08-Sep-03 25-Feb-05 663,221.00 1.90 WELLS FARGO SLGS 05-Nov~02 01-Jun-05 3,957,849.00 2.34 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-05 184,742.45 167 WEST BANK CD 17-Dec~03 30-Jun-05 4,697,560.94 1.55 UICCU CD 09-Mar-04 01-Nov-05 5,850,000.00 2.06 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-05 186,128.03 1.87 UICCU CD 12-Dec-03 09-Dec-05 6,577,860.00 2.33 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-06 187,523.98 2.17 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-06 188,930.41 2.57 TOTAL $110,719,392.86 ' CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND SUMMARY BY FUND GENERAL FUND 3/31 ~2004 3/31/2003 FUND INVESTMENT INVESTMENT TYPE AMOUNT AMOUNT ALL OPERATING FUNDS 82,654,531.01 87,794,134.13 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND 9,947,677.85 0.00 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT RESERVE FUND 700,000.00 1,450,000.00 BOND RESERVE FUND 17,4t7,184.00 16,628,584.00 TOTAL 110,719,392.86 105~872,718.13 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND LISTING BY INSTITUTION 3/31/2004 3/31/2003 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT INVESTMENT NAME AMOUNT AMOUNT COMMERCIAL FEDERAL BANK 18,800,822.76 44,100,062.84 FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK 750,000.00 2,000,000.00 FREEDOM SECURITY BANK 7,300,000.00 9,318,740.00 HILLS BANK & TRUST 21,346.50 21,346.50 IOWA STATE BANK t6,550,000.00 10,974,408.50 IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST 4,147,819.31 7,867,272.29 LIBERTY BANK 17,16t,677.85 0.00 U OF I COMM CREDIT UNION 23,094,006.00 16,052,689.00 UNION PLANTERS BANK 5,050,000.00 3,761,400.00 US BANK 4,524,408.50 5,700,000.00 WELLS FARGO BANK 4,271,751.00 4,376,799.00 WEST BANK (FORMERLY HAWKEYE BANK) 8,847,560.94 1,500,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES AND AGENCIES 0.00 0.00 VAN KAMPEN 200,000.00 200,000.00 TOTAL 110,719,392.86 105,872,718.13 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENT ACTIVITY FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 12/31/03 112,440,402.30 INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INTEREST INSTITUTION TYPE DATE DATE RATE PURCHASES 12/31/03 TO 3/31/04 WEST BANK CD 16-Jam04 15-Oct-04 1.45 500,000.00 LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Feb-04 28-May-04 1.35 3,000,000.00 LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Feb-04 30-Jun-04 1 42 2,000,00000 LIBERTY BANK CD 25-Feb-04 30-Jun-04 1.27 3,000,000.00 UtCCU CD 09-Mar-04 01-Now05 2.06 5,850,000.00 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-04 2.67 190,347.39 LIBERTY BANK CD 11 -Mar-04 01-Dec-04 1.47 274,005.59 LIBERTY BANK CD 1 l-Mar-04 01-Jun-05 1.67 164,742.45 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-05 1.87 186,128.03 LIBERTY BANK CD 1 l-Mar-04 01-Jun-06 2.17 187,523.98 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-06 2.57 188,930.41 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 12-Mar-04 28-May-04 1.11 5,736,000.00 COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 12-Mar-04 30-Jum04 1.12 2,600,000.00 TOTAL PURCHASES 23,697,677.65 REDEMPTIONS 12/31/03 TO 3/31/04 US BANK CD 15-Apr-03 02-Jan-04 1.26 (750,000.00) IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Apr-03 09-Jan-04 1.31 (2,150,000.00) US BANK CD 15-Apr-03 16-Jan-04 1.27 (750,000.00) FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK CD 08-Jan-03 16-Jan-04 1.97 (500,000.00) IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Apr-03 23-Jam04 1.36 (2,150,000.00) COMMERCIAL FEDERAL BANK CD 28-Apr-03 30-Jan-04 1.32 (750,000.00) COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 28-Apr-03 06-Feb-04 1.32 (2,150,000.00) COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 28-Apr~03 13-Feb-04 1.32 (750,000.0C US BANK CD 26-Apr-03 20-Feb-04 1.23 (2,150,000.0C COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 28-Apr-03 27-Feb-04 1.32 (750,000.0C COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 12-May-03 05-Mar-04 1.26 (2,150,000.0¢ IOWA STATE BANK CD 12-May-03 12-Mar-04 1.21 (750,000.0¢ LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Jun-03 19-Mar-04 1.71 (2,150,000.0C LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Jun-03 26-Mar-04 1.71 (750,000.0C COMMERCIAL FEDERAL 02/GO CD 14-Mar-03 14-Jura04 1.32 (1,181,597.58 IPAIT/02 WATER IPAIT N/A Variable (50,631.94) WEST BANK CD 17-Dec-03 30-Jun-05 1.55 (424,912.98) IPAIT/02 GO IPAIT N/A Variable (156,484.07) COMMERCIAL FEDERAL 02/GO CD 14-Mar~03 14-Jun-04 1.32 (3,616,044.87) WEST BANK CD 17-Dec-03 30-Jun-05 1.55 (431,741.22) ( 1,107,274.63) TOTAL REDEMPTIONS (25,618,687.29) INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 3/31/04 110~719~392.86 IP7 PROJECT FACT SHEET The Iowa Environmental/Education Project provides an unparalleled opportunity for experiencing and learning about the intricacies and wonders of nature. By using a number of natural environments, including a 4.5 acre indoor rain forest with an integrated aquarium, and bridging to extedor indigenous ecosystems, the Iowa Environmental Project teaches a global understanding of how life works on ear{h and how we can lead truly sustainable lifestyles in harmony with all of nature. Through utilization of cutting edge ~green design" and environmentally focused systems, the project will serve as both an ecological inspiration ~ind architectural icon, here in the heartland. Location: Coralville, Iowa, near the interchange of Interstate 80 and Interstate 380 · Minutes from Iowa City, home of the University of Iowa, North America's largest teaching hospital, cultural venues, and Iowa Hawkeyes' athletic facilities · 30 acres on current Brownfield site, next to the Iowa River Education: · Development of four learning academies · On-site informal learning opportunities · Interactive links with schools via Internet; 50 Iowa school districts have expressed interest in parb~erships with the project Exhibits: · Reconstructed 4.5 acre tropical rain forest - largest in the world · One million gallon aquarium · Large format and mixed media theatre · Interactive galleries on the indigenous Iowa prairie, geology and food production for the world · Recreated wetland and prairie · Outdoor trails Resource Conservation: · Designed to recapture up to 30 million gallons of annual on-site precipitation · Energy-efficient three-layer foil extedor · Use of alternative/renewable sources, including passive solar, geothermal, biomass, and fuel cell technology Economic Development: · 500 construction jobs over 2 % years · 300 permanent jobs with ripple effect of 2,500 jobs in Iowa · Projected 1.1 - 1.5 million visitors annually · Economic impact $187 million annually - over $2 billion a decade The Green Bay News-Chronicle Online - Wisconsin news Page 1 of 3 ]Wiscollsin news ]World & U.S. news ]National sports ]Local sports Wednesday, April 21, 2004 Front page Archives Madison council bans Arts/Entertainment smoking in all bars and Automobiles restaurants Births Classifieds By TODD RICHMOND Deaths Associated Press Writer Editorial cartoon MADISON, Wis. (AP) - The Common Council voted early Wednesday to ban smoking in ali bars and Editorial comment restaurants, creating the toughest indoor smoking Employment policy in Wisconsin. Food/nutrition The council voted 15-5 to adopt the ordinance, which Forums essentially bans smoking in all workplaces. The Health news measure will take effect in July 2005. Packers' corner "My reaction is a yippee and a yay," said Gayathri ~ Search Vijayakumar, a 25-year-old University of Wisconsin- Shop online Madison grad student and a member of the anti- ,4 ~.' Sports tobacco group Smoke Free Madison. Stocks The ordinance, which wipes out the city's complex Week-in-review array of anti-smoking regulations already on the Weddings books, touched off a battle between health advocates fighting for cleaner air and tavern owners About us who fear the measure could keep smokers away and Voluntary wreck their business. subscriptions The council's Tuesday evening meeting stretched ROADRI..131tVEI~ into the wee hours Wednesday as more than 50 '"~,,ii,~. people spoke on the issue. "What we're proposing tonight is dangerous," Don Bussan, owner of Bowl-A-Vard Lanes, a Madison bowling alley that will be affected by the ban, told the council. He said his father has smoked for many years. "He's 76 years old. Don't seem to bother him." Robin Goldberg, the owner of Dream Lanes, another Madison bowling alley, said he feared bowlers might go to suburban centers instead. He also said he's worried smokers forced to smoke outside in their bowling shoes would track in and snow that could cause other bowlers to injure themselves. He said that could push up his insurance premiums. http ://www.greenbaynewschron.com/ap/page.html?article= 108651 4/26/2004 The Green Bay News-Chronicle Online - Wisconsin news Page 2 of 3 But Ricci Fisher, 13, said she should be able to decide whether toxins from secondhand smoke enter her body. "1 have the right to go somewhere and not become ill because of someone's habit," she said. Discussion on the ban started at 9:25 p.m. and the vote finally came around 12:30 a.m. The council passed an ordinance in 2002 that prohibited smoking in all workplaces, except taverns that get more than 50 percent of their revenue from alcohol and restaurants will full-service bars that make less than a third of their money from alcohol sales, said Janet Piraino, chief of staff for Mayor Dave Cieslewicz. But Alderman Steve Holzman, who crafted the all-out ban, said that ordinance was too convoluted. The new one, modeled after similar regulations in California and New York City, will serve as a model for other cities around Wisconsin, Holzman said. "We want something simple," he told the council. Alderman Mike Verveer worried the ban would create massive throngs of smokers on sidewalks downtown, which already sees a lot of trouble on weekend nights. "This is just going to exacerbate the problems," Verveer said. Lawrence Schmock, owner of State Bar & Grill, said a statewide smoking ban should be implemented to make sure smokers don't flee to bars in other cities. The ordinance could force small businesses to close, he said. "They don't deserve this," he said. But the mayor said bar owners' fears probably won't materialize. He pointed to a study in New York City, which also bans public smoking, that found tax receipts from bars and restaurants increased 8.7 percent from April 2003 through January 2004. "1 understand their concerns," Cieslewicz said. "Change is always difficult." Copyright 2001 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press text, photo, graphics and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP Materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except http ://www.greenbaynewschron.com/ap/page.html?article= 108651 4/26/2004 IOWA CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT USE OF FORCE REPORT March 2004 OFFICER DATE INC # INCIDENT FORCE USED 13 03-03-04 4-11556 Traffic Stop When the officer activated his top lights to make a traffic stop the violator accelerated. The officer then activated his siren, but discontinued the chase when told to do so by his sgt. The suspect vehicle was later located, unoccupied, in a parking lot and impounded for investigation. 31 03-04-04 4-11691 Injured Animal The officer used his side arm to dispatch an injured opossum. 58 03-04-04 4-11710 Assault with a The subject refused to walk to the Dangerous Weapon patrol car when told to do so. While being escorted to the car he attempted to pull away from the officer. After arriving at the car the subject refused to get in and was directed into the backseat by the officer. 25, 31 03-05-04 4-12084 Intoxicated Subject When the subject was told that he was under arrest he refused to place his hands behind his back. He resisted officer attempts to place his hands behind his back and was directed to the ground. The officers used a hands control technique to place his hands behind his back to hand cuffhim. 58 03-06-04 4-12138 Fight After telling the subject that he was under arrest the officer was able to place a handcuff on the subject's left wrist. The subject actively resisted having his other wrist handcuffed and the officer placed him against a wall, where he used a hands control technique to place a handcuff on the subject's right wrist. 41 03-06-04 4-12299 Open Container The officer was speaking with a subject whom he observed carrying an open container of an alcoholic beverage. While the officer was speaking with him the subject attempted to leave. The officer was able to grab the subject's shirt to keep him where he was and then waited for his back up to arrive. The subject was arrested without OFFICER DATE INC # INCIDENT FORCE USED further incident. 58 03-07-04 4-12313 Unk Problem The officer observed a subject that had been injured in a fight. When the officer approached him he tried to run away, but was directed to the ground by the officer. The subject actively resisted being handcuffed so the officer used a hands control technique to place his hands behind his back. 6 03-07-04 4-12333 Fight When the subject refused to comply with officer commands to place her hands behind her back the officer placed her against a wall. The officer was able to handcuffthe subject with the assistance of a bystander and then escorted her to the patrol car while she attempted to twist away from him. 4 03-07-04 4-12517 Fight After separating persons involved in a fight the subject walked up and hit one of the parties in the face. The officer grabbed the subject who then tried to pull away from him. The officer directed the subject to the ground where she was then handcuffed. 24 03-08-04 4-12532 Mental comrmttal The officer deployed a chemical agent after the subject started to flee from U of I officers. The ICPD officer directed the subject to the ground where he used a hands control technique to place the subject's hands behind his back to handcuff him. 56, 27 03-10-04 4-12995 Trespass The subject was placed under arrest for public intoxication. After the officer placed a handcuff on the subject's left wrist he tensed up and pulled his right arm in front of himself as he pulled away from the officer. The officers deployed a chemical agent and directed the subject to the ground where he continued to resist and disregard officer commands to place his hands behind his back. The officers used hands control techniques and active countermeasures to place the subject's hands behind his back to handcuff him. 36 03-13-04 4-13425 Traffic Stop The subject disregarded officer commands to exit his car and tried to OFFICER DATE INC # INCIDENT FORCE USED grab his license back from the officer. The officer was able to pull the subject from his car and place him against the car. The subject actively resisted being handcuffed as he grabbed at the officer. The officer used active countermeasures and verbal commands to gain control of and to handcuff the subject. 4 03-13-04 4-13428 Traffic Stop While conducting an OWI investigation the subject tried to grab his driver's license bask from the officer. The officer used a wrist control technique and directed the subject against the vehicle where he placed the subject, who continued to resist, in handcuffs. 