The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-08-03 Info Packet I;; 1 --= -~- f~Wi!:'"Y. -.;;::.... _....l\f'i.- .... ~ ~ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET August 3, 2006 MISCELLANEOUS IP1 Tentative City Council Meetings and Work Session Agendas IP2 Letter from Mayor Wilburn to Iowa State Senators and Representatives: Legislative priorities IP3 Memorandum from the Assistant City Attorney: Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) Site at the Southeast corner of Burlington and Van Buren streets IP4 Memorandum from the City Clerk: Revised Meeting Schedule (September 2006-January 2007) IPS Memorandum from the City Attorney: Absence IP6 Memorandum from the Assistant Director of PCD: Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue IP7 Memorandum from JCCOG Solid Waste Management Planner: Update on mobile household hazardous waste collection unit IPS Memorandum from JCCOG Solid Waste Management Planner: Update on the special events beverage container recycling program and the permanent downtown beverage container recycling program IP9 Building Permit Information July 2006 IP10 Email from Douglas Elliott: Johnson/Linn County Public Leadership Group meeting August 24, 2006 PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES IP11 Human Rights Commission: July 25, 2006 IP12 Economic Development Committee: July 18, 2006 IP13 Planning and Zoning Commission: July 20,2006 IP14 Housing and Community Development Commission: July 20, 2006 I: 1 --= -~ ~~~i!!:'r -=... _...~ -~ CITY OF IOWA CITY City Council Meeting Schedule and Work Session Agendas w August3,200S www.icgov.org TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS I . MONDAY, AUGUST 21 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session . TUESDAY, AUGUST 22 7:00p Special Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5 5:00p Special Council Work Session 7:00p Formal Council Meeting . MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18 6:30p Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19 7:00p Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall . MONDAY, OCTOBER 2 6:30p Council Work Session - Budget Priorities Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3 7:00p Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall . WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4 4:30p Tentative Joint Meeting (School District) Ie School District . MONDAY, OCTOBER 16 6:30p Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY,OCTOBER17 7:00p Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall . MONDAY, OCTOBER 30 6:30p Special Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall . MONDAY, NOVEMBER 6 6:30p Special Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7 Election Day - No Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall . MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13 6:30p Special Council Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall . TUESDAY,NOVEMBER14 7:00p Special Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall rcO/Pt ~~ I - j -....= -.... J.~---'" ~~~~'"!. -..;;:::.... -ga." ..... &II CITY OF IOWA CITY SAME LETTER SENT TO: The Honorable Robert Dvorsky The Honorable Joe Bolkcom The Honorable Jim Hahn The Honorable David Jacoby The Honorable Jeff Kaufmann The Honorable Vicky Lensing The Honorable Mary Mascher 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org August 3, 2006 Dear The City Council ofIowa City would like to meet with legislators prior to the start ofthe session to identify legislative priorities for the upcoming session. Council would like to suggest: ~ Monday, October 30, late afternoon/evening Please contact City Clerk Marian Karr (marian-karr@iowa-city.org or 356-5041) to confirm this date OR suggest another day and time. The meeting will take place in Harvat Hall of City Hall, 410 East Washington Street. Council will be discussing agenda items at an upcoming work session, and an agenda prepared for the joint meeting based upon that discussion. I will forward an agenda to you with confirmation in the near future. Thank you for setting aside time to meet with us and we look forward to a short productive meeting. Sincerely, Ross Wilburn Mayor I ~ 1 -- = -~... f~W~~ -..;:.... _IIIII~ ....... ... CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM ~ Date: To: August 2, 2006 City Council Eric Goers, Asst. City Attorney L """' Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) Site at the Southeast corner of Burlington and Van Buren streets From: Re: This memo is provided to update Council regarding the above-referenced site. The FMGP site was significant in its impact on the Burlington street bridge replacement project over Ralston Creek. That project has since been successfully completed. However, because Mid American Energy Company recently completed their Feasibility Study Report, the FMGP site again requires the City's attention. Over the last several months I have been in contact with Dana Skelley of EPA, and met with Kevin Armstrong, who was the consultant responsible for the Feasibility Study Report. The City received the revised Feasibility Study Report in June ofthis year. It is substantial in size and content. Contained in the Report was an Environmental Covenant, drafted by Mid American, which would make the City responsible for the maintenance of the tile lining of the creek adjacent to the FMGP site, as well as requiring the development of a program for the lining's routine maintenance and inspection, as well as the reporting of results to EPA. EPA wished to know the City's likely response to the environmental covenant. Given the age and condition of the tile lining (approximately 70 years old) and the site contamination resulting from no fault of the City, staff reported back to EPA that we saw no reason why this burden should be shifted from Mid American, the Potentially Responsible Party (PRP), to the City taxpayers. EPA expected that response, but was pleased City staff was amenable to several other considerations related to the prevention of disturbances to the creek bed. Last week we received a Fact Sheet and Superfund Program Proposed Plan, both from EPA. I have attached a copy of each for your review. EP A has expressed its preference for one of the seven remediation alternatives delineated in the Feasibility Study Report, and has instituted a 30-day public comment period from July 28, 2006 to August 27, 2006. Staff intends to review the plan and submit written comments if appropriate. EPA has scheduled a public meeting for 7:00 p.m. on August 9, 2006 at the Iowa City Public Library, Meeting Room A. Following the public comment period EPA will issue a Record of Decision (ROD) setting the remediation alternative. Following the ROD, EPA will engage Mid American and Iowa Illinois Manor (the current property owner) in plans for implementation of the remediation alternative. Because of the effect on City property, the City would also be engaged in this process, in the hopes all parties can agree to a Consent Decree assigning remediation responsibilities. Any final Consent Decree to which the City is a party would require Council approval. We have enjoyed good communications with EPA, and will continue to discuss the site's remediation. . Should you have any questions or concerns regarding the site, or the procedure moving forward, please do not hesitate to contact myself or Rick Fosse. cc: Stephen Atkins, City Manager Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Marian Karr, City Clerk Rick Fosse, Public Works Director ..vue.., t~;~' ~\~~O S7"JI)'" -s ~\S> i ~ t, s ~ m ~'wa(!l ~ "t' ~. rt ~l. PROI~O"" ,~-...,-"'...., , ~, ~,- ,t ,'i <.l(;-::~:_;' ((:-^~:' "; ;"~:~' -;r-';'~>:~ r.-''';-; , , ',-, ' -: ~giOn 1]i"c~:~2~ :61t.11.'...~ct Sheet Kansas I ' J L. Missouri . Nebraska.---------'-----.---.. July 2006 EPA ANNOUNCES PROPOSED PLAN AND PUBLIC MEETING Iowa City Former Manufactured Gas Plant Superfund Site Iowa City, Iowa INTRODUCTION The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is releasing a Proposed Plan for a remedial action to address contaminated soils and ground water at the Iowa City Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) Superfund Site in Iowa City, Iowa. The Proposed Plan recommends actions that will protect human health by eliminating exposure to contaminated soils and ground water, and potential future exposure to contamination in indoor air and sediment in Ralston Creek. EPA is asking for your <;omments on the Proposed Plan. Although EPA, in consultation with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), is recommending an action to address the contamination, a final decision will not be made until EPA reviews comments from the public. A 30-day public comment period will run from July 28,2006 until August 27,2006. A public meeting will be held Wednesday, August 9, 2006, starting at 7:00 p.m. at the Iowa City Public Library. The community is invited to attend and present comments at the meeting. Written comments will be accepted until August 27, 2006. After all comments are evaluated, EPA will make a decision, which will be published in a Recordof Decision (ROD). MARK YOUR CALENDAR EPA and IDNR will hold a public meeting to give the community the opportunity to make public comments on the Proposed Plan for the Iowa City FMGP Superfund Site. The meeting will be held August 9, 2006, starting at 7:00 p.m. at the Iowa City Public Library, Meeting Room A, 123 S. Linn Street, Iowa City, Iowa. Written comments must be postmarked no later than August 27, 2006, and should be 'sent to: Beckie Himes Community Involvement Coordinator U.S. EPA 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, KS 66101 Himes.beckie(Q)eoa.oov The ROD will also include a summary of EPA's responses to the comments received during the public comment period. THE CONTAMINANTS Coal tar contaminants, sych as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); volatile organic compounds (YOCs), including benzene and toluene; and cyanide have been identified in samples taken both onsite and oftsite: ',. ALTERNATIVES FOR REMEDIATION EPA's recommendation includes actions to prevent exposure to the contaminated soils and ground water, and prevent future air and sediment contamination. The alternatives for remediation include: Alternative 1 - No Action . To comply with guidance, no action is required to be considered as an alternative. 'The title defines this alternative: no action would be taken to address the contamination at the site. Alternative 2 -Institutional Controls (Ies) . Local ordinances and state rules governing ground water would be enhanced by environmental covenants to . restrict land use at the site and in Ralston Creek. Indoor air and sediment monitoring would be conducted. Alternative 3 - ICs and Ground Water Monitoring . All of the actions in Alternative 2 with the addition of ground water monitoring. Alternative 4 -ICs and Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) . All of the actions in Alternative 3 but the ground water monitoring would include analysis to ensure that bioremediation of ground water is occurring. Alternative 5 - ICs with Biosparging . All of the actions in Alternative 3. a Biosparging in the shallowest ground water aquifer to enhance removal of contamination. Alternative 6 - ICs with Ground Water Extraction and Treatment a All of the actions of Alternative 3. . Extraction and treatment of ground water. Altemative 7 -ICs and LNAPL Recovery with MNA . All of the actions of Alternative 4. . Removal and off site disposal of light nonaqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) contamination from ground water. PREFERRED AL TERNA riVE EPA's preferred alternative is Alternative 7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Proposed Plan and other related documents provide details of the nature and extent of contamination and the work that has been completed at the site. These documents are part of the Administrative Record, available during regular business hours at the following locations: Iowa City Public Library 123 S. Linn Street Iowa City, Iowa EPA Re~on 7 901 N. 5. Street Kansas City, Kansas If you have questions or need additional information, please contact: Beckie Himes Community Involvement Coordinator EPA Region 7 901 North 5th Street Kansas City, Kansas 66,101 913-551-7003 Toll-free 1-800-223-0425 E-mail: himes.beckieC1ileoa.aov 2 .;f.D "'~~ i. ft l \~~ ""'''LPflf(Jf.f,,;I' k~_ d! : LW\d UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. REGION VII 901 NORTH 5TH STREET KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66101 !'( 'J JUL 2 7 2006 JUL 3 1 2006 - --... ~._~-~ ~ Eric Goers Assistant City Attorney City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mr. Goers: Enclosed is a copy of the Proposed Plan for the Iowa City Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) Superfund Site. The public comment period for this Proposed Plan begins on July 28, 2006, and ends on August 27, 2006. A public meeting is scheduled for August 9, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in Room A at the Iowa City Public Library. Sincerely, Diana 1. ngeman Remedial Project Iowa/Nebraska Branch Superfund Division Enclosure RECYCLE~ _~IImUI~ SUPERFUND PROGRAM U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED PLAN PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 7 lOW A CITY FORMER MANUFACTURED GAS PLANT IOWA CITY, IOWA JULY 2006 EPA ANNOUNCES PROPOSED PLAN Dates to remember: This Proposed Plan identifies the Preferred MARK YOUR CALENDAR Alternative for addressing contamination at the Iowa City Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Site (Site) andprovides the rationale for this July 28 - August 27, 2006 The v.s. EP A will accept written comments on the preference. In addition this Proposed Plan includes Proposed Plan during the public comment period. summaries of other alternatives evaluated for use at this Site. This document is issued by the U.S. PUBLIC MEETING: Environmental Protection Agency (BPA), the lead August 9, 2006 agency for the Site, and the Iowa Department of The V.S. EPA will hold a public meeting to explain the Proposed Plan and all of the alternatives presented in Natural Resources (IDNR) the support agency. The the Feasibility Study. Oral and written comments will EP A, in consultation with the lDNR, will select a also be accepted at the meeting. The meeting will be remedy for thc:l Site after reviewing and considering held at the Iowa City Public Libraty at 7:00 p.m. all information submitted during the 30-day public For more information, see the Administrative comment period. The EP A, in consultation with the Record file at the following locations: IDNR, may modify the Preferred Alternative or select another response action presented in this Iowa City Public Libraty U.S. EPA Records Center Proposed Plan based on new information or public 123 South Linn Street Region 7 comments. Therefore, the public is encouraged to Iowa City, IA 52240 901 N. 5th St. review and COIn~ent on all the alternatives Kansas City, KS 66101 presented in the Proposed Plan. The, EP A is issuing this Proposed Plan as (FS) reports and other documents contained in the part of its public participation responsibilities under Administrative Record file for this Site. The EP A Section 300.430(f)(2) of the National Oil and . and the IDNRencourage the public to review these Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan documents to gain a more comprehensive (NCP). This Proposed Plan summarizes understanding ofthe Site and Superfund activities information that can be found in greater detail in the that have been conducted at the Site. Remedial Investigation (RI) and Feasibility Study , The Superfund Remedial Process I Pre-Remedial I . Remedial Investigation! .1 Public I ~ Remedial ~ Remedial Process Feasibility Study (RIlFS) )I Comment I Design Action v nv Uv v Proposed Plan Record of Decision (ROD) I , SITE BACKGROUND Site Location The Site is located east of downtown Iowa City at 505 East Burlington Street in a mixed COmillercial and residential area. The Iowa- Illinois Manor apartment building currently occupies the Site. Burlington Street runs along the northern boundary and VanBuren Street runs along the western boundary: Ralston Creek runs north to south adjacent to Van Buren Street. A map of the Site, including the location of monitoring wells, is shown in Figure 1. Site History Manufactured coal gas was produced at the Site beginning in approximately 1857 until approximately 1937 when natural gas became available in the area. The manufactured gas plant (MGP) operated under several names throughout its years of operation. For the majority of the years it was operated by Tri-City Railway and Light Company, a subsidiary of United Light and Power Company. In the early 1940s Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company (IIGE) purchased Tri-City Railway and Light Company. Following closure of the MGP operations, the Site was utilized by I1GE as a service facility until approximately 1971. The MGP site property is currently occupied by the Iowa-Illinois Manor apartment building, which contains 54 units, occupied by approximately 150 residents. The residents generally are students of the University of Iowa. The Iowa-Illinois Manor apartments were constructed by the Iowa-Illinois Manor Partnership (the Manor Partnership) in 1983. The Manor Partnership continues to own and operate the apartments. The location of Ralston Creek was changed during the time the MGP operated. The creek was straightened and tile lined between 1948 and 1970 placing it in its current location. The portion of Ralston Creek adjacent to the Site is currently tile lined and heavily vegetated. In 1983, during the design and construction of the apartment building, an investigation was conducted at the Site. During this investigation, it was determined that fill material containing what was believed to be coal gas plant refuse was present in the subsurface. As a result of the material encountered in the subsurface and vapors encountered during the investigation, the design of the foundation of the apartment building was modified to include a liner under a portion of the building and a passive venting system in the crawl space. The EP A conducted investigations at the Site and issued an Expanded Site Investigation Report in 1998 in which it was determined further investigation was warranted due to the presence of elevated levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) specifically benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and total xylenes (BTEX); polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PARs); cyanide; arsenic; and lead. In March 1999 the EPA, MidAmerican Energy Company-a successor to IIGE-and the Manor Partnership entered into an Administrative Order on Consent (AOe) for site characterization activities. From October 1999 through March 2004 MidAmerican conducted this investigative work. The [mal Site Characterization Report, dated August 2003, including the baseline risk assessment and all amendments to the report constitute the final Remedial Investigation Report for the Site. In December 2003 the EP A determined that a time-critical removal action was necessary to remove contamination associated with the MOP along the northern edge of the Site. This work was necessary to minimize exposure to city and utility workers doing construction work in the area, and to address an underground tank in the area. MidAmerican and the Manor Partnership entered into an AOC for this work. In January 2004 MidAmerican removed the contents of the underground tank, filled it with inert material,and recovered groundwater and light nonaqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) from two monitoring wells. In August 2004 MidAmerican and the Manor Partnership entered into a third AOC with the EP A for a feasibility study. MidAmerican conducted some additional limited field investigations, completed a treatability study 2 involving the removal of LNAPL, and completed a assessments were conducted. Some of the Feasibility Study Report dated June 2006. conclusions were as follows: Summary of Site Characteristics Subsurface soil at the Site is contaminated with . Site Geologv and Hvdrogeologv: The uppermost BTEX and P AHs. layer of the Site generally consists of fill materials . Soil contamination at the surface is very limited such as coal fines, cinders, brick, concrete, sand, and the amount of surface soil exposed at the and gravel. Directly beneath the fill, to the top of Site is minimal. the bedrock surface, are native deposits consisting . Groundwater contamination exists at the water of silt, sand, and clay. The surface of the limestone table, at the bedrock surface, and extends at bedrock surface was encountered as shallow as a least 1800 feet downgradient from the Site in depth of20.5 feet and as deep as 79.5 feet. The the bedrock. Elevated levels ofBTEX, PARs, bedrock monitoring wells depths ranged from 66 to cyanide, and arsenic have been detected in 196 feet below the ground surface. The bedrock groundwater. Also, LNAPLs and dense slopes southwesterly, similar to the Ralston Creek nonaqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs) were channel on the southwest portion of the Site, and found in some wells. has a northwesterly slope at the northern margin of . The Site does not appear to have a significant the Site. In places, the bedrock was found to be impact on the surface water in Ralston Creek. fractured with large voids in the rock. At two . The sediment in Ralston Creek has elevated locations cavities of approximately five and nine levels of P AHs inunediately adjacent to and feet were encountered. downgradient of the Site. Sources other than The unconsolidated aquifer at the Site has the Site are also contributing to the PARs found in the sediment. been divided into two units, the water table zone . Samples taken of air in the apartment building and the bedrock surface zone, for purposes of and the crawl space beneath do not have site- evaluation of the Site. The water table was related contaminants at levels that would pose a generally encountered at a depth of 10 to 20 feet health risk to residents. below the ground surface. The groundwater flow . The contaminated groundwater is not direction at the water table is westerly on the Site. considered to be a principal threat for the Site The groundwater flow at the bedrock surface is as defmed below. However, the LNAPLs and consistently southwesterly at the Site. Groundwater DNAPLs found in the groundwater may be flow direction in the bedrock aquifer is generally considered source material. expected to be west toward the Iowa River. This flow direction can be affected by pumping of wells in the area. WHAT IS A PRINGPAL THREAT? Surface Water Hvdrology: Ralston Creek is a . . The NCP establishes an expectation that EP A will use treatment to perennial stream with highly variable flow that runs address the principal threats posed by a site wherever practicable (NCP Section 300.430(a)(I)(iii)(A)). The principal threat concept is southwesterly on the western edge of the Site to the applied to the ,characterization of source materials at a Superfund site. A source matC4ial is material that includes or contains hazardous Iowa River. The confluence of Ralston Creek with substances, pollutants, or contaminants that act as a reservoir for the Iowa River is approximately one mile south of migration of contamination to groundwater, surface water or air, or acts as a source for direct exposure. Contaminated groundwater the Site. generally is not considered to be a source material; however, Non~ Aqueous Phase Liquids (NAPLs) in groundwater may be viewed as Conclusions of the Remedial Investigation: Site source material. characterization activities were conducted in several phases and included sampling and analyses of SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE ACTION surface and subsurface soil, groundwater, air, surface water, and sediment. The groundwater This action will be the final action for the contamination plume was delineated and human health and screening level ecological risk Site. The scope of the actions to be taken at this Site will prevent unacceptable exposures to air in 3 the apartment building, soil, groundwater, and further contributions of contamination to the sediment of Ralston Creek from the Site. SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS As part of the RI, a baseline risk assessment was conducted to determine the current and future effects of site contaminants on human health and the environment. Based upon the results of the baseline risk assessment, it is the lead agency's current judgment that the Preferred Alternative identified in this Proposed Plan or one of the other measures considered is necessary to protect public health or welfare or the environment from actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances into the environment. WHAT IS RISK AND HOW IS rr CALCULATED? A Superfund human health risk assessment estimates the baseline risk. This is an estimate of the likelihood of health problems occurring ifoo cleanup action were taken at a site. To estimate the risk, the process undertakes four steps: Step 1: Analyze Contamination Step 2: Estimate Exposure Step 3: Assess Potential Health Dangers Step 4: Characterize Site Risks In Step I, comparisons are made between site-specific concentrations and health~based standards to dctcnnjne which contaminants are most likely to pose the greatest threat to human health. In Step 2, different ways people might be exposed to contaminants are identified. Concentrations, frequency, and duration of exposure are used to calculate the reasonable maximum exposure (RME) which I - portrays the highest level of exposure that could reasonably be expected to occur. In Step 3, information from Step 2 is combined with toxicity information for each chemical to assess potential health risks. The EP A considers two types of risk: cancer and noncancer. Thp likelihood of any kind of cancer resulting from a site is generally expressed as an upper bound probability; for example, a J in 10.000 chanctJ. In other words; for every 10,000 people exposed, one extra cancer may occur as a result. For noncancer effects, a hazard index is calculated. _ The key concept here is that a hazard, index less than one predicts no noncancer effects. In Step 4, the results of the three previous steps are combined, evaluated, and summarized into a total site risk; The EP A then determines if the site risks requires action to prevent exposures to the contaminants. The following two subsections - Human Health Risks and Ecological Risks - summarize the results of the baseline risk assessment process. Human Health Risks Step 1: Analyze Contamination The following contaminants pose the greatest potential threat to human health at the Site and are contaminants of concern. PAHs: There are 16 PAH compounds that are routinely analyzed for at MGP sites. Seven of these compounds (benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b )f1uoranthene, benzo(k)f1uoranthene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(I,2,3- c,d)pyrene) are classified by the EPA as probable human carcinogens. Benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) and dibenz(a,h)anthracene are considered to have the highest level of carcinogenicity of the P AHs. BaP is the only P AH to have an established drinking water standard. The drinking water standard for BaP is 0.2 micrograms per liter (~g/L). Naphthalene is a noncarcinogenic P AH that poses a relatively high level of nonccancer risk to humans through inhalation of the vapors. A drinking water standard does not exist for naphthalene. Benzene: Benzene is a VOC commonly found at MGP and petroleum sites. Exposure to this compound has been associated with health effects in humans, including drowsiness/dizziness, convulsions, skin irritations, and blood conditions. Benzene is considered a known human carcinogen by the EP A. The drinking water standard is 5 ~gIL. Cyanides: Cyanides are nonmetal inorganic compounds that can combine with organics to form organocyanide compounds and with metals to form metal-cyanide compounds. Many cyanides are soluble in water. The drinking water standard for cyanide is 200 ~g/L. Step 2: Estimate Exposures The potential human receptors that were evaluated in the baseline risk assessment were adult and child residents, an apartment maintenance supervisor, an apartment groundskeeper, underground utility workers, construction workers, and Ralston Creek cleanup volunteers (for the cleanup of Ralston Creek, which is held annually), and children playing in the creek. These receptors were evaluated for potential exposure pathways 4 including incidental ingestion of soil, dermal (skin) contact with soil, inhalation of dust from the soil and VOCs from soil, ingestion of groundwater, dermal contact with groundwater, inhalation of VOCs in groundwater due to household water uses (i.e., showering and cooking), and inhalation of volatile compounds migrating from subsurface soil and groundwater into air in the apartment building. The exposures that were considered include the current situation at the Site and also exposures that might reasonably be predicted based upon expected or logical future land use assumptions. Steps 3 and 4: Assess and Characterize Risk There are no current exposures to the . groundwater contaminants since no one is using water from the plume. Access to surface soil is very limited at the Site and the levels of contamination present are not at unacceptable levels. The levels of contamination in subsurface soil would present only a negligible level of risk to a utility worker. Contamination in subsurface soil and groundwater could possibly volatilize and present a risk of air exposure to the residents of the apartment building but that is not currently happening. This is likely due to the previous actions that have been taken including a passive venting system in the building crawlspace and a liner under part of the building, as well as the relatively low volatility of some of the contaminants. The surface water and sediment of Ralston Creek do not currently pose any unacceptable levels of risk to people, including children, wading or playing in the creek. The tile lining of the creek banks and creek bed in the area adjacent to the Site may limit contaminants from reaching the water or sediment in the creek. However, it is possible that conditions or uses of these areas could change in the future and people could be exposed to unacceptable levels of risk from the Site. If a water well were to be installed in the plume people could drink or bathe in contaminated water. The cancer risks for adults and children using contaminated water in the future were calculated to be in the 10'2 or lout of 100 range. The noncancer risks, expressed as a health index (HI), were 3,000 to 7,100. An HI of one or greater represents an unacceptable level of noncancer risk. Exposure to contaminated soil could occur in the future if the use of the property were to change and new construction were to take place at the Site. The HI for a construction worker was 2.8. It was not determined what the risks might be for future uses of the Site if the current apartment building was to have a different use or the building demolished and the property used in some other manner. It was decided that it was too speculative to attempt to determine what alternative uses might occur in the future for that property other than its continued use as an apartment building. Air in the apartment building could become contaminated if the venting and lining systems that are in place in the apartment building failed in some manner. The surface water or sediment in Ralston Creek could become contaminated at unacceptable levels in the future if the tile lining were removed or some other mechanism allowed contamination from Site soils or groundwater to enter the creek. Ecological Risks A screening ecological risk assessment and a qualitative macro invertebrate assessment were conducted for Ralston Creek. The conclusions were that (1) the significant ecological resource to be protected in Ralston Creek is the fishery located at the confluence of the creek and the Iowa River and (2) contamination from the Site is notreaching that location. Even though there are elevated levels of contaminants from the Site in creek sediments immediately adjacent to the Site, currently it is not presenting any significant negative impact on the inhabitants of the creek. The same contaminants that might enter the creek from the Site are also present from other sources both upstream and downstream of the Site. These other sources include storm sewers that empty into Ralston Creek and surface drainage from streets, driveways, and parking lots that drain into the creek. As was the case with human health risks, it is possible that the surface water or sediment in Ralston Creek could become contaminated at 5 unacceptable ecological levels in the future if the tile lining were removed or some other mechanism allowed contamination from Site soils or groundwater to enter the creek. REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) provide a general description of what the actions taken at a site are expected to accomplish. RAOs are most often general objectives such as prevention of exposure to contaminants, prevention of contaminant migration, or restoration of groundwater to drinking water quality. The RAOs for this Site are as follows: . Prevent and/or reduce human exposure to groundwater containing contaminants of concern that exceed applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) or health- based levels. . Prevent and/or reduce future soil exposure risks to acceptable levels by maintaining the existing land use. The future soil RAO may be reevaluated if the building is removed or its use changed. . Prevent and/or reduce future human exposure to indoor air containing contaminants of concern that exceed health-based levels. . Maintain the existing ecological steady state and prevent and/or reduce future unacceptable risks to human health and the environment. Action levels are the concentrations of the contaminants of concern in the affected media that must not be exceeded to ensure that the RAOs will be met. These levels were initially developed, for this Site, during the FS. The processes for doing so for each media are described below. The action levels for groundwater were determined based upon the following hierarchy: . The maximum contaminant level (MCL) pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act for the contaminant when an MCL is available. . For contaminants without an MCL, the action level was calculated based on an excess lifetime cancer risk of 1 x 10-6 and/or a target hazard quotient of I. . When the calculated risk-based action level is below the laboratory practical quantitation limit (PQL), the PQL is used as the action level, provided it falls within the acceptable risk range. The action levels for groundwater at the Site, and the rationale for their selection, are listed in Table I, attached. There are no soil action levels as surface soil at the Site does not pose an unacceptable risk. Prevention of future subsurface soil exposure for construction workers will be addressed through institutional controls. Action levels for indoor air were calculated for benzene and naphthalene based on an excess cancer risk of I x 10-6 and/or a target hazard quotient of 1. The action level for benzene is 0.8 microgram per cubic meter (~g/m3) and the action level for naphthalene is J.3 ~g/m3. Sediment samples from Ralston Creek will be compared against consensus-based probable effects concentrations (PECs) ofPAHs for freshwater ecosystems as indicators of possible new contribution of contaminants from the Site into the creek. These are contaminant concentrations that have been developed for specific compounds above which the inhabitants of a body of freshwater could be negatively affected. The PECs are listed in Table 2, attached. SUMMARY OF REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES Remedial alternatives for the Iowa City FMGP Site are presented below. All of the alternatives with exception of the no action alternative include institutional controls, air monitoring, and sediment monitoring. Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 Institutional Controls Alternative 3 Institutional Controls and Groundwater Monitoring Alternative 4 Institutional Controls and Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) Alternative 5 Institutional Controls and Biosparge with Groundwater Monitoring 6 Alternative 6 Institutional Controls with Groundwater Extraction, Treatment, and Monitoring Alternative 7 Institutional Controls and LNAPL Recovery with MNA Common Elements All of these alternatives-except the no action alternative-include common elements. Further description of these elements follows. Institutional Controls (lCs): Each of the alternatives-exc~pt for the no action a1ternative- includes implementation of ICs. The ICs include the following: . An existing City Code requiring connection to the public water supply. . An existing County Ordinance requiring notification regarding setbacks from contamination for groundwater well installation. . An existing State Rule governing installation of wells in areas of contamination. . An environmental covenant to prohibit installation of wells, limit excavation, ensure maintenance of the liner and the passive venting system beneath the apartment building, and provide notice prior to any changes in use of the Site property. . . An environmental covenant or other institutional control to prohibit installation of wells, disturbance of the tile lining, and maintenance of the tile lining in Ralston Creek in the area adjacent to the Site. Air Monitoring: Each of the alternatives-except the no action alternative-includes periodic sampling of the air in the 10wa-lIIinois Manor apartment building to determine whether occupants might be exposed to Site-related contaminants exceeding health-based levels. Sediment Monitoring: Each of the alternatives- except the no action alternative-includes periodic sampling of the sediment in Ralston Creek adjacent to the Site to determine whether Site-related contaminants are reaching the sediment at levels posing unacceptable ecological or health-based risks. Groundwater Monitoring: The specific type and frequency of monitoring may vary for each of the alternatives-except the no action alternative-but at the very least would include periodic analysis of groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells on and off the Site for the contaminants of concern. Monitored Natural Attenuation CMNA): Natural attenuation refers to the naturally occurring processes in the environment that act without human intervention to reduce the mass, toxicity, mobility, volume, or concentration of contaminants. For this Site, intrinsic biodegradation of groundwater is the process of interest. Groundwater monitoring, including analysis of special parameters that indicate whether biodegradation is taking place, would be an element of MNA. ALTERNATIVE 1: NOACTION Estimated Present Worth Cost: $0 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: never The NCP requires that the EP A consider a no action alternative against which other remedial alternatives can be compared. Under this alternative no further action would be taken to monitor, control, or remediate the air, soil, sediment, or groundwater at the Site. ALTERNATIVE 2: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS Estimated Present Worth Cost: $590,500 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: > I, 000 years Alternative 2 includes the ICs and air and sediment monitoring as described previously. There would be no groundwater monitoring. The objective of the ICs is to achieve the RAOs by prohibiting installation and use of water wells, preventing exposure to contamination in air, subsurface soil, and creek sediment. Data gathered at the Site indicate that natural attenuation is likely occurring and that conditions are conducive to sustaining groundwater contaminant plume stability through contaminant degradation. However, without groundwater monitoring there would be no way to determine what is occurring within the plume. There would be no actions taken to remove contamination from groundwater or to monitor the movement of the contaminant plume. 7 ALTERNATIVE 3: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS AND GROUNDWATER MONITORING Estimated Present Worth Cost: $ 1,242,800 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: > 1,000 years Alternative 3 includes all of the components in Alternative 2 with the addition of periodic groundwater monitoring. The groundwater monitoring would occur at monitoring wells within and outside of the contaminated plume and the samples would be analyzed for the contaminants of concern. ALTERNATIVE 4: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS AND MONITORED NATURAL ATTENUATION (MNA) Estimated Present Worth Cost: $1.442,200 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: > I, 000 years Alternative 4 includes all of the components of Alternative 3 with the addition of groundwater analysis to determine if and the rate at which natural attenuation is occurring. With this alternative no further actions are taken to accelerate the cleanup of the groundwater but the additional analysis will provide information to determine whetJ:1er the groundwater plume is stable or decreasmg and whether Site conditions remain favorable for natural attenuation to occur. ALTERNATIVE 5: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS AND BIOSPARGE WITH GROUNDWATER MONITORING Estimated Present Worth Cost: $4,116,300 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: > 1,000 years Alternative 5 includes all components of Alternative 3 with the addition ofbiosparging to stimulate bioremediation of contaminants in the saturated and unsaturated soils. Biosparging involves the use of low flow rates of air injected into the groundwater to enhance aerobic biodegradation. Sufficient oxygen typically remains to stimulate bioremediation in the unsaturated zone as well. One significant limitation to the effectiveness ofbiosparging for this Site is that many of the contaminants have relatively low volatility and would notlikely be remediated through this technique. Also, there are concerns about minimizing vapor migration at this Site so contaminants do not move from the subsurface into the air in the apartment building. Biosparging would not be effective in the bedrock aquifer since the air would likely follow the fractures in the bedrock and would not be distributed through the groundwater in the bedrock aquifer. Also, it is possible that DNAPL could be mobilized. Movement ofDNAPL would create a large plume of contamination increasing the volume of contaminated groundwater. . ALTERNATIVE 6: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS WITH GROUNDWATER EXTRACTION, TREATMENT AND MONITORING Estimated Present Worth Cost: $5,706,100 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: >1,000 years Alternative 6 includes all of the components of Alternative 3 as well as extraction and treatment of groundwater from the unconsolidated and bedrock aquifers. Sufficient information is not currently known to accurately predict the number of extraction wells that would be needed but it was estimated that at least fourteen extraction wells would be required. The extracted groundwater would be pumped to a treatment system to remove contaminants prior to discharge to a storm or sanitary sewer. It is anticipated that centuries would be required to reduce the contaminant levels in groundwater to safe levels so this alternative is considered a containment technology that would control the movement of contaminants in the groundwater rather than a method of achieving full aquifer restoration. There also is the potential that the process of extraction could mobilize the DNAPL and further spread contamination. ALTERNATIVE 7: INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS AND LNAPL RECOVERY WITH MNA Estimated Present Worth Cost: $1,590,800 Estimated Time to Achieve RAO: >1,000 years Alternative 7 includes all of the components of Alternative 4 with the addition of recovery of LNAPL from the unconsolidated aquifer. A treatability study into methods ofLNAPL recovery was conducted and it was determined that the best method that could be employed at this point would be the placement of sorbent "socks" into existing monitoring wells in areas where LNAPL is present. 8 The "sock" is a device that can be filled with a sorbent material that will preferentially absorb the contamination that is not dissolved in the groundwater (i.e., LNAPL). The sorbent socks would be checked periodically and replaced when saturated with LNAPL. This is a very low-risk, low-cost method of reducing the contaminant mass at the water table. Natural attenuation would be enhanced by the removal of this additional contaminant mass. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES Nine criteria are used to evaluate the different remediation alternatives individually and against each other in order to select a remedy. This section of the Proposed Plan profiles the relative performance of each alternative against the nine criteria, noting how it compares to the other options under consideration. The nine evaluation criteria are discussed below. EV ALUA TION CRITERIA FOR SUPERFUND REMEDIAL AL TERNA TIVES Overall Protecliveness of Human Health and the Environment determines whether an alt10rnative elimfuates, reduces, or controls tbreats to ublic health and the environment tbrou ICs, en ineerin controls, or treatment. Compliance with ARARs evaluates whether the alternative meets federai and state environmental statutes, regulations, and other re uirements that ertain to the Site, or whether a waiver is 'ustitied. Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence considers the ability of an alternative to maIDtain protection of human health and the environment over time. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants tbrougb Treatment evaluates an alternative's use oftreatrnent to reduce the harmful effects of principal contaminants, their ability to move in the environment, and the amount of contamination resent. Short-term Effectiveness considers the length oftime needed to implement an alternative and the risks the alternative poses to workers, residents, and the environment durin im lementation. Implementability considers the technical and administrative feasibility of implementing the alternative, including factors such as the . relative availabili of oods and services. Cost includes estimated capital and annual operations and maintenance costs, as well as present worth cost. Present worth cost is the total cost of an alternative over time in terms of to day's dollar value. Cost estimates are expected to be accurate within a range of +50 to-30 ercent. State/Support Agency Acceptanc., considers whether the state agrees with the EPA's analyses and recommendations, as described in the RIfFS and Pro sed Plan. Community Acceptance considers whether the local community agrees with EPA's analyses and Preferred Alternative. Comments received on the Pro ased Plan are an im rtant indicator of communi acce tance. Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment All of the alternatives except the no action alternative would provide adequate protection of human health and the environment by eliminating, reducing, or controlling risk through treatment, engineering controls, and/or ICs. While existing city and county ordinances and state rules provide some degree of protection, they do not address potential future exposures to contaminated soil, air, and sediment without implementation of environmental covenants. Alternatives 2 through 7 use layered ICs to prohibit well placement in the plume. Alternatives 3 and 4 include groundwater monitoring to provide current information about plume conditions. The addition ofbiosparging to Alternative 5 would likely result in mass reduction of the more biodegradable contaminants (BTEX and some P AHs) in the unconsolidated aquifer. The groundwater extraction and treatment component of Alternative 6 would also reduce contaminant mass in the unconsolidated and bedrock aquifers while providing protection through controlling movement of the plume. Alternative 7 would reduce the mass of contaminants at the water table. Alternatives 5 and 6 have the potential to pose a negative impact on protectiveness by mobilizing DNAPL. The no action alternative does not protect human health and the environment because it would not adequately prevent installation of new wells into the plume, does not monitor the plume's future migration, and does not address potential future exposures to contaminated soil, air, and sediment without implementation of environmental 9 covenants. As a result, the no action alternative was eliminated from consideration under the remaining eight criteria. Compliance with ARARs None of the alternatives are likely to comply with chemical-specific ARARs for all compounds due to the nature and distribution of the contaminants at the Site. Due to the presence of DNAPL in fractured bedrock it is unlikely that the EPA's Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act for public water supplies, would ever be met for benzo(a)pyrene or even the more biodegradable compounds that comprise BTEX. It has been demonstrated through past experience at similar sites that long-term treatment of high levels of dissolved concentrations of P AHs cannot be remediated in a reasonable timeframe. At this time there is no known reliable method for removing and . remediating the undissolved contamination in . groundwater (DNAPL) or treating it in place. When there are site-specific conditions that may inhibit groundwater restoration, such as is the Cl!Se at this Site, the EP A has established guidance and a mechanism to evaluate the technical impracticability of restoring groundwater to meet ARARs. This has been documented in the FS Report and therefore it has been determined that a Technical Impracticability (TI) ARAR waiver is appropriate for the groundwater contaminants at the Site. The EP A refers to the portion of the aquifer where groundwater cannot be restored to drinking water standards within a reasonable timeframe as the "TI zone." The TI zone for this Site is shown in Figure 2. It is possible that the exact location of the TI zone may be modified in the future to the southwest as more information about the plume in this area is developed during implementation of the remedy. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence All of the alternatives are permanent and effective in the long-term because the ICs would effectively reduce the risk of exposure in the future. The biosparging in Alternative 5 may significantly increase the mass removal rate of VOCs in the unconsolidated aquifer but its effectiveness is not well demonstrated for the other contaminants at MGP sites. Alternative 6 would maintain hydraulic control of the plume and remove some dissolved contaminants but would not effectively remediate the Site. Alternatives 5 and 6 may also mobilize DNAPL, increasing the volume of contaminated groundwater. All of the alternatives would require long-term monitoring and management. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants through Treatment Alternatives 2 through 4 do not involve active treatment; therefore, create no greater degree of reduction in toxicity, mobility, or volume, other than ongoing intrinsic remediation. Alternative 5, biosparging, has the highest likelihood of achieving the greatest VOC mass removal in the shortest time thereby reducing toxicity and the volume of contaminants remaining. Alternative 6, although primarily a containment remedy, would also result in the reduction of volume of contaminants. However, both Alternatives 5 and 6 may increase the mobility ofDNAPL. Alternative 7 will reduce the toxicity, mobility, and volume of contaminants through the removal ofLNAPL. Short-term Effectiveness Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 pose minimal risk to the community or environment due to monitoring activities. There is a slight risk to field and laboratory workers from the collection and analysis of contaminated samples. These risks are minimized through the use of appropriate protective equipment. Alternative 5 potentially exposes Site workers to soil contamination during system installation but risk to the community is minimal. Operation of the biosparge system adds an additional risk to workers from the mechanical and electrical equipment but since only clean air is injected there is minimal increased risk of exposure to Site contaminants. The biosparge system may mobilize LNAPL and increase contaminant movement to Ralston Creek at initial startup and may cause vapor migration to the apartment building, exposing residents. With Alternative 6 there is some risk to workers dUring equipment 10 repair, cleaning, and sludge handling. During treatment some oftlui contaminants are transferred to the vapor phase resulting in some additional community exposure. Alternative 7 recovers LNAPLresulting in potential exposure to Site workers, the community, and the environment in the event of an accidental release during recovery or storage. These risks can be minimized with proper protective equipment, operating procedures, and a secure storage alternative. Implementability All alternatives include ICs, including those provided by the City Code, County Ordinance, and IDNR rules which are already in place. Environmental covenants on the Site property should not be difficult to enact with cooperation of the Site owner. It is anticipated that an agreement could be reached with the city of Iowa City on an environmental covenant to protect Ralston Creek. The groundwater extraction and treatment systems for Alternative 6 would be the most difficult to implement because of the complex treatment process and equipment maintenance and reliability issues that are likely to result from downtime caused by pump failure, biofouling, metal precipitation, carbon fouling, and line breaks. In addition, significant offsite access is required to install and maintain the system. Alternative 5 is the next most difficult to implement due to the scope of the system and the need to obtain off site property access. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 include monitoring, . which is relatively easily accomplished. Alternative 7, LNAPL recovery, is the easiest active remediation alternative to implement because the activities have been shown to be effective at the Site and procedures are already in place. Cost Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 are all relatively inexpensive because they do not include active remediation or the installation of any capital equipment. Alternative 7 provides for active remediation of LNAPL and is not significantly more expensive that the least expense alternatives. Alternative 5 involves more aggressive remediation through biosparging at a significantly higher cost than Alternatives 2, 3,4, and 7. Alternative 6 is the most expensive due to the need to install more capital equipment and higher operating expenses for operation of the extraction and treatment systems. Although the costs were estimated for a 30-year period, the system would have to operate indefinitely since it is not expected that all of the groundwater contamination would ever be addressed and the system would primarily operate as a containment remedy. It is significant to note that the cost estimates for all of the alternatives are based Upon 30 years of operation, though in all cases, the remedial goals willnot be met in that timeframe. Costs could be significantly higher if the periods of operation extend well beyond 30 years. State/Support Agency Acceptance The state of Iowa supports the Preferred Alternative. Community Acceptance Community acceptance of the Preferred Alternative will be evaluated after the public comment period ends and will be described in the Record of Decision. SUMMARY OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The Preferred Alternative for the Site is Alternative 7 which addresses the groundwater contamination using MNA, ICs, and the recovery of LNAPL from the unconsolidated aquifer through the use of sorbent socks. Soil contamination would be addressed through the implementation oncs. The potential for future indoor air contamination is addressed through periodic monitoring and maintenance of the measures already in place to limit vapor intrusion from the Site. The potential for future impacts to the sediment and surface water in Ralston Creek will be addressed through periodic sampling of sediment and ICs. The Preferred Alternative will reduce the amount of contamination at the water table, through the removal ofLNAPL, without the risk of mobilizing DNAPL. There is minimal risk to Site- 11 workers, the community, or the environment during implementation of this remedy and it is easy to implement. The cost of implementation is low compared to the other alternatives with the potential for removing contaminant mass from the groundwater. An important element of the remedy for this Site is the technical impracticability ARAR waiver for groundwater within the area designated as the TI zone. .ICs will protect anyone from being exposed to groundwater within the TI zone and monitoring will assure the groundwater outside of the TI zone will meet all ARARs and health-based action levels. The EP A will periodically review the remedy in order to evaluate its on-going effectiveness. These reviews will occur at least every five years and are required for this preferred remedy. Future groundwater monitoring will include special low-flow collection methods for samples that will be analyzed for metals to determine with more certainty whether elevated levels of metals that may pose an unacceptable level of risk to humans are dissolved in the groundwater or are actually attached to the soil. If elevated levels of metals are found dissolved in the groundwater a determination will be made whether there may need to be a modification to the remedy for this Site. Based on the information available at this time the EP A and the state of Iowa believe the Preferred Alternative would be protective of human health and the environment, would comply with ARARs outside of the TI ARAR waiver zone, would be cost effective, and would utilize permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum extent practicable. The Preferred Alternative can change in response to public comment or new 'information. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION The EPA and IDNR provide information regarding the cleanup of the Iowa City Former Manufactured Gas Plant Site through public meetings, the Administrative Record file for the Site, and announcements published in the Iowa City Press-Citizen newspaper. The EP A and IDNR encourage the public to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the Site and the Superfund activities that have been conducted at the Site. The dates for the public comment period, the date, location, and time of the public meeting, and the locations of the Administrative Record file, are provided on the front page of this Proposed Plan. 12 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Specialized terms used in this Proposed Plan are defined Safe Drinking Water Act, that is delivered to any user of a below: public water system. Administrative Order on Consent (AOC): In this Proposed Plan the AOC is a legal agreement, signed by EPA and potentially responsible parties (pRPs), that requires the PRPs to perform a response action that is necessary as a result of a release or threat of release of hazardous substances. Administrative Record (AR): The body of documents that forms the basis for selection of a particular response at a site. An AR is available at or near the site to permit interested individuals to review the documents and to allow meaningful public participation in the remedy selection process. Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand, or gravel capable of storing water within cracks and pore space's or between grains. When water contained within an aquifer is of sufficient quantity and quality it can be used for drinking or other purposes. The water contained in the aquifer is called groundwater. Biosparging: Injecting air at a low flow rate into an aquifer to enhance aerobic biodegradation of contaminants while controlling the rate of volatilization of contaminants. Capital Costs: Expenses associated with the initial construction of a project. Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Com'pensation, and Liability Action (CERCLA): The law enacted by Congress in 1980 to evaluate and cleanup abandoned, hazardous waste sites. The EP A is charged with the mission to implement and enforce CERCLA. Consent Decree: A legal document, approved hy a judge, that formalizes an agreement between EP A and one or more potentially responsible parties (pRPs) outlining the terms by which the response action will ,take place. A Consent Decree is subject to a public comment period prior to its approval by a judge, and is enforceable as a final judgment by a court. Contaminant Plume: A column of contamination with measurable horiwntal and vertical dimensions that is suspended in and moves with groundwater; Groundwater: Underground water that fills pores in soils or openings in rocks to the point of saturation. Groundwater is often used as a source of drinking water via municipal or domestic wells. Institutional Controls (ICs): The placement oflaws, regnIations, restrictions, etc. on a site/property which assist or assure protection of human health by eliminating exposure pathways. Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs): The maximum permissible level of a contaminant in water, pursuant to the Monitoring: An on-going collection of information about the environment that helps gauge the effectiveness of a cleanup action. Monitoring wells drilled at different levels at the site would be used to detect any migration of the plume. Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA): Natural attenuation that is being monitored to assure that the processes and actions that are expected are occurring at rates that are acceptable to the effort. Operation and Maintenance (O&M): Activities conducted at a site after the construction phase to ensure that the cleanup continues to be effective. Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater flowing from a specific source. Present Worth Analysis: A method of evaluation of expenditures that occur over different time periods. By discounting all costs to a common base year, the costs for different remedial actions can be compared on the basis of a single figure for each alternative. Record of Decision (ROD): The decision document in which EP A selects the remedy for a Superfund site. Superfund: The nickname for CERCLA. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): Carbon compounds, such as solvents, which readily volatilize at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. Most are not readily dissolved in water, but their solubility is above health-based standards for potable use. Some VOCs can cause cancer. 13 BURLINGTON STREET I-I 1\ i , ~' , . I I IIW-~6 ~~~ IIW-~ IAW-IO W-g " W-3 1:>::\ cr ::> 00. 'W' n. VI ....0 i~1 ... il:c ~ ILl " en . () . ILl cr ,z De 0>- IZI ... cr (/10 en '" '" ~o ,0. z cr J:Dl . f- . 0 w ... 1(/)1 ~O . -l m I '<{' '0:::' ~ COAL I I > I PARKING ER W-11 LOT IAW-4211> lIW-16 IAW-2 -tw-, IAW-~ 0 ... ~ ~ I o I I ,- I o I . I I o ' I , I j;;/ L-J 0, +UW-15 , . -------.--------------- ED HARNEY'S COMPL E TE AUTO SERVICE U::GEND: . WATER TABLE MONITORING WELL + BEDROCK SURFACE MONITORING WElL II> BEDROCK MONITORING WELL iii ABANDONED MONlT DRING WELL o PASSIVE VENT ( ~M~ [ BUILDING [ c [ [~ .r- ! I o r SCALE 60 I IN FEET !mES; 1. HISTORIC STRUCTURES SHOWN IN BLUE. 2. HISTORIC MAP SOURCE: 1926 " 1933 SANBORN FIRE INSURANCE MAPS eMWH 0.. 1.401MB "10.0 IADAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY FORMER MANUF' ACTURED GAS PLANT SITE IOWA CITY,IOWA ...... SITE MAP 1 :.Z~...../:./;.-;% >/////:/) ;-'/-;/ /%///:'t//:':/PP4EGE 5T ': is COLLEGE : , I ' : I I 1 'I ~ I zl !t1L , I 31 S I z, 1- -..-->> . i: "/...///.~! 15; : !il l~ ~!. i5i a_I 'z ! '::; ////////// _ ~'/////-'///. ...J a:. I . ~ 0 c lei I=>I I r-~.:: 11>1 i 1-'1 I"e : , wI I I I ~i ....27 .\~! . BuRL iNGTON $r ;\ ., I l'l-'n OJ on ill' ., LJ or 0 300 ! >'/ I' . II . 'I JLlJu' ." iUtJL 1-' I SCALE IN FEET I . _u ' , n COURT 5T I I COURT 5T ~ l ,-----, , I _.>>~ I n I I I . ."TU fl..! __ WEU I 'I ' I COUNTY POST I . __.....ra: __ wnl I; I ICOURTHOUS OFF feE -.0 ___KU. -, I , . J I i , , . --- iv~v>~,-:~ , ~Y~'TJIU'I . .n I .-/vV"....vv HARR I SON $T ... 1oIW'1~ I 'UDD --0 _TU:INC.OL~y_ i COUNTt c! ' 3 S [) ~ i z . /' 0 '" ~ I JAIL .... I I- 0 z /' - '" I - . / -< z ~ I 1_ z ~ ~. " w ~ - '" / " z '" I ~ d. 25 " 0 i' '" '" w z '-' PRENTISS 5T _.>> _31', z I " 00 "" " " I JO DO D > -, " ffOWERY $T I I I -. I I ......., 1 -. ; WRIGHT -~ . D - aDCK uc:s __ ... ..-anT lM1 I -~- TlIlIX'ltllfOlTHE:n%ONEw'VKMWITElI ; allSEDCIIIIl1NlI!llt.T.... I . 0 .. ~ I /I / ~ /;' / I " .. \, ~ II , 0:: .. I .. /"II I " , t ...- - I <m> MWH - UlD~ ENERCY C(liI)AN'( PROPOSED TECHNlCH.. FORMER UNroF' ACTURED CAS Pl.eNT SIT[ IMPRACTICABUTY ZOfIE 2 . IOWAQTY,)()WA 15 . .'. TABLE 1 PRELIMINARY REMEDIATION GOAL'! FOR GROUNDWATER .FORMERMANUFACTURED GAS PLANT - IOWA CITY, IOWA . Health-Based To-Be-Consld<red (TBC) Values Selected GrollDdwater Conmndnrr.nt-or CbemlcaloSpedfIc ARABs Risk..Based CoDcentration PRG PottDdal Concern- (McLs) (RBC) PQL (basls for _on) 2-methylDapbtbalCIIC .61.2 61.2(RBC) Acenapbthene 914 914 (RBC) Acenapbtbylene 362 362 (RBC) Bemeoe . 5 - 5 (Mo.) B=(a)antbracene . 0.009 0.13 0.13 (PQL) Bcmo(a)pytcoe 0.2 0.2 (MCL) Benzo(b)llu<x3nlbene 0.005 0.1 0.1 (PQL) Ilenzo(k)l1IlOlllDtbene 0.05 0.14 0.14 (PQL) Cbryaene . 0.85 0.85 (RBC) Cyanide 200 200 (MCL) Dibenzo(a,b)antbracene 0.0003 0.033 0.033 (PQL) Etbylbeozeue 700 700 (MCL) F!uo=Ie 490 490 (RBC) Indeno(l,2.3-cd)pyrene '0.005 0.1 0.1 (PQL) . Napbtbil1ene 6.2 6.2 (RBC) - . 294 294(RBC) Tol1lelll> 1.000 - 1,000 (MCL) Xyl..... total 10.000 10.000 (MCL) Notes: An values are pIeSenled in micrograms per liter (~g/L). MCL = Maximum contaminant level. ARAR = Applicable or _ and appropriate requirenleots. PRO = Preliminaty remedia1 goal. PQL = Practical quantitationlimit RB = Riak-ba.ed PRO. I of! I I I 16 , . TABU 2 ESTIMATED EXCESS LIFETIME CANCER RISK AT PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMIT FORMER MANUFACTURED GAS PLANT. IOWA CITY,IOWA Olmpound of PQL' Cancer Risk . Concern (pgIL) alPQL Benzo(a)anthracene 0.13 1.53E-05 Beozo(b)fluorantbene 0.1 1.98E-05 Benzo(k)fluorautbene 0.14 2.97B-06 Dlboozo(ah)anthraceoe 0.033 9.78E-05 lndeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.1 1.98E-05 Notes: PQL = Practical quantitation limit. ~gIL = Micrograms per liter. . PQL is equivalent to Reporting Limit fOr all compounds except dibenz.o(ah)anthracene. Dibenzo(ah)antbracene PQL i. based on Method Detection Limit 17 I ~ I t~~;!:'t ~... .....,~ ...,.... CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM ~ Date: August 2, 2006 From: Mayor and City Council i. Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~v;. Revised Meeting Schedule (September 2006-January 2007) To: Re: At your July 31 work Session Council agreed to the following schedule: September 5 - combined special work session (5PM) and regular formal September 18,19 - Regular work session and formal October 2, 3 - Regular work session (first hour BUDGET priorities) and formal October 16, 17 - Regular work session and formal October 30 - Special work session November 6 - Special work session November 7 (Election Day) - No meeting November 13, 14 - Special work session and formal November 23, 24 - Thanksgiving, offices closed November 27,28 - Special work session and formal December 4, 5 - Rescheduled December 11,12 - Special work session and formal December 18,19 - Cancelled December 25, 26 - Christmas, offices closed January 1 - New Year's, offices closed January 2 - Cancelled January 4 - Special BUDGET work session (8:00 am - Noon) January 8, 9 - Special work session and formal January 15 - Martin Luther King Day, offices closed January 16 - Special CIP BUDGET work session (8:00 am- 5:00 pm)' January 22, 23 - Regular work session and formal January 29, 30 - Special BUDGET work session Regular meeting schedule of first and third Tuesday resumes in February. Special meetings will be called as necessary. All meetings subject to change. . To be video taped cc: Department Heads Cable TV Maintenance clerklmem/906-' 07 schedule.doc ,~ 1 ~~~~'t -.;;;:.... I!IIIIIII~ ...,.. .. CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM rnJ Date: August 1, 2006 To: City Council From: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City AUorne Re: Absence I will be out of the office the weeks of August 7 and August 14, returning on August 21. My staff will know how to reach me. cc: City Manager Assistant City Manager City Clerk eleanor/memlaugust.doc I! 1 !~~~Ilt '""~ ~mIl9~ ....... .. CITY OF IOWA CITY ~ MEMORANDUM Date: August 2. 2006 To: City Council ~ From: Jeff Davidson, Dept. of Planning & Community Development Re: Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue I received the attached letter and petition from residents of Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue. I indicated to Mr. Hayes, the neighborhood representative, that their three requests would require action by the City Council. Mr. Hayes requested that I forward the letter and petition to you with the following statement from him: I hope the council members will be responsive to our concerns and suggestions. As you can tell, the neighbors are becoming frustrated with what they consider to be abuse of the street and our neighborhood by increasing numbers of drivers, speeding drivers, and heavy trucks. Thanks. Jim. Attachments cc: Steve Atkins Karin Franklin Marcia Klingaman Rick Fosse Ron Knoche Sam Hargadine Matt Johnson ppdadmfmem/jhayes.doc Hayes Lorenzen Lawyers PLC James P. Hayes Karen A. Lorenzen* lulia C. Albul Suite 580 Plaza Centre One 125 S. Dubuque Street Iowa City, IA 52240-5678 Phone: 3 I 9 887 3688 Fax: 319 887 3687 jhayes@hlplc.com klorenzen@hlplc.com ialhul@Wplc.com . Also admitted in Florida July 28, 2006 Mr. Jeff Davidson Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development City of Iowa City 410 E Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Traffic Conditions on East Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue Dear Jeff: East Court Street residents met at my home on Sunday, July 23, 2006, to review your report of May 31, 2006, to the City Council, and to discuss the current situation and make recommendations to the City Council. We are concerned that conditions have not improved, and in fact, have worsened in the year's time since we filed our petition with the City. Children cross Court Street on their way to Longfellow School at their peril. The historical and residential nature of East Court Street between Summit and Muscatine is eroded by increasing traffic (300-500 more vehicles per day since last year), the heavy commercial traffic and speeders. The neighbors of East Court Street request that the City: 1. Install speed bumps at appropriate intervals East Court Street between Muscatine Avenue and Summit Street. Mr. Jeff Davison Page 2 July 2S, 2006 2. Decrease the tonnage for truck traffic embargo below the current 16 ton limit to some more reasonable number. Ever so many semis and other heavy commercial vehicles continue to use the street, increasing the danger to pedestrians, especially children. Even on Interstate SO, the highway commission requires trucks over 10,000 pounds (5 ton) to stop at the weigh stations. 3. Return that section of the street between Muscatine and Summit Street to its original brick surface within a reasonable period of time. Making this section of residential, historical homes a brick street is especially appropriate in the Longfellow neighborhood in view of the importance of the Nicholas Oakes brick yard to the story of the neighborhood. We request the City take further action, and we are happy to meet with you or any of the designated City agencies to discuss our concerns and recommendations more fully so as to demonstrate needed action. I'm attaching signatures of my neighbors who have read this letter and agree with the requests made to the City Council. With kindest regards, I am JPH/cag J 1 rz E Cav/Cr ~W J: "'- szz- Y1 I/lCj E:. ~ sf )w J-C~ q::-~'- ",,,.S<6. " ~t1),L <:t-.'1J;/1/)J/~);7Lh jlla $'. ~-&-. ~..a..,. ~> ~CL 6-;' =<..vo juHJ ! f?uw ~.v1f /t9:2CJ IF, ~.;r .JJru4- ~ ~;J-I/O } 1 bS ~ L04.~')!'~',,~ . . /, ,a in. J~~ r 1J ~k-~ -;/~ A1~~ l;' r+o Wl$ (j"~(- (jf.. ~f. ~'tt~J~y t1PJ z c#vrr>-f. ~ ?t?'~ 6. ~~ M~.. I If 2. C. - Cov~:r J?r. CLD 4 ~ '-, Wlb L COURT '51-, 'F 1>3 Su '<I C)l::.qt; Q ~-'l;.3 I)&L( E, WiA.yT ~~ Il1rE~ liS/G". &v.er g, ; fyN.j )A//JJ 11/1> g-uJ-- (} ~^ C' ~} <f e: Co- ~ ,j ~71A . ~~Cf~~ I/)3 E. (I~ $V. ~ t -44- [I Z-6 E: uvV'.r- ~ r:. 9~ ~ Vh.. 17L k: L f<-etk#c- 1,:7 t'-C? e, cc.-vvo'--Y /,........ d.v'7. /L~ f{~ ;:<L ~,-t ) /0 c.(-o c- ~. /~~/ .,IA-. ";;;;=/- ~';t r~' "- --r" C '-1... / A- rCl-'1 Ii 0 ~v~ "'1) .' l I ~ 1 ~~I~~'r ~~.-aal~ ...,.. .. CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: May 31,2006 From: City Council ~~ Jeff Davidson, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development ,.-"f To: Re: Status report on traffic conditions on East Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue At your July 18, 2005 work session, you discussed traffic on East Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue. This was in response to a petition from residents expressing concerns regarding "increasingly heavy, fast, and careless traffic" on this portion of East Court Street. The petition asked you to consider six specific alternatives for slowing down traffic and quieting the street. You agreed to implement the following items: . An ordinance was approved to embargo large trucks on East Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue. . The Police Department was directed to conduct periodic traffic enforcement on this portion of Court Street. Enforcement was targeted during the times of day when the highest percentage of vehicles were traveling in excess of 35 mph on Court Street. The following provides a one-year assessment of the effectiveness of these measures. Traffic counts were recorded May 10-12, 2006 and compared to counts recorded June 21-24, 2005. 85th percentile vehicle speeds in the westbound direction (uphill) increased by approximately 1 mph. 85th percentile speeds in the eastbound direction (downhill) decreased by 1-2 mph. Existing 85th percentile speeds are around 31 mph, except for just west of the all-way stop at the Court Street/Oakland Avenue intersection which was 33 mph. This does not surprise us; this all-way stop is not warranted according to the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and it is not uncommon for motorists' irritation to unwarranted traffic control devices to result in higher traffic speeds just beyond the unwarranted traffic control device. Overall traffic volume on Court Street increased 300-500 vehicles per day. There has been ongoing police enforcement of traffic laws on this section of Court Street. Captain Matt Johnson of the Iowa City Police Department indicated to us last fall that following City Council direction for increased enforcement in this vicinity, the Police Department conducted enforcement activities approximately 29 times between late July and mid-September. During that time approximately 10 citations and some warnings were issued, but speeding traffic was not observed to be a recurrent issue by police personnel conducting enforcement activities. We also examined the traffic count data to determine the periods of time when vehicles were consistently exceeding 40 mph in this vicinity of Court Street. We found that these times were generally during the morning and afternoon peak traffic periods, as well as the 2:00-3:00 p.m. period when school is letting out. This amounted to 3 to 4% of the total vehicles using Court . Street each day. This is not unusual for residential streets in Iowa City. ./ May 31, 2006 Page 2 To conclude, it appears that the embargo ordinance and increased police enforcement has had a minimal impact on vehicle speeds on Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue. Traffic volume has increased 10 to 15%. Recorded vehicle speeds in May 2006 are typical for residential streets in Iowa City; approximately 5 mph over the posted speed limit. Let me know if you have any comments or questions, or if you wish to take any further action. cc: City Manager Police Chief Director of Planning and Community Development Neighborhood Services Coordinator Director of Public Works City Engineer JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner James P. Hayes, Neighborhood Representative Postscript: The above information indicates that traffic conditions on this section of Coult Street are not significantly different from other residential streets in Iowa City. The day after I prepared this memo I was in my car eastbound on Coult Street at the Muscatine Avenue intersection when I observed an incident that I'm sure is what makes neighborhood residents so upset. A young man in a loud white car proceeded westbound on Coult street through the red fight at a high rate of speed, accelerated rapidly up the hill, and blew through the stop sign at Oakland Avenue without even slowing down at what must have been at least 40 mph. It is this very small number of reckless motorists that create the majority of our neighborhood traffic issues. ppdadmlmem/court-traffreportdoc ,# .... Location: Court Sf. Summit - Muscatine JCCOG Date recorded: Mav 10-12 2006 2006 Traffic Count Program Requested by: leff fJ"vid~nn Ci5 ~ "E E ::0 CI) ~ Speed Speed 85%: 31 mph "'0 85%: 33.4 mph <>>",. Court SI. '"<::>e -9',,- , 1,957 ~ ~ 1956 '" --- - - 3,821 - - 3,832 -=-- 1,864 1,876 --- , I ," Speed Speed <ri I 85%: 31.5 mph :> 85%: 31.3 mph <t: Ci5 "lJ "'"' <: CI) I ~ ~ C .!!1 '" \'! I u 0 ~ i I I I I ~ ! Number-s shown indicate 24-hour average daily traffic i Data recorded by NC97 HI-STAR data classifier If there are any. questions, contact the JCCOG r":-~ JCCOG Transportation Planning Division at 356-5235. r.. 1C-218 Location: Court st. Summit - Muc:r-A/ine JCCOG I . t Date reco~ed: .Inns 21-:>4 2005 2005 Traffic Count Program ; ~uested by: .JAR DAvidson , I I .~ :l:< ~ II) ~~ Speed Speed I 85%: 30 mph 85%: 32.5 mph q,~ I Court st. ~. "'J. I 1,845 ~ ~ 1 e95 ~ --- -; si2 3,521 - - 3,363 -=-- --- I ' 1,/188 i Speed ~ speed 85%: 32.8 mph 85": 33.5 mph <( .., "lJ "'"' II) <: II) ~ .!! - .!!! "'" <: .. e (.) 0 Cl Numbers shown indicate 24-hour ~ average daily traffic Data reco~ed py NC97 HI-STAR data classifier If there are any questions, contact the JCCOG II_JCCOG! Transportation Planning Division at 356-5235. IC-21O I I I ~ I -.....= -j(f ~~lji~1lf: ~~...aal~ ....,..- CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM ~ From: Steve Atkins _ _ / Brad Neuman'1,rc;COG Solid Waste Management Planner ~t :P ~ Date: August 3, 2006 To: Re: Update on mobile household hazardous waste collection unit The Iowa City Landfill and Recycling Center recently purchased a mobile hazardous waste collection unit that allows the landfill to collect household hazardous wastes at any location in the landfill service area. The service area includes all of Johnson County and the communities of Riverside and Kalona In Washington County. The landfill also uses the 16' trailer to collect hazardous wastes from small businesses in their service area. The landfill held their first mobile household hazardous waste collection event on June 17 at Longfellow School. The event, which targeted the Longfellow Neighborhood only, was held from 9am-noon on that Saturday morning. The event was advertised in the neighborhood newsletter and through direct mailings to neighborhood residents. The landfill did require that each household make an appointment to participate in the event. The landfill scheduled 30 appointments and had an additional 10 households show up without an appointment for a total of 40 households served in 3 hours. The neighborhood and school provided 8 volunteers for the event. These volunteers helped with traffic control, paint collection, and helped conduct a survey prepared by the landfill. There were 2 landfill staff people on hand to accept materials and pack the material for transportation back to the landfill's permanent household hazardous waste collection facility. The results of the survey conducted at the event indicated that 75% of the waste materials were generated from households cleaning out their house. 15% of the waste materials were inherited from someone else. A large majority (88%) of those surveyed said they would be willing to pay a small fee for the mobile collection service. 17 of the 40 households had used the permanent household hazardous waste collection facility at the landfill. As for the amount of waste collected, 57% of the 3,786 Ibs of material collected was latex paint. Oil based paints made up 25% with the remaining 18% being made up of materials such as batteries, light tubes, auto fluids, and poisons. The average weight per household was over 94 pounds of hazardous materials. The landfill does not have any more events scheduled at this time but they do plan on offering their new service to all of the communities in their service area as well as other neighborhoods and rural subdivisions. I will get the word out to JCCOG entities on the availability of the mobile unit. There was much learned from this initial event and the landfill is reviewing their mobile collection procedures before scheduling any additional events. If anyone has any questions or comments please give me a call at 356-5235 or e-mail me at brad-neumann@iowa-city.org. cc: Dave Elias Jeff Davidson Rick Fosse Jennifer Jordan jccogswfmemlhhw.doc I! 1 -....= -~ f~W~1lt ~~ "DD'~ CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM C!fLJ From: August 3, 2006 Steve Atkins Brad NeUman~OG Solid Waste Management Planner Wf1~ 0ftJ Date: To: Re: Update on the special events beverage container recycling program and the permanent downtown beverage container recycling program Special Events Beverage Container Recycling This is the third year that the Iowa City Landfill and Recycling Center has provided beverage container recycling collection at both the Iowa City Jazz Fest and Arts Fest. The downtown festivals have offered a great opportunity to expand the City's recycling program to include the collection of beverage cans and plastic bottles, including deposit containers as well as non- deposit containers such as tea and water bottles. The program works with the festival organizers and volunteers to place and service special collection containers during these two events. In the program, the City delivers 24 special recycling containers and a larger roll-off container to the festival grounds for use during the festival weekend. Volunteers place the special recycling containers throughout the event grounds and service the containers during the festival weekend. All of the materials collected during the events are placed in the roll-off container and are delivered to City Carton for separation and recycling. During this year's Arts Fest, which was held the first weekend in June, we collected 180 pounds of cans and bottles. This down from the 200 pounds we collected during the 2005 Arts Fest. During the Jazz Fest, heid the first weekend in July, we did a little better, collecting 400 pounds of cans and plastic bottles and 100 pounds of cardboard. This is very close to what we collected at the 2005 event. Even though we do not collect a large amount of recyclable materials during the Arts and Jazz Festivals, I believe it is worth continuing. The volumes collected at these festivals have increased slightly or remained steady and we continue to see little contamination problem. We are to the point at which the festival organizers plan for the recycling containers to be at their events and I believe that there can be small operational improvements made to the program in the coming years. Landfill personnel are doing a very nice job in delivering and picking up the containers and the recyclables at each event and have been working at improving the program since it started. Since the Landfill service area extends county-wide, we should also be offering the special events containers to other communities in Johnson County for use during special events. This would include working out the details with the landfill as far as delivering the containers and collecting the recyclable material. We may need to offer just the containers for use at these events end have the event organizers take care of the collection and delivery of the recyclables. August 3, 2006 Page 2 Downtown Beverage Container Recycling The beverage container collection program has also become a permanent fixture on the pedestrian mall in downtown Iowa City during the past two years. There are three locations on the pedestrian mall for beverage container recycling. As we anticipated, we have had some problems with contamination and vandalism. In the first year of the program about one third of the material collected was trash. We did recycle about 1,000 pounds of materials that first year. This past year, however, was not as good as the first year. We collected only 500 pounds of material and we continue to see trash being placed in the containers. The collection units located near the library (west end) and the north end of the ped mall seem to be working the best. The unit on the west side of the ped mall continues to be about half full of trash. Two of the six units have experienced vandalism in the past two years. Most of the locks have been broken and replaced. Even with these issues and the relatively low volume of material collected, I would recommend continuing this program. These units are highly visible and send a good message to people using the ped mall. I believe there will always be contamination and vandalism issues as long as there is a large student population. I think it is important to offer recycling in public places for those wanting to use the services. Hopefully, the longer the containers are made available on the ped mall the more people will use them and contamination and vandalism will become less of a problem. We need to give this program a chance to grow. The City's Central Business District maintenance employees are doing a very nice job collecting materials, dealing with contaminants, making repairs, and monitoring the overall program. We may also want to consider expanding beverage container collection to the athletic fields in the parks and recreation areas in Iowa City. People using athletic fields tend to go through a lot of plastic bottles. There is a high volume of plastics going into the trash at these locations. The biggest issue associated with such a program is collection of the recycled material. This could be very time consuming considering the number of events, and the associated contamination issues. These issues would need to be discussed with Parks and Recreation Department staff. Let me know If you have any questions or comments. cc: Jeff Davidson Rick Fosse Terry Trueblood Terry Robinson Sheri Thomas Dave Elias Jon Thomas Jennifer Jordan jccogsw/mem/special-collection. doc ~01~ ~vY ~ BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION July 2006 ~~ ~ \).}' KEY FOR ABBREVIATIONS . Type of Improvement: ADD - Addition ALT - Alteration REP - Repair FND - Foundation Only NEW -New OTH - Other type of construction Type of Use: RSF - Residential Single Family RDF - Residential Duplex RMF - Three or more residential RAe - Residential Accessory Building MIX - Mixed NON - Non-residential OTH - Other Page: 2 City ofIowa City Date: 8/1/2006 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1 /2006 Census Bureau Report From: 7/31/2006 ~ ~ Permit Number Name Address Imnr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD06-00303 ROBERTS DAIRY COMPANy 1123 N DODGE ST ADD NON $210,000 CHANGE OF USE TO OFFICE WITH ADDITION BLD06,00499 ORAL-B LABORATORIES 1832 LOWER MUSCA TINE ADD NON 2 $92,489 FENCE FOR INDUSTRIAL FACTORY BLD06-00554 PROCTER & GAMBLE 2200 LOWER MUSCA TINE ADD NON $50,000 CORRIDOR ON NORTH END OF MAIN BUILDING BLD06-00553 PROCTER & GAMBLE 2200 LOWER MUSCA TINE ADD NON $15,000 JOB SITE OFFICE TRAILER BLD06-00504 LUCAS SCHOOL 830 SOUTHLA WN DR ADD NON $10,000 PORTABLE CLASSROOM BUILDING FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BLD06-00505 ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY 611 GREENWOOD DR ADD NON $10,000 PORTABLE CLASSROOM BUILDING FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BLD06-00542 REBEKA BERSTLER 2732 NORTHGATE DR ADD NON $1,945 DETACHED DECK FOR OFFICE BUILDING Total ADD/NON permits: 7 Total Valuation: $389,434 BLD06-0048I FRANTZ CONSTRUCTION Ci 42 LANCESTER PL ADD RMF 0 $54,830 BASEMENT FINISH AND 4 SEASON ADDITION FOR RMF UNIT Total ADD/RMF permits: 1 Total Valuation: $54,830 BLD06-00406 NORM & DEB CATE 322 MULLIN AVE ADD RSF 2 0 $243,000 2 STORY ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00488 GREG & VAL SCHNOEBELEl 2406 E WASHINGTON ST ADD RSF 2 0 $200,000 ADDITION AND AL TERA TION FOR SFD BLD06-00507 BILL SMITH 515 WOODRIDGE AVE ADD RSF 2 $63,812 ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00482 PETER AUL T 716 E BLOOMINGTON ST ADD RSF 2 0 $35,129 ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00413 MICHAEL L & SHERRY L MC 1105 KEOKUK ST ADD RSF 2 0 $28,000 DECK AND ROOM ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00546 KETTELKAMP, RICHARD T 1655 RIDGE RD ADD RSF 2 $11,500 DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00532 GLEN R MOWERY 1026 SAINT CLEMENTS Al ADD RSF 2 $6,000 ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00485 RON BAKER 3650 DONEGAL CT ADD RSF 2 0 $4,600 DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00571 ANTHONY & TRACY TITUS 174 GLENN DR ADD RSF $2,500 DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00490 DAVID & MEGAN WILSON 1830 B ST ADD RSF 2 0 $1,100 FRONT ENTRY RAMP FOR SFD BLD06-00334 RICKER, MICHELL L 209 MYRTLE AVE ADD RSF $1,000 DECK ADDITION FOR SFD Total ADD/RSF permits: 11 Total Valuation : $596,641 Page: Date : To: From: 3 8/] /2006 7/1/2006 7/3 ]/2006 City ofIowa City Extraction of Building Permit Data for Census Bureau Report Permit Number Name Address ~ Imor ~ Use Stories BLD06-00282 GROUNDS FOR DESSERT CC 345 S DUBUQUE ALT NON RESTAURANT IN PARKING RAMP/COMMERC]AL BUILDING BLD06-00502 LA TTER-DA Y SAINTS 503 MELROSE AVE AL T NON 2 INTERIOR REMODEL OF CHURCH FACILITY EMBOSSED METAL PORCH CEILING BLD06-00524 THE LIQUOR HOUSE L TD 425 S G]LBERT ST AL T NON 2 LIQUOR STORE TENANT FINISH IN MIX COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL BUILDING BLD06-00543 FALBO BROTHERS PIZZA 457SGILBERTST ALT NON RESTAURANT TENANT FINISH IN MIXED COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL BUILDING BLD06-00536 THE PICADOR 330 E WASHINGTON ST AL T NON 2 AL TERA T]ON OF BAR EXITING AND RESTROOMS BLD06-00500 AI-IMAN CENTER OF lOW A ]]4 E PRENTISS ST AL T NON 2 CHANGE OF USE FROM RELIGIOUS TO SHELTER HOUSE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES BLD06-00556 DGOSM LC (24.333% INT) 1660 SYCAMORE ST AL T NON DANCE STUDIO IN MALL BLD06-00548 DR ANN ROMANOWSK] ] 5] 7 MALL DR AL T NON BASEMENT LOCKER ROOMS FOR EMPLOYEES BLD06-00557 SH]RKEN L L C ] ] 19 SHIRKEN DR AL T NON OFF]CE PART]TIONS BLD06-00574 KSK LIM]TED PARTNERSHII 459 HIGHWAY 1 WEST ALT NON CHANGE OF USE FROM HAIR SALON TO RETAIL Total AL T/NON pennils : 10 Total Valuation: BLD06-00314 MARK HOLTKAMP CONVERT 4 PLEX INTO DUPLEX 212 S JOHNSON ST ALT RDF TotaIALT/RDF permils: 1 Total Valuation : BLD06-005]0 JIM BUXTON 946]OWAAVE ALT RMF NEW FOUNDA T]ON, BASEMENT FLOOR AND BASEMENT WALLS FOR RMF UN]T BLD06-00494 JOYCE LANXON ]623 CLIFFORD LN ALT RMF 2 FINISH BASEMENT FOR RMF UNIT BLD06-00576 RIVER CITY HOUSING COLI 935 E COLLEGE ST AL T RMF 0 AL TERA TION OF FIRST FLOOR DWELLING UNIT IN RMF COOP BLD06-00463 ALPHA DELTA PI 111 E BLOOMINGTON ST AL T RMF 3 OPENING FOR AIR CONDITIONER IN SORORITY EXTERlOR WALL Total AL T/RMF permits: 4 Total Valuation: BLD06-00523 HALLIE J SIMS 1 BELLA VISTA PL REMODEL SFD BLD06-00526 JAMES & LEANNE DREIER 424 N V AN BUREN ST KITCHEN REMODEL FOR SFD BLD06-00493 BRENDA PAYNE ]59 OBERLIN ST BA TH/K]TCHEN REMODEL FOR SFD ALT RSF 2 ALT RSF 2 ALT RSF 2 Page: 4 City ofIowa City Date : 8/1 /2006 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1/2006 Census Bureau Report From: 7/31/2006 ~ ~ Permit Number Name Address ImDr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD06-00473 PAMELA NOEL 864 OXEN LN ALT RSF 3 0 $14,876 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD BLD06-00489 BARRY & LISA GREENBERC 1111 FRIENDLY AVE ALT RSF 2 0 $11,225 CONVERT STORAGE AREA TO F AMIL Y ROOM BLD06-00478 RICHARD & KAREN MCPHE 2340 KRlSTlAN ST ALT RSF 2 0 $10,633 CONVERT SCREEN PORCH TO 3 SEASON FOR SFD BLD06-00537 MIKE SINGER & AMY BAU!\; 1644 MORNINGSIDE DR ALT RSF 2 $10,000 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD BLD06-0054I XIAOY AN ZHU 1217 EMILY CT ALT RSF $9,400 BASEMENT BEDROOM AND BATH FOR SFD BLD06-00520 SUZANNE BENTLER 520 S GOVERNOR ST ALT RSF $8,000 REMODEL KITCHEN INCLUDING ADDING WINDOWS BLD06-0055I SMITH-MORELAND 960 ARLINGTON DR ALT RSF $5,500 CONVERT SCREEN PORCH TO 4 SEASON PORCH FOR SFD BLD06-00497 JUDY & DREW DILLMAN 853 NORMANDY DR ALT RSF 2 $5,000 WINDOWS AND KITCHEN REMODEL FOR SFD BLD06-00535 DCM INC 1036 E COURT ST ALT RSF 2 $2,000 EGRESS WINDOW FOR SFD BLD06-00560 JEFF MILLER & AMY SEIDEl 1147 E COURT ST ALT RSF $1,500 KITCHEN REMODEL FOR SFD BLD06-00401 WILLIAM P WATERBURY 1720 E COURT ST ALT RSF 0 $800 Install two egress windows in bedrooms Total AL