31, 58 03-14-04 4-13599 Public Urination While speaking with a subject about public urination the subject spit over the officer's shoulder. The officer directed the subject over the hood of the patrol car and told him he was under arrest. The subject spun and around, pulling himself from the officer's grasp. The officer was able to direct the subject to the ground, but the subject attempted to get back to his feet. The officer deployed a chemical agent and was able to place him in handcuffs as back up officers started to arrive. The subject continued to spit at and threaten the officer while being directed into the backseat of the patrol car. 4, 6 03-15-04 4-13719 Traffic Stop After being told that he was under arrest the subject brought his bands up in front of himself in a threatening mauner. The officers placed the subject against a wall and used hands control techniques to place his hands behind his back. 57 03-19-04 4-14510 Injured Animal The officer used his side arm to dispatch a sick raccoon. 17, 9 (15, 6, 03-21-04 4-14773 Fight Officers responded to a complaint of a 81, 14, 58) large fight with multiple smaller fights. The combatants disregarded officer commands to stop fighting and continued to fight while being physically separated by the officers. OFFICER DATE INC # INCIDENT FORCE USED Officers deployed chemical agents to gain control of the situation. On at least two occasions subjects aggressively approached officers who were in the process of making arrests. One subject was sprayed with a chemical agent by a back up officer and arrested. The other subject was directed to the ground by a back up officer and arrested. 58 03-21-04 4-14776 Fight The subject had been placed in restraints by another agency. When the ICPD officer arrived the subject tried to kick the officer. The officer placed the subject on the ground until he calmed down. Because the person refused to walk to the patrol car the officer had to carry him. 47 03-21-04 4-14792 Injured Animal The officer used her side arm to dispatch an injured deer. 20 03-23-04 4-15195 Delivery of Drugs The officer drew his sidearm and Invest. ordered subjects to get on the ground. The subject's complied and were handcuffed. Officers had received prior information the subjects may be armed. 94 03-24-04 4-15493 Injured Animal The officer used his side arm to dispatch an injured raccoon. 18 03-25-04 4-15545 Criminal Mischief After the subject attempted to strike the officer with a wooden plank the officer directed him to the ground and placed him under arrest. 60 03-28-04 4-16282 Intoxicated person After finding the subject passed out in an alley, covered in vomit, the officer woke him and requested an ambulance. The subject disregarded officer commands to stay seated on the ground, got up and charged the officer while swinging his arms. The officer directed the subject onto the hood of a patrol car and handcuffed him while being kicked by the subject. The officer was able to place him into the back seat of the patrol car, but had to remove him to place him in leg restraints after he started kicking the back window. Date: April 28, 2004 To: Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager From: Linda Severson, Human Services Coordinator,..~ Re: Award Given to City Channel 4/Community Television Service (CTS) Over the past several years, staff and volunteers with the Department of Corrections have worked with City Channel 4/Community Television Service (CTS) staff to produce a number of videos that highlight some of their programs and activities. Some examples of topics have been "An Introduction to Community Based Corrections"; "The Silent Witness Project" - a visual display of silhouettes of victims of domestic violence; "Circle of Suppod and Accountability" - a supportive group of people involved with an individual who is re-entering the community from a correctional setting; and coverage of Crime Victims' Week programs. On April 15, Channel 4/CTS staff (Ty Coleman and Jerry Nixon), along with Ann Bovbjerg (volunteer with Channel 4/CTS and 6th Judicial District Department of Corrections) and Darlyne Neff (volunteer with the 6th Judicial District Department of Corrections) received the Outstanding Citizen Award from the Iowa Correctional Association at their annual meeting held in Cedar Rapids. Attached you will find the nomination statement. The collaborative activities between the Depadment of Corrections and Channel 4/CTS exemplifies the mission of CTS and what they can offer to the community. cc: Karin Franklin Jeff Davidson iccogadm/mem/ctsaward.doc OUTSTANDING CITIZEN 2004 The Outstanding Citizen Award recognizes an individual or group who has a significant, positive impact on corrections in the State of Iowa. Their efforts, whether in the public or private sector, may have been relatively unsung or widely acclaimed in the community previously. Ann Bovbjerg, a community member of the Southern Advisory Committee for the Sixth Judicial District of Iowa, had a vision to produce video products which could be used in a variety of ways to reach the public to improve community awareness and understanding of the corrections profession. She believed that there was a need to provide the public accurate data that was easily digestible to assist them in understanding the variety of issues confronted by the criminal justice system as well as to promote the restorative vision. Ann had been a community volunteer working with the local community cable TV station and went to them to seek assistance. The Cable TV Station (CTS) - Channel 4 - is a department within Iowa City Government. The Cable TV Station was started in 1996 to cover community events and work with staff of non-profit or not-for- profit organizations. This wonderful service produces a quality product that most non-profits couldn't begin to think about paying for. The staff members for this station, Production Assistant Jerry Nixon and Community Programmer Ty Coleman have been directly involved in producing these products. Another member of the Southern Advisory Committee, Darlyne Neff, also participated and volunteered her time to assist this project. This team worked with a variety of staff from the Sixth Judicial District of Iowa to produce videos. This relationship continues up to the present time. Videos are aired and re-aired numerous times on the local government channel. They are also utilized and disseminated for training and speaking engagements in the community. These professional products are a tremendous tool to allow people to get a concrete picture of the work we are advancing in community corrections! Videos have been produced on the following topics: An Introduction to CBC, How Iowa Corrections is funded, Community Service, Restorative Justice, the Silent Witness Project, Circles of Accountability and Support, and annual coverage of Crime Victim's Week. They have also worked with corrections to produce smaller "clips" which assist us in featuring various evolving practices by videoing personal testimony of people involved in the work or developing short video clips of the process. These are used to help train and explain as we are doing training or public speaking. We are pleased to give this year's Outstanding Citizen award to Ann Bovbjerg, Darlyne Neff, Jerry Nixon, and Ty Coleman of the Sixth Judicial District Communications Project Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Private Non-Profit Est. 1973 Three Centers: Pheasant Ridge Broadway Clear Creek Our Mission Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County is dedicated to building a better future for people in neighborhoods through programs that educate, strengthen families and create a sense of communitjz Our Approach · Prevention-Focused · Family-Centered · NeighborhOod:Based What Makes Us Unique... · Relationship Focused - No't Crisis Focused · Stability- Long-Term Commitment to Families · Emphasis on Families Connecting to Families and the Community · Programs Adapt to Meet Needs of the Neighborhood Centers' Programs Child Development PREP - Preschoolers Reaching Educational Potential Infant Child Care Classes Toddler Child Care Classes Dual Language Presc. hools Child Development Play Groups for Young Children Family Support for Families with Young Children Head Start Preschool Partnership Literacy Development Collaboration with Wendell Johnson Speech and Hearing Center Neighborhood Centers' Programs Youth Development Afterschool Programs AmeriCorps "Youth Connections" Tutoring: School-Based and Center-Based In-School Mentoring Pre-employment program EL.I.G.H.T. Summer Program (Future Leaders In Gear For Higher Training) Music Enrichment Classes Young ~¥omen's Groups Teen Group Young Black Men's Group Parent Support for Families with School-Age Children Neighborhood Centers' Programs Family Development Parenting Classes (home-based, center-based and community-based) Parent Support Groups English as Second Language Classes Adult Basic Education Classes Even Start Family Literacy Classes Employment Skills Classes Parent Advisory Group New Mom Support Group "Successful Families Initiative" "First Books in Iowa" with IPTV Neighborhood Centers' Programs Comm unity Development Broadway Improvement Group "BIG" Neighborhood Councils Community Events Study Circles Summer Lunch Program Coordinating Resources and Support Neighborhood Centers' Programs Outcomes & Measures Enhanced school readiness for young children Improved school performance & attendance for school-aged children Self-Sufficiency for families Stronger community and safer neighborhoods Prevention of child abuse and neglect Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Contact Information: Pheasant Ridge Neighborhood Center 2651 Roberts Road Iowa City 358-0438 Broadway 2105 BrOadway Street Iowa City 354-7989 Clear Creek 310 Marengo Road Tiffin 545-1377 Email: ncjc@ncjc.org Web Site: www. ncjc.orcj Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County PO. Box24.91 · IowaCitylA 52244- ,, (319J358-0438 email: ncjc~>ncjc.org · Web Site: www. ncjc.org Our Approach Our Mission Neighborhood Centers of ·Prevention Johnson County is dedicated to building a better future for ~ ~"'.am,,y people in neighborhoods · · Neighborh throughprograms that educate. strengthen families and create a sense of communi~ Selected Programs Child Development Youth Development ~ infant Child Development Classes ~/ After~chool Programs ~ Toddler Child Development Classes '~ AmeriCorps ~Youth Connections" ~t Shared Visions Head Start Preschools '~ Tutoring & In-School Mentoring ~ PREP - Preschoolers Reaching ~ Pre-employment Program Educational PotentiaJ ~Sumrner '~ Enrichment Classes Kindergar[en Readiness Program) N Teen Groups Community Development Family Development ~ Broadway Revitalization Project -J Parent Education ~J Neighborhood Councils *J Parent Support Groups ~ Community Building Events ~ English asSecond Language Classes ~ Summer Lunch Program ~ Adult Basic Education Classes ~/ Even Start Family Literacy Classes I~oved school performance & attendance for school-aged children Self-Sufficiency for families Enhanced school readiness for¥oung children Stronger community and safer neighborhoods Prevention of child abuse and neglect NCJC Early Childhood YaJh ~dd~ Creative Curriculum Assessment Averages 2.§ Johnson O~er County IowaCity o u 2 3% 4-% 4% Unit~d~'ay ~ 1.5 60/° o~ 1 Services 65% 0.5 o National Academy NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS of Johnson County Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County Recognized Areas of Effectiveness Child Development: ~/e are an accredited child development program through the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). Our work with staff mentoring has been published in the NAEYC.journal Young Child, and we have presented on this subject at the NAEYC National Conference. Parent Involvement: V(/e provide training on parental involvement to youth workers and teachers. ~Ve have been conference presenters to providers on parent involvement in schools and our "two generation" approach to child care and child development. School-Age Programs: ~X/e have written our own curriculum for school-age afterschool programs, targeted particularly at vulnerable children. We also have staff providing in-school mentoring at elementary, middle and high schools in both the Iowa City and Clear Creek Amana school districts. Parent Education and Family Support: Parent support has been a core program of Neigh- borhood Centers for 30 years. ~/e provide both group and home-based parenting and parent support. We currently use the Nurturing Program curriculum as a foundation. Multi-Cultural and Dual Language Programming: Programming at the Centers reflects the diversity of cultures represented in our Neighborhoods. ~/e provide training to the Iowa City Community School DistricL We operate the only dual language ISpanish/English and Arabic/ English) classrooms in Johnson County. Cross Cultural Programming for Immigrants and Refugees: Since 1977, Neighborhood Centers has been active in providing support for new immigrants to our community. In 2001, Governor Vilsack's staff visited the Neighborhood Centers to study our methods and use them in his immigration initiative. Family Resource Center Development: In 1997 and 1998, Neighborhood Centers was asked by the Iowa Department of Human Services to provide technical assistance to rural communities throughout Iowa that were developing Family Resource Centers. Literacy and English as Second Language: ~/e recognize parents as the first teachers of their children and deeply value lifelong learning. We have a well respected Even Start Family Literacy Program achieving great success in adult basic education, ESL and literacy develop- merit for young children. Our early childhood programs have partnered with the Wendell Johnson Speech and Hearing Clinics at the University of Iowa to help young children reach their potential in speech language and literacy. MINUTES DRAFT~ IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2004 - 5:30 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Pusack, Brett Castillo, Kimberly Thrower, Saul Mekies, Terry Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Mike Brau, Bob Hardy, Andy Matthews, Dale Helling OTHERS PRESENT: Phil Phillips, Rene Paine, Susan Rogusky, Jon Koebrick, Beth Fisher RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None at this time. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Rene Paine reported that her last day will be May 14th as the director ofPATV. Shaffer reported that he received an email from Kevin Hoyland informing him that the school district is in the process of receiving a bid for upgraded equipment for the Board Room. The money used to purchase this equipment is from the pass-through fund, recommended by the CTG and approved by the ICTC. Koebrick reported work in preparation to deliver high definition television is in process and may be available in April. Video on demand will be available around the first week of May. Shaffer reported that he and Jon Koebrick have developed language that will be carried on InfoVision that informs subscribers how to return or get rebates for non-addressable converters they no longer need. The contract for refranchising services with Rice, Williams is nearly complete. The InfoVision focus group is planned for Saturday, April 3. In regards to the programming cost of ESPN and the possibility of making it an a la carte channel, Koebrick said that has become an issue of the cable industry as a whole. ESPN programming costs have been going up about 20% per year for the last five years. ESPN does not want to give operators the right to offer ESPN as an a la carte channel, in part, because they can demand more from advertisers as a regular channel. It is in ESPN's best economic interest to maintain the present arrangements. Matthews noted that the City has no legal authority regarding any control over the programming offered by Mediacom. Koebrick reported that something called two- tuner digital video recorders will be available to subscribers in September. Koebrick reported that Mediacom recently sent applications for a $1,000 per year academic scholarships for students interested in studying communications. 25 are given annually in the state of Iowa. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Thrower moved and Castillo seconded a motion to approve February 23, 2004 meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS None. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. CONSUMER ISSUES Shaffer referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet and noted that there were 9 complaint~ 1 about billings, 2 about poor customer service, 1 about rates, 1 about getting a cable buried, 3 about technical problems, and 1 about not getting a return phone call. All the complaints have been resolved or are in the process of being resolved. MEDIACOM REPORT Koebrick reported work in progress to deliver high definition television and may be available in April. Video on demand will available around the first week of May. UNIVERSITY OF IOWA REPORT No representative was present. PATV REPORT Paine reported that PATV will be holding a special workshop for the Everet Conner Center so they can produce a show about disabilities. Public Access Week will be April 11-17th. Rene Paine reported that her last day will be May 14th as the director of PATV. SENIOR CENTER REPORT Rogusky distlibuted the March Senior Center TV program guide and reported that several new volunteers have joined SCTV. IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT No representative was present. Shaffer reported that he received an email from Kevin Hoyland informing him that the school district is in the process of receiving a bid for upgraded equipment for the Board Room. LEGAL REPORT Matthews said he had nothing new to report. LIBRARY REPORT Fisher reported that the fiber optic connection to the new building has been installed. A complete second digital editing system has arrived. K1RKWOOD REPORT No representative was present. MEDIA UNIT Hardy reported that the League of Women Voter's Legislative Forum will be cablecast live this weekend. InfoVision will be holding a focus group soon. The Community Television Service recently taped a presentation of a group of environmental groups called the 2004 Prairie Preview. At the request of the United Church of Christ three programs on healthcare will be taped. A public service announcement for the Adolescent Health Resource Center will also be produced. CABLE TV ADMINISTRATOR REPORT Shaffer reported that he and Jon Koebrick have developed language that will be carried on InfoVision that informs subscribers how to return or get rebates for non-addressable converters they no longer need. The contract for refranchising services from Rice, Williams is nearly complete. The InfoVision focus group is planned for Saturday, April 3. CSAPN 3, ESPN, CHANNEL PACKAGING Koebrick said that Mediacom does not carry CSPAN 3 on any of their systems at this time. There would be no contractual problems receiving it. Programming of this type is typically put on the basic tier, but in Iowa City that would be a problem due to a lack of channel space. If it were to be added, it would likely be added to the expanded basic tier. If it would be added it would be added to all the systems served by a head-end. In regards to the programming cost of ESPN and the possibility of making it an a la carte channel Koebrick said that that has become an issue of the cable industry as a whole. ESPN programming costs have been going up about 20% per year for the last five years. ESPN does not want to give operators the right to offer ESPN as an a la carte channel, in part, because they can demand more money from advertisers as a regular channel. It is in ESPN's best economic interest to maintain the present arrangements. If an operator were to drop ESPN, it would be at a competitive disadvantage in relation to the direct satellite TV providers. Mediacom has worked with some national cable TV organizations to permit them the right to offer a channel a la carte if the programming charges are double the average per channel cost. Cox recently got an agreement with ESPN that has only a 7% annual increase in fees due, in part, to efforts by Mediacom and Cox. Matthews noted that the City has no legal authority regarding the control of the programming offered by Mediacom. Koebrick said that ESPN contracts typically involve a number of other channels also owned by Disney/ABC and include channel placement on systems. It even extends to retransmission consent agreements. Meikes said he is concerned that some channels that may not be appropriate for children are located next to channels intended for children. This is bad for the programmers, operators, and viewers. Koebrick said that large media conglomerates such as Viacom that control a number of programmers insist on their channels be adjacent on the channel lineup. As a result, for example, MTV and Nickelodeon often are adjacent. Mediacom will trap out any channel free of charge upon request. The best method of affecting change would be to contact Congress, the FCC and the programmers. Koebrick reported that something called two-tuner digital video recorders will be available to subscribers in September. Koebrick reported that Mediacom recently sent applications for a $1,000 per year academic scholarships for students interested in studying communications. 25 are given annually in the state of Iowa. Castillo asked about the barriers to complete a la carte programming. Koebrick said that programmers won't agree to a la carte arrangements. If programmers were forced to be carried a la carte and be revenue neutral, they would have to charge much more for their programming. A subscriber would likely end up paying about the same but have access to fe~ver channels. ADJOURNMENT Thrower moved and Smith seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 6:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Drew Shaffer Cable TV Administrator 1TLECOMMUNICA110NS tOMMISSION 12 MONTH ATTENDANCE BECIBB Meeting Date Kimberly Sill NelklS Brett ~lSIJIll Tln~Smltll Jill PlSael[ Thrower 612103 X X X X X 7~28~03 x X X X X 8~25/03 X X X X 9~22~03 X x X x 10~27~03 X X X X 11/24/03 X X g/C X l 12/15~03 I/c I/C X x X 1/2/04 x I/~ X x X 1/26~04 X X x X x 2123/04 X 9/C X e/C X 3~22~04 X X X X X (X) = Present (0) = Absent (O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused) MINUTES PRELIMIN~ IOWA CITY PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, APRIL 1, 2004 - 3:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE CENTER Members Presents: Chuck Felling, Terry Trueblood, Emily Carter Walsh, James Hemsley, Mark Seabold, Rick Fosse and Barbara Camillo Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Karin Franklin Visitors Present: Zack Scafuri, Seth Godard, and Rick Naylor CALL TO ©RDER Chairperson Felling called the meeting to order at 3:30 P.M. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 4, 2004, MEETING Chairperson Felling asked if there were any additions, substitutions, or corrections, to the minutes. Seabold stated that under "Updates", second paragraph, misspelling of historic; and also in the following paragraph, there needs to be a space between May and 1st. MOTION: Fosse moved to accept the minutes; Trueblood seconded the motion. All in favor; motion passed. DISCUSSION OF ALLEY PROJECT ENTRY DESIGNS WITH ZACK SCAFURI, DESIGNER Zack Scafuri brought in some pictures of his previous work, explaining to the Committee that he wanted to share some of his ideas for alley entryways. Scafuri told the Committee he would like to get an idea on color and feel of this proposed project. He discussed the various components of his projects, showing how they represent the wind, the river areas downtown, and the medical community, as examples. Franklin explained to the Committee that this is a project to enhance the alleys downtown, one that the City Manager has proposed to the City Council. She said the goal is to keep the alleys clean, enforce the parking, and come up with a way to keep the garbage under control. Franklin went on to explain Zack Scafuri's part in this, stating there are three components to this project. The primary one being some type of entry piece over the alley, which would indicate that the alley is a place to go. This entryway would need to be 15' 5" above the grade of the alley so trucks would be able to pass under it. It would also be connected to the buildings on each side so it could be removed if necessary. Two other issues to be considered are pedestrian-scale lighting in the alleys, and also a way to screen the dumpsters. Franklin asked the Committee if they had any ideas on a theme, or a focus, as this would give Scafuri some direction to go with ideas. She reiterated that these would be fairly simple designs, ones that don't require ongoing maintenance. Camillo stated that she thought Scafuri has some wonderful ideas, ones that really show the feel of Iowa City. Walsh followed up with asking about color, and how it can be used within the project. Scafuri explained some of his past projects, colors that he used in them, as well as two and three-dimensional parts to the project. Fosse stated that his thoughts are to have these pieces fit in with the architecture of the buildings so there isn't so much contrast in design and color. Franklin did remind the Committee that they are focusing on the alleys at the Ped Mall only at this time. Members continued to discuss their thoughts and ideas on how these entryways will fit into the current landscape of this area. Franklin went on to state that there will be two separate designs, two entryways, and then each alley has an entrance and exit. Between Dubuque and Linn there would be a design that is at each end of that alley, and then between Dubuque and Clinton there would be another design, at both ends of this alley. Since this is a pilot project, Franklin stated that if it grows to other alleyways, each alleyway would then have its own design. The overall idea of a theme was then discussed, with Hemsley stating that he really likes the music theme. Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes April 1,2004 Page 2 Walsh went on to state that she also would like a design related to music, as opposed to the weather, the river, the bridges. She feels the music theme would be something new for the area. The Committee continued to toss around ideas on a musical theme, discussing ways to incorporate it into this type of project. Scafuri said that in listening to the Committee, he has picked up the themes of music, community, writing, and nightlife. He will be in touch with the Committee to further discuss his design ideas. PRESENTATION OF STUDENT ART WORK FOR PENINSULA PARK AND DISCUSSION WITH ARTISTS Franklin reminded the Committee that this project is for a piece that will be placed at the Iowa City end of the pedestrian bridge that crosses the Iowa River at the Iowa River Power Company. The bridge is due to be completed this summer. Seth Godard explained a piece he had made from steel, further explaining the detail of the piece. Members asked various questions, such as how large the piece is, measurements, etc., and Franklin explained more about the area in which this piece would sit. Questions were raised about how this project will proceed, and Franklin stated that they could either do something similar to the Iowa Sculpture Showcase where the artists would have their work on display for a year, and would receive an honorarium; and the other option is to actually acquire a piece, or to commission a piece. Rick Naylor then discussed his piece "Geo 1", stating that it's about eight feet tall and spins. He explained some of his thoughts on how to display this piece. Naylor showed the members slides of his work, and answered their various questions. Franklin stated that in deciding on a piece to display, the members need to remember safety issues, such as sharp corners, and staying away from pieces that would be easy to climb. Naylor then discussed another idea, consisting of six separate pieces set up in a circular pattern. Discussion continued on whether this concept would work in this particular setting. Franklin suggested that a "field trip" would enable the Committee and the student artists to get a better feel for the area in which these pieces would be placed. Fosse stated he would go and retrieve the bridge plans now so the students will have a better understanding of this project. Franklin went on to state that the Committee members need to decide what they want to do next with this project. Fosse explained the bridge design to the Committee and the student artists, showing the layout of the area in greater detail. The students asked specific questions concerning the area so they could get a better feel for this project. They also asked if they could get some local history on this area. Franklin wrapped up this part of the discussion by suggesting they schedule a field trip to this area for the May meeting. It was decided that everyone would meet at City Hall as usual, and then they would all head out to the site together. Franklin asked the students to let the faculty know that the Committee wished to establish an on-going relationship with the art program. UPDATES Herky on Parade -- Klingaman stated that the Herky program is going well. There have been 75 Herky's sponsored by various organizations and businesses. One group, the United Action for Youth, is going to be doing a rhinestone cowgirl, and the high schools have also taken on some Herkys. The Committee is invited to the sneak-peek preview on April 13th, where they hope to have all of the designs posted, and the members can also meet the artists. The Children's Museum at Coral Ridge Mall has a display with Herky and "Starry Night" that Klingaman said she hopes to get to City Hall for the Council's April 20th meeting. Neiqhborhood art proiects - Chairperson Felling stated he did not have any new information on Longfellow, and has been unable to contact Tim. Klingaman stated that the last she heard they were awaiting the approval from property owners before they moved forward with markers. Klingaman stated that Northside met last week, and put out a call for ideas. John Coyne was the only artist that responded to this call. Klingaman next brought up Iowa Sculpor's Showcase, stating that around April 16th the Angel of the Ped Mall will be installed on the Showcase. Felling asked about Goosetown, and Klingaman stated all of the molds for the street signs have been done, and most of the pouring has been done. Discussion turned to other neighborhoods joining, and Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes April 1,2004 Page 3 Klingaman said they need to establish who is most interested, perhaps through a letter of interest from each neighborhood. She said they are still working with Wetherby. Court Street Transportation Center - Franklin said things are moving along well at the site. They have been working with David Dahlquist on the fence project. She showed the Committee an illustration of the fencing that would go along the side by the daycare center. She also discussed the signage needs, and the special effects they plan to add. Dahlquist will be working with school groups to do these special projects. Members had a general discussion about time frames, opening of the ramp, etc. Walsh asked about the poetry on the buses, and Klingaman said they will be installing poetry in the kiosk next week as they are almost done with printing, and the bus poetry will be up soon. COMMITTEE TIME/OTHER BUSINESS None. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Felling asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Walsh moved to adjourn; Hemsley seconded the motion. All in favor; motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 P.M. MINUTES INARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 2004 - 1:00 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM Members Presents: Ernie Lehman, Bob Elliott, Regina Bailey Members Absent: None Council Members Present: None Staff Present: Steve Atkins, Karin Franklin, Steve Nasby Others Present: Irvin Pfab, Dan Black CALL TO ORDER Chair Ernie Lehman called the meeting to order at 1:00 P.M. CONSIDERATION OF THE JANUARY 26, 2004, MINUTES MOTION: Bailey moved to approve the minutes as submitted, Elliott seconded the motion, The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION - REQUEST FOR TAX EXEMPTION - 119 IOWA AVENUF Nasby opened the discussion by giving some brief history on the Central Business District Urban Revitalization Plan and outlining the eligibility criteria for the property tax exemption. He noted that in February of 2001, the Council approved a property tax exemption for the property located at 210-212 Clinton Street - the Whiteway Building, and in May of 2003, a tax exemption was approved for the Zephyr Copies building, located at 124 E. Washington Street. According to the eligibility criteria for the proposed project, qualified real estate includes real estate assessed as commercial property. The proposed project is a commercial property, so the whole structure would qualify. Secondly, eligible projects include rehabs, additions, and new construction. The proposed project is for the construction of a new 1,500 sq. foot building to replace the 1,050 sq. ft. building that was destroyed by a fire in August of 2003. The third requirement centers around the exterior design of the building, and its review by the staff design review committee and approval by the City Council. This will be done soon, with a recommendation and a resolution being forwarded to the City Council possibily for their consideration at their May 4, 2004, Council meeting. And last, the improvements must increase the actual value of the property by at least 15 percent, and in this instance, the proposed project would increase the value on the property. Dan Black, Iowa State Bank and Trust Company, was present to represent the Bremer Trust that owns the property. Black answered questions for the Committee members, stating that given the location of the property, a bar/restaurant would be the most likely tenant for this proposed building. Lehman stated that he was not comfortable at this time granting this exemption, as there are too many unknowns at present, i.e., type of business, number of employees, pay level, etc. Elliott and Bailey agreed that they would like further information before any decisions are handed down. Black said he would contact the Committee once he had further information about this request. The Committee did state that if the project were going to be a bar, they would most likely not approve the request due to the large number of bars in the area, and the animosity it could bring. MOTION: Elliott moved to table this request for tax exemption at 119 Iowa Avenue. Bailey seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF 2004 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY in November 2003 the Council Economic Development Committee reviewed the 1999 Economic Development Strategy and recommended numerous revisions. Nasby asked the Committee to review the suggestions and revisions made. Discussion centered on the Comprehensive Development Code, and the changes that have made things simpler in this area. Various projects that have already been completed were discussed, and the many compromises that have been made. Some specific building projects were specifically addressed, and the discussion turned to how the City has always worked with the developers to get the projects completed. Economic Development Committee Minutes March 30, 2004 Page 2 Discussion then turned to the visiting of local companies, and Chair Lehman explained some of their past visits. The topics of publicity and perception were also discussed at length, with City Manager Atkins joining in, stating staff would start setting up visits again for the new members. Atkins then discussed the topic of the City building a "spec" building to generate some new business. The members consulted the City map to look at various areas, and discussion turned towards having a private contractor do the actual building, and the City being the "landlord". Atkins said he would have his staff work up something on this, and he would get back to the Committee on their findings. Nasby then asked the Committee to set a date for the next meeting. It was decided that meetings would be the third Wednesday of each month, with the next meeting set for April 21, at 9:00 am. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Lehman adjourned the meeting at 2:12 P.M. data on cJt yntJpcd/mfn ut es/ecod ev/2OO4/ed c 03-30-04.doc MINUTES IP14 IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Preliminar MARCH 10, 2004 - 5:00 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL - IOWA CITY CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Dennis Keitel, Michael Wright, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Robed Miklo, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Holland, Mike Haverkamp, Lowell Brandt, Helen Buford, Jay Berry, T. J. Brandt CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Keitel called the meeting to order at 5:02 PM. CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 11, 2004 BOARD MINUTES Chairperson Keitel asked if there were any corrections or additions to the minutes. There were none. MOTION: Alexander moved to approve the February 11, 2004 minutes as submitted. Wright seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. APPEALS APL04-00002 Public hearing regarding an appeal submitted by Steve L. Droll of a decision of the Senior Housing Inspector regarding the maximum occupancy or number of roomers permitted at 428 E. Jefferson Street in the Residential/Office R/O zone. Miklo first reviewed various photos and layouts with the Board to familiarize them with the property in question. He then explained the nonconforming status of the duplex in terms of the zoning regulations with both lot size and parking requirements. A duplex is to have 4 off-street parking spaces, and this property contains only 1 off-street parking space. Miklo also gave a brief zoning history of this property. Prior to being zoned R/O Residential/Office in 1993, the property was zoned Central Business Service zone, or CB-2. The CB-2 zone did not allow residential uses on the ground floor. The property was, therefore, nonconforming then in terms of the previous zoning designation. Prior to being zoned CB-2 in 1983, the property was zoned R3A Multi-Family, and in 1976 when this property was converted to a Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 2 duplex, it had this zoning. The R3A zone requires 2,500 square feet of lot area, per dwelling unit of a duplex, or 5,000 square feet. The property only had 3,320 square feet at that time so it did not have the 5,000 square feet necessary for a duplex. The Senior Housing Inspector is recognizing this property as a nonconforming duplex in the current R/O zone. However, because the property does not contain sufficient lot area or parking spaces, it is the Inspector's position that roomers are not allowed. Roomers would not be considered a legally nonconforming use because they are provisional use, which was never legally established on this property under the current R/O zone, or the previous zones which applied. The Inspector has determined that the applicant has the right to rent each unit of the duplex to a family, which may include two unrelated persons. However, because the right to have roomers, a provisional use, was never legally established on this property, roomers are not permitted, according to the Inspector's determination. In order for the property to take advantage of the provisional use, allowing of roomers, it would need to comply with the lot area and off-street parking requirements. The issue of over-occupancy of this particular property has come to light because of a recent directive by the City Council to improve enforcement of zoning ordinances. The City Council passed an ordinance requiring an Information Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form for each property. On this form the number of legal occupants is noted. The Council directed Housing and Inspection Service Department to establish the maximum permitted occupancy for rental units, based on building, zoning, and housing codes. Section 14-6W-2A of the Zoning Code grants the Board of Adjustment the power to hear and decide appeals, where it is alleged there is error in any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the City Manager or designee, in the enforcement of the Zoning Chapter or any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto. In this case the designee is the Senior Housing Inspector. Appeal cases differ from Special Exceptions, which the Board often hears, in that you are not being asked to allow a use based on compatibility with the neighborhood or subjective considerations, but rather the question before the Board is whether the Housing Inspector made a mistake when applying the law. In making his decision, the Inspector relied on Section 14-6T-2A of the Zoning Ordinance, the Regulation of Nonconforming Uses. This section of the ordinance and the subsection Continuation of Unlawful Uses Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 3 states: nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted as authorization for the continuation of the use of a structure or land established unlawfully in violation of the zoning regulations in effect prior to the effective date hereof. In this case the Inspector has determined that the provisional use of roomers on this property was never legally established. The property currently lacks, as well as previously lacked, lot area and the required number of parking spaces in order to have roomers. In order to find the Inspector made an error, the Board would have to find that the roomers were legally established on this property, under a previous zoning designation. The Inspector has determined that at no time in the past did this property contain the required number of parking spaces, or sufficient lot area to permit roomers. The Inspector also relied on the Section 14-6T-3A, Regulation of Nonconforming Uses, Enlargement or Alteration. This section states that no nonconforming use shall be enlarged, nor shall a structure for a nonconforming use be constructed, reconstructed, structurally altered or relocated on the lot. In order to get at the issue of enlargement, the Inspector relied on the definitions in the Zoning Ordinance, which define enlargement as "an increase in volume of building, an increase in the area of land or building occupied by a use, or an increase in the number of occupants or dwelling units." In this case it's the increased number of occupants that applies. Based on these laws, the Inspector has determined that the roomers at 428 E. Jefferson Street, would be an enlargement, or an expansion, of a nonconforming use. As stated previously, the single family home on this property was converted to a duplex in 1976 when the property was zoned R3A. At that time the property did not contain, nor does it contain today, sufficient lot area or parking spaces to allow roomers. Although there is some question as whether even a duplex would be allowed under the R3A zone, the Inspector is recognizing this as a duplex and is permitting each unit of the duplex to be occupied by a family, which may include two unrelated persons, but would not include roomers. In order to find use of this property as a duplex, with the right to roomers, as not an enlargement or an expansion of a nonconforming use, the Board would have to find that the roomers were legally established. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 4 The applicant's position seems to be that this property has a history of being rented to five unrelated occupants, two in the second floor unit, and three in the first floor unit; and that the City should continue to allow the five unrelated occupants. Allowing the five unrelated occupants would only be possible legally if the use of the property as a duplex with roomers was legally established. Although the actual occupancy over the years may have exceeded what was permitted by zoning, the excess occupancy is not permitted by the nonconforming provisions of the Zoning Code. To allow roomers in this case would be an expansion of the nonconforming use, contrary to the Zoning Code, under the sections previously cited. Maximum densities are set by the zoning ordinance to prevent overcrowding, to assure that each dwelling unit has sufficient open space, and to control the level of demand on City services and infrastructure. The Residential/Office zone allows a relatively high density when compared to other parts of Iowa City. It allows 24 housing units per acre. The current use at 428 E. Jefferson Street has a density equivalent of 26 housing units per acre. It is important in nonconforming situations that the limit on the number of roomers is upheld. To allow additional roomers would compound the nonconforming density in this situation. Although allowing roomers at 428 E. Jefferson Street may appear insignificant, to do so would grant this property special privileges that other property owners do not have. With the recent establishment of the Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form, the City and many property owners are discovering that properties have been exceeding the number of occupants legally permitted by codes. Such properties are being required to come into conformance with the current codes, rather than continue at a level of occupancy that is not allowed by the zoning law. To allow properties to exceed these maximums undermines of the zoning ordinance. In summarizing the staff's findings, Miklo states that the property at 428 E. Jefferson Street is nonconforming with respect to the density requirements of the Residential/Office zone. The property is nonconforming with respect to the minimum number of parking spaces. A duplex is required to have 4 parking spaces, and this property has only 1. The provisional use of allowing roomers was never legally established on this property. Adding the provisional use at this time would be the expansion of a nonconforming use, which is clearly not allowed by the Zoning Code. After considerable deliberation, the City Council adopted the Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement Form, and instructed the Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 5 Housing and Inspection Department to enforce existing zoning, building, and housing codes. Uniform enforcement of these codes has lead to the identification of properties such as this, which are over- occupied and are now being required to comply with City ordinances. Special rights should not be granted to certain property owners merely due to the fact that they or previous property owners exceeded the number of lawfully permitted occupants. Based on these findings, staff concludes that in making the determination of occupancy at 428 E. Jefferson Street, roomers are not permitted. The Inspector correctly applied Section 14-6T-2A, Regulation of Nonconforming Uses, General Provisions and Restrictions, and the Continuance of Unlawful Uses. The Inspector also properly applied Section 14-6T-3A, Regulation of Nonconforming Uses, Enlargement or Alteration, which states "no nonconforming use shall be enlarged nor shall a structure with a nonconforming use be constructed, reconstructed, structurally altered or relocated on a lot", and in making this determination, the Inspector relied on the definition of enlargement which includes no expansion of number of occupants. Based on these findings and conclusions, staff recommends that this appeal of the decision of the Senior Housing Inspector for the property at 428 E. Jefferson Street be denied. In concluding, Miklo stated that Norm Cate, the Senior Housing Inspector, is present this evening to answer questions as well. Maurer asked for a legal description of a roomer. Miklo read from the Zoning Code: "Roomer, an occupant of a rooming house, or a rooming unit, who is not a member of the family of the rooming house operator. A roomer shall also mean an occupant of a dwelling unit who is not a member of the family occupying the dwelling unit." Holecek suggested Miklo also define family. Miklo again read from the Zoning Code: a family is defined as "one person, or two or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption, or placement by a government or social service agency, occupying a dwelling unit as a single household, housekeeping organization. A family may also be two, but not more than two persons, not related by blood, marriage, or adoption." Leigh asked for clarification of the distinction between a roomer and an unrelated person to the family who is living with that family in that unit. Miklo explained that "family" may consist of two unrelated persons, and they are able to occupy a dwelling unit." Once a third unrelated person moves into that dwelling unit, they are considered a roomer. Keitel then asked Cate, Housing Inspector, how this Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 6 particular property was discovered as being nonconforming. Cate explained the background of the situation, stating that every two to three years they are out doing inspections for rental permits. With the directive from the City Council on determining maximum occupancies, this property came up for inspection and this became an issue. Discussion then turned to whether or not a possible variance could be done on this property, and the various legalities involved. Holecek concluded that the applicant could apply for a variance and they would have to show that they met the three tests for a variance in order for the Board to approve a variance. Public Hearing Opened Joe Holland, legal representative for Mr. Droll and his partner, stated that there were many nuances in the zoning ordinances from 1976 and earlier. He said Board of Adjustment is a common sense body, which is intended to put a buffer between the technical rigidity of the zoning ordinance the public and the manner in which the ordinance is enforced. He said he hoped that this is the perspective of the Board. He asked that the Board put itself in the position of those in the audience. He said that he finds it troubling about these proceedings that the Board receives the staff report before the meeting. He said the Board should not take the report as gospel. He said the applicant is at a disadvantage because at this point no one has advocated for the applicant. He addressed the Board on the validity of the staff report, and the history of this particular property. The City has no records prior to 1976. According to records, the owner in 1976 was George Sondag. Holland gave the Board Chair a copy of a building permit application from 1976 (Exhibit 1). He said this permit was for an alteration on the property, which he said was already a duplex at this time. The work was converting a porch into a bedroom. A lot of the facts surrounding this property are missing due to the passage of time. Prior to 1976, the property was occupied; part of it was occupied by the owner and part of it was occupied by her family, in two separate units. He said that the building permit indicates this property was a duplex at the time, and also indicates the property was R3B, and not R3A as staff has noted in their report. Holland pointed this out to show that records are very sketchy from that time frame. Holland gave a second item to the Board Chair (Exhibit 2), which is a copy of a letter dated 1977 from a housing inspector, with a Certificate of Compliance attached. This meant that the property in question had Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 7 met or exceeded the minimum housing standards established by Chapter 9.30 of the City Code. Holland stated that what's really driving this appeal is the issue of parking, not the issue of occupancy. There is plenty of room for four people in this duplex. Unfortunately, Exhibit 2 indicates it meets Housing Code. Zoning enforcement was not done by Housing Inspection at that time. He goes on to state that on the 1976 building permit (Exhibit 1), item 9, number of off-street parking spaces required, is blank, so we really don't know what parking was required at that time as far as the Building Department was concerned. Holland next gave copies of specific pages from the zoning ordinance, pertaining to 1976 and 1977, to show what was in effect during the time period they are looking at for this property. He said he understands that the Board members are volunteers and may not be well versed in statutory interpretations. Therefore, he would try to simplify it. He pointed out again the discrepancy between the staff report showing this property in an R3A zone, versus his findings of an R3B zone. He said as he reads it, you could have a duplex with up to five unrelated persons per dwelling unit, provided parking is provided (or up to ten persons per duplex). He stated that if the garage were torn down, this would free up space for another, possibly two more, parking spaces. He said that he thinks staff is mistaken about the lot area. He then addressed the issue of lot area, stating that the requirement in 1975 was a minimum lot area of 500 square feet per dwelling unit, and this property has approximately 3,300 square feet. He said for a duplex you would only need 2,500 square feet of lot area. According to current standards however, this property clearly does not meet the lot size. In looking at the R3A and R3B parking requirements, he pointed out that this requirement is to take place "at the time the use is created, or structurally altered". There have not been any major structural alterations on this property, so this should not be an issue. Holland then discussed conforming uses versus nonconforming uses, and the major changes in the City's zoning changes over the years. He went on to express the desire for the Board to review this appeal carefully, based on the facts as they know them to be, and how that fits into the scheme of the current ordinances versus the historic zoning ordinances. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 8 He said although this property does not have required parking spaces, the Code says that at the time a use is created or structurally altered it has to comply with parking requirements. It could be argued that enclosing the porch was a structural alteration, but that is debatable. He said it is the applicant's position that this property was legally created as a duplex and that it should be allowed to continue as a legal nonconforming use. The city may say it is not legally conforming. But he said he had tried to show the Board from the admittedly vague information that this was a duplex. He said that the Board of Adjustment should apply common sense. He said he thought that it would be difficult to prove one way or another when this properly was converted to a duplex. Reasonable people can disagree, but he did not think that one could take the staff report or Mr. Cate's letter as gospel. Holland repeated that historically this property has had 5 occupants. He said the City Housing Inspectors in the past had told the applicant orally that you could have 5 occupants. He said that he also had represented someone who put an offer on this property but who latter withdrew it when the City said you could not occupy this property with 5 people. That offer was for $215,000. There currently is an offer for $192,000. This interpretation results in a very real loss in value of this property. Holland said he is asking what is a fair and logical interpretation of the facts and how this fits in with the scheme of the current zoning ordinance and previous zoning ordinances. He said what this comes down to is what fair to the applicant and the City. Maurer asked for clarification on when the current owner purchased the property, and what its use has been. Holland explained the series of owners since Sondag in 1976, and stated the property has always been a duplex, as it is now. He stated that Mr. Droll purchased the property in 2001. Wright asked if the property is currently for sale, and Holland stated there is a pending offer. Leigh asked about the zoning status in 2001, and Holland stated it was R/O. Keitel asked for clarification on the bedroom in the basement, and the compliance issues surrounding the window size. Holland said there was a Notice of Violation and evidence that it was corrected based on a letter from the Building Official. Keitel then asked about putting in more parking spaces, and whether or not the current owner is willing to Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 9 improve upon the situation. Holland replied that they would be but have been held up due to the issues at hand. The new owner, he states, would most likely want to improve the situation. Keitel asked if there was an alley to provide access to the parking. Holland said that there is but that there is an intervening property with an easement between this property and the alley. Alexander then questioned Section 14-6T-2A, which the Housing Inspector cited, and asked Holland to clarify his stance on this issue. She asked if this application of this section was incorrect. He said yes. Holland stated that it comes down to when this property was converted to a duplex. Miklo stated he had some information in that regard. He said that on March 4th he spoke with Barb Sondag, a previous owner, and she related that she and her husband bought this property as investment property from a woman who lived there with her son, giving more background to the 1976 time frame. Holland said he spoke with George Sondag who indicated in 1976 it was a duplex with one woman living in one unit and her son and daughter-in-law living in the other. Holecek questioned that the issue here is not whether or not the property is a duplex, but whether the roomer has been legally established. Holland disagreed, saying the issue is parking and whether or not there was lawful parking, and if it was legally established parking at the time that a roomer could live in the property. He said since they don't know when this became a duplex, that they then don't know what the parking requirements were at that time. Keitel asked where the tenants park. Holland said some don't have cars or park on the street or on this property. Miklo said he had additional information regarding questions Mr. Holland had raised. Miklo stated that on the building permit it does show this was zoned R3B, and in checking the zoning maps from the 1970% it does in fact show this as R3A in 1976. He said the building permit apparently had an error, but noted that both R3A and R3B required 2,500 square feet per family for a two-family dwelling so even then the property did not conform in 1976, regardless of whether it was zoned R3A or RSB. He then discussed the copy of the letter from a previous housing inspector that stated the property complied with city housing codes. He said this is not an indication that it conformed with zoning codes, and that only recently did the City housing inspectors go back and check properties for conformance with zoning codes. Holland agreed. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 10 Maurer questioned whether or not the sale of a property triggered an inspection by the City, especially in a rental unit. Cate responded that only the rental permit itself triggers an inspection to the properly, changing ownership does not affect this. Mike Haverkamp of 109 N. Van Buren addressed the Board, and stated that he had talked to Anita Cochran of 430 Jefferson. He said that Cochran and he are both neighbors of this property. He asked if she had any concerns she wanted him to raise with the Board. Cochran is 97 years old, and he is bringing her list of concerns to the Board. He himself does encourage the Board to support the City staff in allowing this to remain a duplex, but not allow the additional roomers. He said that Cochran mentions several concerns she's had, and he has had the same concerns himself. He said this year's tenants have been good, but previous tenants were not, and Cochran had mentioned she had had to call the police frequently due to loud noises and parties, and even her renters have had to call the police because of problems. He said Cochran said the last family to live there was the Ricky's, who sold it to Sondag. Haverkamp stated that he has lived at 109 N. Van Buren for 18 years. He said 428 Jefferson has been a duplex that entire time, and that he has no problem with that. He said the issue is extra roomers, which means more people on the property. He said parking is a huge problem, and he gave a copy of the easement, from 1985, to the Board. The easement allows vehicles to cross over his property to access the garage at 428 Jefferson Street. He then explained the property lines, and his fence line. He stated that two years ago the tenants were a real problem. He said they were very loud, and police gave out 140 tickets that year for illegal parking in the area of question. He said parking is a big problem. He asked the Board to support the City's decision to allow the property to remain a duplex, but to deny the application for the additional roomers. He said the propedies are very dense in this neighborhood, and he has a problem with allowing it to be even denser. Cate stated that in regards to this property, what has never been established is the necessary parking, nor the provisional use of roomers. He then responded to questions from the Board regarding the fact that with or without roomers, there is still a parking problem as this property only has one parking space. Maurer said if this reverts back to a duplex without roomers, this property still has a parking problem. iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 11 Lowell Brandt of 824 N. Gilbert spoke in favor of the City's recommendation. He said he was in an older neighborhood and supported enforcement of the zoning ordinance. Having been on the Board in the past, he stated that he realizes the seriousness of issues such as this, and asks that they use objectivity in making their decision. H said he knows the Board does not rubber stamp the staff's recommendation. He said he realizes that this may be a precedent as many people may appeal the decisions of the City to enforce the law. He said there is no question about the application of the laws pertaining to roomers. He said he hopes that the Board does not determine that just because the ordinance has not been enforced in the past is a reason to allow a violation to continue. He said he works in the criminal justice system and he often hears people say it is not wrong as long as you don't get caught. Helen Burford of 604 Ronald Street expressed her support of the City's decision, stating that the North Side has seen many changes over the years, mainly due to the zoning changes. She said the neighborhood is fragile, and she feels that enforcing occupancies is becoming more and more important in order to have livable neighborhoods. She said higher densities may lead to nuisance problems. Jay Berry of 430 Church Street also spoke in support of the City staff's recommendation. His biggest concern is density issues, and he feels that enforcement of the zoning regulations are helping to bring this and the parking issues more into line. Nothing he has heard from the applicant has lead him to believe the appeal should be granted. Holland stated that in his opinion emotional comments from the public have no relevance in this hearing. He said the issue is whether or not the inspector made an error, not density or parking; and he asked that they keep that in mind, as the real issue is an interpretation of the zoning ordinance and the facts specific to this property. Holecek responded to Holland's statement, and stated that it is the opinion of the City Attorney's office that the public does have standing to participate in an appeal hearing. As far as relevance of emotional appeals, she agrees with Mr. Holland, that the Board is charged with applying the facts, and to determine whether or not the housing official has made an error in applying the law to the facts. She reiterated that Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 12 the issue is not whether or not this property will continue to be allowed as a duplex, but rather the issue is the roomer, and whether or not the roomer has been established as a legally nonconforming use. They have to look at whether the facts before them show that the housing official has made an error in determining that the roomer was never established as a legally nonconforming use. Miklo added that statements from an adjacent neighbor as well as from Holland himself indicate that a mother lived on one floor, and the son and daughter-in-law lived on the other floor as late as 1976, so even if it was a duplex in 1976 there is no evidence that roomers lived there prior to 1976. He also said roomers are a provisional use--provided parking to . In 1976 a duplex with roomers would have had to have four parking spaces. It is clear that there are not four parking spaces today, nor were there in 1976. Maurer asked if anyone knew when roomers did start living on this property. Miklo said as late as 1976 a family occupied this building. Holland responded that nobody really knows. Holland stated that the issue of roomers being a provisional use has to do with the regulation now, but in 1976 it wasn't an issue. Holecek stated that the determination of the housing official is that there has not been a legally established provisional use of the roomer for a number of reasons, one of which is the parking, and the absence of parking. She said she does not agree that once a duplex is established you automatically get roomers. Holland stated again that in 1976 it was not a provisional use issue. Miklo stated that the 1976 ordinance reads as follows: "two family dwellings provided, however, that no more than three persons not members of the family may room in each living unit, provided that off-street parking is provided. Miklo also said that once a nonconforming use is abandoned, even if it had been established legally as a duplex with roomers prior to 1976, it appears that in 1976 a family lived there without roomers, and they would have lost any nonconformity at that time. No one has brought forward evidence to indicate that roomers were ever legally established. From the records the building inspector relied on, roomers were never legally established. Alexander asked for clarification on Miklo's statement, and he replied that yes, the duplex would have been required to have four parking spaces in 1976, as well as 5,000 square feet of lot area. Holecek noted that since it doesn't appear during the continuum of time between '76 and today that a roomer was present, it seems incumbent that in order to say that the housing official has made an error, there needs Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 13 to be some showing that the roomer was indeed legally established and continued. She said there's the absence of parking, which we know today would be a nonconforming use, so there needs to be a continuation of that established use. Public Hearing Closed MOTION: Leigh moved that regarding an appeal submitted by Steve. L. Droll of a decision of the Senior Housing Inspector regarding the maximum occupancy or number of roomers permitted at 428 E. Jefferson Street in the Residential/Office RIO zone, to uphold the decision of the Senior Housing Inspector and to deny the appeal. Alexander seconded. Maurer asked a question of Holecek concerning the outcome if the Board were to overrule the Inspector's decision, and he wanted clarification on the parking issue. Holecek said if the Board upholds the decision of the Inspector, there would fewer occupants and __ less need for parking. Maurer asked what if they overturn the decision. Cate said they would still need to provide parking. Keitel asked that the motion be amended to include the clause: provided the appellant provides at least one additional parking space, then a roomer would be allowed in the unit with 3 bedrooms. Wright asked that they vote on what's on the floor. Holecek stated that the motion was to uphold the decision and deny the appeal. Keitel asked fer her clarification on how they could add this wording. She stated they could phrase the motion as: to approve the appeal, provided that the owner provide one additional parking space, off-street parking on the property, or a special exception for off-street parking in order to get the roomer. Cate next addressed parking requirements questions from the Board. He stated that there have to be 4 off-street parking spaces on the property in order to be in compliance. Keitel said unless there is a variance given for parking elsewhere. Alexander asked if it was in their purview to deal with the parking. Keitel said the Board could do what it wants. Holecek said the parking issue was not on the agenda. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 14 Holecek noted that the motion on the floor at present is: to uphold the decision of the housing official and deny the appeal. Alexander said she would vote in favor of the motion as stated. She said that as best as can be determined by the evidence before the Board, she feels the housing inspector made a correct determination on the roomer issue. Wright stated that he also will vote in favor of the motion. The history is certainly hazy, he stated, and he feels this has been a nonconforming use for some time. This would be an extension of a questionable non-conformity. Leigh said she will also vote in favor of the motion. She said she does not believe there is evidence that a roomer has been legally established, and she feels there is a responsibility of any property owner to use the property within the confines of the zoning law. Maurer stated that in looking at this situation, the roomer issue would never have come up if the parking wasn't a problem to begin with. Although roomers have existed for a long time the parking has not been provided, as it is not possible to provide more parking here. He will also vote in favor. Keitel stated that he is voting to not uphold the decision of the Senior Housing inspector, as he believes that the exhibits presented by Mr. Holland do establish precedence that when this property was expanded with the third bedroom in the basement, the intent was clear that it was for three unrelated individuals. He feels the use was established. He did state that the owner should try to make some effort to add parking. The appeal was denied and the decision of the Senior Housing Inspector was upheld on APL04- 00002, by a 4 to 1 vote. SPECIAL EXCEPTION EXC04-00002 Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Regina Catholic Education Center for a special exception to permit expansion of a religious institution, specifically a school, for property located in the Low-Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone at 2140 Rochester Avenue. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 15 Keitel stated that for the record, he is a Roman Catholic, but does not feel there is any conflict of interest under this from his standpoint. Miklo then presented the staff report on this application. He pointed out the existing school in photos, and explained the planned expansion project, which will consist of a 48' x 82' one-story addition to the current west wing of the facility. This one-story addition will contain 4 classrooms. In addition, the applicant wishes to construct a 100' x 175' two-story addition to the northwest corner of the building in an area currently occupied by a parking lot. The addition will consist of a kitchen, a multi-purpose room, restrooms, and classrooms. There are three requirements that religious institutions must meet in order to proceed with this project, including a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet, a setback requirement, and access to a collector or arterial street. Miklo stated that all three are being met, as well as the general standards that must be met. He highlighted Item d. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, stating there have been concerns about drainage in the general neighborhood west of this property. Staff is recommending that all drainage be directed to the north to Ralston Creek so that it does not add to the existing problem in this neighborhood. Before issuance of a building permit, the applicant must show how they will handle the drainage. Item e. asks that adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. As noted in the staff report, the City has received many complaints about the traffic in this area, and there have been some improvements made - a center turn lane in front of the school, and improvements to the traffic signal at First and Rochester. These changes have improved some of the traffic congestion, but there still are concerns about peak traffic times. Because of these continuing traffic concerns, staff has raised the issue of another entrance off of First Avenue. Miklo pointed out on the map where this area is, and questioned if there is an easement there that would allow another driveway to the school. He did follow up with the point that this exception may not create any increase in traffic, but in the future if there are applications for further expansions, these concerns would need to be addressed. At that time a traffic study should be conducted. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 16 He next addressed Item f., which deals with the application meeting the standards of the code, and stated that the parking issue is explained in detail in the staff report. Another concern is fire access. A fire access road is required unless the Fire Marshall approves an alternate fire safety plan. The Fire Marshal is working with Regina to design such an alternative plan, which may include a requirement that portions of the building be served with a fire suppression system. He added that this would be a second condition which would need to be met before building permits are approved. Staff is recommending this special exception for an expansion of a religious use in the Iow-density single- family zone at 2140 Rochester Avenue. They recommend approval subject to two conditions: 1) the Fire Marshal's approval of an emergency vehicle access drive or alternative fire safety plan; and 2) the site plan illustrate how storm water will be directed nodh to Ralston Creek. He reiterated that staff is not recommending that a driveway to First Avenue be required at this time, but they are emphasizing that any future additions to the school that would result in an increase in traffic should not be approved unless the applicant provides a traffic study that demonstrates how the additional traffic can be adequately accommodated, and that traffic study should address the feasibility of the First Avenue connection. Public Headnq Opened T. J. Brandt appeared before the Board to represent Regina Education Center. He stated he is the Chairman of the Building & Grounds Committee at Regina, and they are in the process of finalizing plans for a $3.1 million addition, classroom addition, cafeteria addition, to better serve.their student population. He then discussed the parking issues, and some of the history surrounding the building and grounds, as well as the parking. He detailed the changes to the driveway and parking areas, and the one-way traffic pattern that is hoped to alleviate some of the congestion. Brandt stated that the Fire Marshal said they could put in a fire hydrant to deal with the issue of fire protection, as well as put in sprinkler systems. In reference to the drainage problem he stated they are working on that and will be having another meeting soon. Maurer asked Brandt if there were any limitations on parking, to which Brandt replied there were no limitations. He then pointed out in the photos just how they will address the issue of parking, and showed Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 17 the fence line where the track is. Maurer then asked when they hoped to break ground, to which Brandt replied either late April or early May. Public Hearinq Closed Keitel commented about the detention pond, stating that at the time the track and soccer complex were built down behind Regina Education Center, he worked for a company that did all of the consulting work for the detention basin, the future parking lot drainage, and all of the drainage issues at that time. He said they did everything at that time with the expansion in mind, and had City approval on this with the master plan, and that the detention pond does have to stay the way it is in order to handle the drainage appropriately. With regard to an access road down along the track, they looked into this at the same time, and additional easements would be needed before anything could really be done. MOTION: Leigh made the motion to approve a special exception to permit the expansion of a religious institution in the RS-5 zone, conditioned upon the Fire Marshal's approval of an emergency vehicle access drive or alternative fire safety plan, and a site plan that will illustrate how storm water will be directed north to Ralston Creek. Alexander seconded. Maurer stated that he would vote in favor of the motion before the Board. He sees no reason to vote against this move forward. Alexander stated she would also vote in favor as it meets the conditions set forth for a religious institution, and that with the provision for the drainage being set forth, that she agrees with the exception. Keitel stated he would also vote in favor, and feels it will improve property values in the neighborhood. Wright stated he had nothing to add to the statements already made and said he will also vote in favor. Leigh stated she is agreeing with the previous comments as well. The motion passed with a vote of 5 to 0. OTHER None. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 18 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION None. ADJOURNMENT Maurer moved to adjourn; seconded by Wright. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 PM. Board Chairperson Board Secretary data on cityntlpcdlminu~eslboa/2OO41boaO3-10-O4doc Board or Commission: Board of Adjustment ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2004 MARCH 10, 2004 TERM NAME EXP. 1/14/04 2/11/04 3/10/04 4/14/04 5/12/04 6/9/04 7/14/04 8/11/04 Carol Alexander 1/1/08 NM X X Dennis Keitel l/1/05 NM X X Karen Leigh 1 / 1/07 NM X X Vincent Maurer 1/1/06 NM O X Michael Wright 1/1/09 NM X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting .... Not a Member MINUTES Preliminary E~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL APRIL 1, 2004 MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Benjamin Chair, Don Anciaux, Ann Freerks. Jerry Hansen. Elizabeth Koppes, Dean Shannon MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: None PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB04-00001 - Discussion of an item submitted by James Davis for a final plat of J JR Davis Addition, a 26.98 acre, 8-Lot commercial subdivision located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard, south of Highway 1 (45-day limitation period: April 16, 2004). Miklo stated that the design and zoning issues were worked out at the time of rezoning and preliminary plat approval. As stated, this is an 8-lot commercial subdivision. There is a new street named City View Drive being proposed as a loop street to provide access to the majority of the lots, with lot one having direct access to Mormon Trek Boulevard. Stormwater is being provided in the southern part of the subdivision, and there is also approval for a reconstruction of the wetlands in this area. This will allow the stormwater management plan to occur, and the reconstruction of the wetlands will actually be an improvement over what is currently there. There is a water main extension fee of $395 per acre, and a sanitary/sewer tap-on fee of $3,200 per acre. Legal papers are currently under review by the City attorney's office. The construction plans have been approved at this point, and the staff recommends approval of the final plat. Public Discussion: No one appeared. MOTION: Hansen moved, and Freerks seconded, to approve the final plat for SUB04-00001, an item submitted by James Davis for the JJR Davis Addition, a 26.98-acre, 8-Lot commercial subdivision located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard, south of Highway 1 (45-day limitation period: April 16, 2004). Hansen stated that DNR has looked over this and it complies with the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the District Plan, and that he feels it is good for the city. Freerks stated that she agrees, and it looks like the wetlands issues have been addressed. Motion carried to approve SUB04-00001 on a vote of 7-0. OTHER ITEMS: Discussion of PlanninFI & Zoning Commission By-Laws, Section 10, Conflict of Interest Miklo discussed the matter of conflict of interest, and stated that the staff is not recommending one way or the other. Members discussed how to word this change, and Behr stated that if members would look at Section 10, they could replace the word "room" with "panel of commissioners". "A member who believes that they have a conflict of interest on a matter about to come before the Commission shall state the reason for the conflict of interest, leave the panel of commissioners before the discussion begins, and return after the vote." He said in this way it limits the member's obligation. Members then discussed if this person could take part in the discussion as an audience member. Koppes stated she would like to change this a little, as this person who leaves the panel should not be able to then discuss the matter. Miklo suggested they add "shall leave the panel of commissioners before discussion begins, and shall not participate in the discussion". Brooks suggested the wording "shall refrain from participation in the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes April 1, 2004 Page 2 discussion". Miklo said they would put something together and then present it at the next meeting, something more specific. Chair stated that three things come to mind with this issue. One being that he feets that sitting on a Commission should not put members in a position where they can't be aware of items that concern them, specifically with the situation involving Self Supporting Municipal Tax District and himself. He said he would want to hear that conversation. Secondly, he stated that whatever this Commission decides, they still will not have the final say as the City Council will have the final say. Therefore he feels they need to speak their minds and express their opinions. Third, this can apply to all of them, and not just himself. He said there will be other situations that he personally will be involved in where he would recluse himself, just so he would not be a part of them. He does feel that he has the right as a citizen to make these choices. Hansen stated that he agrees with Chair that none of them should have to give up their rights as citizens just to sit on a volunteer commission. He said he looks at this as accountability to the public, and not being intimidated by another commissioner. Koppes said she would like to add that by not having a camera at their meetings, it does create a problem in having someone leave the room and not be able to hear the discussion of an item of interest to them. Brooks said he also supports this, and agrees with the others that by removing themselves from the discussion and the vote, that addresses the issue. He feels being in the room during the discussion is not a problem, and stated that this wasn't a problem in the past. Miklo stated this bylaw was adopted in 1997, and it was based on the feelings of the Commissioners at that time. He said the Commission should keep in mind that this isn't necessarily about commissioners intimidating other commissioners. A good reason for this bylaw is the appearance of a conflict, what the audience sees, regardless of how the Commission interacts. He said you don't want someone in the audience to perceive that there is an influence by a commissioner with a conflict still being in the room. He did reiterate that they are not making a recommendation to the Commission, but just pointing out some of the history behind this issue. Freerks said that she doesn't feel the Commissioners are giving up any rights as they can read the minutes, or send someone else to a meeting. She sees both sides to this. Shannon says he feels the same as the other commissioners. Anciaux said he agrees that if there were a camera present, it would help in these situations. He said he would support the change. Miklo stated that staff would prepare a draft amendment for the Commission to review at their next meeting. Chairperson Anciaux asked if there was any further business under "Other Items". Hansen asked if all of the Commission had seen the Press-Citizen editorial about the Visual Preference Survey. He said he wanted the Commission to advocate for things we believe in, and asked if the memo that we sent to Council shouldn't be released to the Press-Citizen. Hansen said he was disappointed with the tone of the editorial, and whether it is something that warrants a guest editorial. Koppes said sometimes the best way is to just sit it out. Collect the data, and show them what we've come up with because she thought that it'll just show that it's not radical, and that it is probably well formed. Freerks said she thought sometimes if you answer those things it just tends to prolong them. Koppes said the citizens who took the survey told her they were thankful that the City was asking their opinion. She said she knew quite a few people at Tuesday's Visual Preference Survey - people she had worked with and people she didn't expect to participate in something like this. Freerks said unfortunately there are people who are skimming the paper and don't understand the issue. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes April 1,2004 Page 3 Koppes said one of the persons at the survey has been a life-long citizen of Iowa City. They were very interested, and their comment was, "1 want Iowa City to be a great place to live - that's why I'm here." So they're looking at it as their obligation to contribute to their community. Chair said as far as responding, rebutting to the paper, he was cynical about it. Hansen said it's not swaying the paper's opinion that he is worried about. It's getting them to print an article that people can read. He personally thinks the City will get real value from this tool, this information. Based on the editorial, he questions whether the Press-Citizen wanted this government to be of and by the people. Chair said he received a lot of good feedback and acknowledgement, and people were grateful for his explanation when he wrote a guest editorial about the Peninsula and new urbanism. Hansen said he got the same feedback from the Sandhill article that they wrote, where a lot of people said "thanks for explaining what was going on." Brooks said being able to have some of the facts in terms of the demographics and how many people have taken it, and what some of the results are would reinforce the benefits of doing the survey. Hansen said the Press-Citizen is not challenging the results. Because the results aren't even in. They're challenging the wisdom of even asking the citizens their opinions, whereas he sees a lot of merit in it. Anciaux asked if there were any results in from the survey. Miklo said the only thing that was tallied was the first session of 40. The consultant found that the demographic was typically a middle-aged female. Miklo said we should within a few weeks have the results and report that shows the images that rated highly, and these are some of the reasons, and these are images that rated poorly, and these are some of the reasons, and these are images that rated neutrally, and these are some of the reasons, and these are some things that you can do, or that you can consider in your zoning ordinance if you want to pursue any of these avenues that are revealed by the survey. Miklo said the survey is just one tool in the whole process of writing the zoning ordinance. It's the opinion of the people who are willing to come to a public meeting, and you can take it or leave it, but he thinks it will be useful and will give us some direction. He said we won't be doing this code in a vacuum, which to an extent we have been so far. Miklo said something the editorial criticizes is that we spent approximately $9,000 to do the survey. He said there's more value than just this survey. This is a tool that the staff now knows how rouse, having worked with the consultant. We can use it, for example, if we're proposing public projects and we want to get some reaction to various designs, we can use it with a neighborhood group. If we're doing some improvements to a park, we can show them different options and get their reaction, so we think it's something we're getting our value out of, long after this particular project. Koppes said she thought the Visual Preference Survey was useful. She was grad she went and was happy to see the good turnout of citizens. CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 4, 2004, MEETING MINUTES Chairl~erson Anciaux asked for a motion to approve the minutes. MOTION: Koppe$ moved to accept the March 4, 2004, meeting minutes as submitted. Freerk$ seconded the motion. Motion carried ?-0. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 P.M. data on ~tyntlpcdlminuteslp&zi200412004 04-01-04p&z.doc Board or Commission: Iowa City Iowa Planning & Zoning Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2004 APRIL 1, 2004 TERM NAME EXP. 1/1/04 1/15/04 2/5/04 2/19/04 3/4/04 3/18/04 4/1/04 04/15/04 05/06/04 Don Anciaux 05/01/2006 NM X NM X X NM X Bob Brooks 05/01/2005 NM X NM X X NM X :Benjamin 05/01/2006 NM X NM X X NM X Chait Ann Freerks 05/01/2008 NM X NM O/E O/E NM X Jerry Hansen 05/01/2005 NM X NM X X NM X Elizabeth 05/01/2007 NM X NM X X NM X Koppes Dean Shannon 05/01/2008 NM X NM X X NM X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E-- Absent/Excused NM = No meeting .... Not a Member MINUTES Preliminary HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APRIL 22, 2004 - 7:00 P.M. EMMA HARVAT HALL - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Amy Smothers, Paul Sueppel MEMBERS EXCUSED: Michael Gunn, Tim Weitzel, Justine Zimmer MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Bywater, Linda Bywater, Karen Copp, Eric Freeze, Rixa Freeze, Mark Russo CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Historic Review: Certificate of appropriateness for 725 South Summit Street. McCafferty said that the owners of the house, Eric and Rixa Freeze, were present at the meeting. McCafferty said this is a Queen Anne style house that at some point was covered with asbestos siding. She said the wood siding was removed from every location except on the front porch, where some fish scales remain. McCafferty said the Freezes propose to remove the asbestos and replace the siding with wood or fiber cement board. She said they propose to do a simple, typical Queen Anne siding scheme with fish scales at the top, a band board below the fish scales, a band board below the upper windowsill, and the water table across the bottom. McCafferty said she feels that the proposal is appropriate. MOTION: Smothers moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of siding at 725 South Summit Street. McCallum seconded the motion, Ponto said this appears to be a straightforward project. Maharry said this would be consistent with other Queen Anne homes. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Certificate of appropriateness for 738 Dearborn Street. McCafferty said the primary aspect of this project would be the addition to the back of the house. She said this house is a stucco bungalow that would have a craftsman-style addition. McCafferty said the addition itself would be fiber cement board. She said the house is currently stuccoed with some asbestos shingles in the upper portion. McCafferty said all of the additions have also been done in an asbestos-type shingle that looks similar to the existing. McCafferty said that due to the difficulty in matching stucco, this proposal uses fiber cement board for the addition. She said she has seen some examples around town of this mixture of materials: stucco with an addition that had clapboard on it. McCafferty said clapboard would help distinguish this as a new addition as opposed to something old. McCafferty said a skylight is proposed for the addition. She said the windows will be Andersen wood or wood-clad windows. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 22, 2004 Page 2 McCafferty said the proposal includes removal of the chimney. She said the chimney is no longer used and has been (parged?). McCafferty said the applicant also proposes replacing an original window with a garden window, which would be a bay window that has glass on all sides. McCafferty said that based on the guidelines, the addition would be acceptable. She said the guidelines do state that prominent chimneys cannot be removed, as some chimneys are very much a part of the architectural character of the building. Smothers said that they are part of the skyline and part of the silhouette of the building. McCafferty said she did not feel the chimney contributes much to the character of the building. She said the garden window is a modern-type window, which the guidelines clearly disallow. Copp asked, if she were to put the garden window into the addition instead of the house, would it still be disallowed. Sueppel said it is a totally vinyl window. Copp said the kitchen is now very small, eight feet by eight feet, and the addition to the kitchen would be eight feet by ten feet. She said the fireplace was never used. MaCallum said they can often be exposed to become a nice architectural element in a newly remodeled kitchen. Smothers agreed that a chimney can become a focal point. Copp said the chimney is in the way of the cabinets, and even after the addition there will be a shortage of cabinet space. She said the chimney is not exposed brick; it is plastered over. Copp said she would also like to have more room upstairs, as the chimney goes through an upstairs closet. McCafferty said that for an alteration in a conservation district, vinyl or vinyl-clad windows may be used for the replacement of basement windows only. She stated that for an addition, modern window types such as casements may be used, provided they have overall proportions comparable to those found in an historic building, and they must be trimmed to match. Sueppel asked if the sill of the window would be wider like the other sills. He said the sills on the old windows have the two to three inch masonry sills, but the others don't have anything that looks like that. McCafferty said the upper windows are more of the typical window with wood construction window trim. She said it would not be appropriate to do the oversized sill, because it is trying to imitate masonry there, so they should match the upper windows. McCafferty pointed out that there is a bay window in the second floor in the dormer. Sueppel said he could understand not having a garden window if the house didn't already have a bay window, but he would not be opposed to one in this case. Smothers asked how far above the roof the skylight would project. Copp said it is a regular skylight that might project a couple of inches. She said it would be a Iow profile, fiat-style skylight. McCafferty said she also recommends having a friezeboard over the door, which would be a typical historic element, and also recommends using a little bit larger columns. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 738 Dearborn Street to allow for the addition, to allow for the demolition of the chimney, to disallow the garden window, and to require the friezeboard over the door and slightly larger columns, McCallum seconded the motion. Ponto asked if a setback is required for an addition. McCafferty said either a setback or some other means of distinguishing the addition is required. Ponto said that because it will be siding versus stucco, it will be obvious where the transition lies. Sueppel pointed out that the dormer is an addition to the original house. He said he would not want to be picky with a garden window when so much else has been altered on the house. Maharry said that when an addition is done, the attempt is made to try to make it consistent with what it would have looked like at the time of the historic district. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April22,2004 Page 3 The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Certificate of appropriateness for 614 Clark Street. McCafferty said the Commission looked at this property in August of 2002, when the owner of the house, Mark Russo, came before the Commission looking for guidance. McCafferty said the owners had requested approval of the concept of putting a garage in the basement and converting the south side entry into a sun porch. McCafferty said that since that time, the owner has decided not to do the garage but would like to proceed with the sun porch. She said that, given the limitations of the property and the desire to preserve the most significant aspects, the apse and the front entry, this seemed to be the best option to accommodate the owners' needs while still preserving the historic character. McCafferty said the owners now intend to eliminate the garage doors. She said the support system below will be a little bit different from the original drawings. McCafferty said the new proposal shows three brick piers across the front and square brick columns to match the existing brick columns and eave detail to match the existing eave detail. She said the owners propose to (something about retaining) next to the driveway so that the grade is more level across the front of the porch. Smothers said this is a good solution, and she believes it will be beautiful. McCafferty said the owners propose to use fiber cement board with a stucco finish similar to the existing. Russo said McCafferty was great to work with on this project. Russo added that he wants the house to look like the original structure. MOTION: Smothers moved to approve an application for a certificate of appropriateness for the plans for 614 Clark Street and to approve a demolition permit for the demolition of the existing stoop at 614 Clark Street. Sueppel seconded the motion. Maharry said this project fits within the guidelines and will be a nice addition. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Certificate of appropriateness for 621 South Summit Street. McCafferty said this house designed in the colonial revival style. She said the house was once moved 90 degrees on the lot. McCafferty said the sun porch and front portico were added after the original construction. She said the owners are proposing to enclose the sun porch located on the south side of the building. McCafferty said the owners propose to enclose the porch with windows of a style similar to those of the existing house so they can use it as a four-season sun room. McCafferty said that the recently adopted guidelines disallow enclosing front porches or porches that are highly visible from the street with permanent windows and/or walls. She pointed out, however, that the Secretary of the Interior Standards seem to state that disallowing permanent windows, when dealing with a sun porch, may be too onerous. McCafferty said the guidelines were written right after looking at the 520 Grant Street application, and in the future, the Commission may want to allow a little more flexibility, at least when the sun porch is on the side of the house. McCafferty referred to several photographs showing a similar style porch on a similar style structure. She said the President's House at The University of rowa, in particular, is a good example. McCafferty said she made some suggestions to the owners. Linda Bywater said she liked McCafferty's proposal . She said she would like to have one lower panel with three windows across, for the street- facing facade, as on the President's home. McCafferty said one needs to be careful not to make this look too enclosed. She said separate panels, as opposed to just one, makes it look more panelized, like it could have been at one time had there ever been removable windows. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 22, 2004 Page 4 Maharry asked about the floor plan and how the walls would interact with the columns. He said the final edge of the column equals the final edge of the wall in the design. McCafferty said the screens are currently behind the columns. Maharry asked about the walls being set back from the columns. Linda Bywater said that the brick goes out to the edge so that she would want to leave the brick and come back some with the walls, a little more forward so that the walls would be set back about one-third. Maharry asked about the application of the wall to the original wall of the house. Linda Bywater responded that there is just enough room. She said she understood that Maharry wants the wall back so that the columns stand out. Smothers said she feels it would balance the entrance to have three windows. She said it would mirror the door and the two sidelights. Linda Bywater asked for suggestions for the west side of the porch. McCafferty said she feels the proposal for two French doors would result in two very narrow doors and it would be awkward to use. Smothers added that French doors would have been installed in a much earlier period than that of this house. Linda Bywater said the doors from the living room on to the porch are almost the same size. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for enclosure of a screen porch at 62'1 South Summit Street subject to the revision in plans for three windows with one panel beneath for the east elevation and as staff recommends for the west elevation. McCallum seconded the motion. McCallum said he feels the single door would look better on the west elevation. Smothers said she likes the symmetry of the corner revival with the three windows (and the three openings?). MINUTES: APRIL 8, 2004: Maharry said that on the fourth page, paragraph four, the last sentence should be changed to, "Sueppel said he agrees with the historic findings." He stated that on page four, in the second paragraph, the last sentence should be revised to, "...with the research in front of the Commission that found this to be historic." Ponto said that on page three, the motion should be corrected to read, "...approvar to the State Historical Society of the proposed Ronalds Street expansion of the Brown Street Historic District National Register nomination." Smothers said that the stated reasons for her abstentions from voting on the three National Register nominations were inaccurate. She said she did review the nominations but just found that there were footnotes and some other things missing. Smothers said she just did not agree or accept voting on the nominations as final drafts, without corrections being made first. She said the wording should be changed in all three cases to, "Smothers said she did not realize this was the final draft and therefore abstained from voting." McCafferty said she should have given the nominations to the Commission for proofing at an eaHier stage. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the minutes of the April 8, 2004 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, as amended. Smothers seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS: Maharry referred to the photographs for the nominated properties for the various categories: nine residential properties nominated for paint; three properties nominated for additions; five properties nominated for rehabilitation; and one prope~y each for new construction, institutional, stewardship, and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 22, 2004 Page 5 commercial paint and exterior finishes. McCafferty also offered three additional nominations for (???). The consensus of the Commission was to present awards to the 24 nominated properties. OTHER: McCafferty stated that the training with Kerry McGrath previously scheduled for before the next regular meeting would have to be rescheduled. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte data on dtynt/pcd/rninute$/hpc/2004/hpc04-22-04 doc Board or Commission: Historic Preservation Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2004 April 22, 2004 TERM NAME EXP. 1/8/04 1/22/04 2/12/04 2/;/6/04 3/11/04 4/8/04 4/22/04 5/13/04 5/27/04 6/10/04 Amy Smothers 3/29/05 NM NM X O/E X X X James Enloe 3/29/06 NM NM O/E X X X O Michael Gunn 3/29/07 NM NM O/E O/E X O/E O/E Michael Maharry 3/29/05 NM NM X X X X X Mark McCallum 3/29/06 NM NM X X X X X James Ponto 3/29/07 NM NM X X X X X Paul Sueppel 3/29/06 NM NM OrE O/E X X X Tim Weitzel 3/29/05 NM NM X X X X O/E Justine Zirruner 3/29/07 .............. O/E O/E KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting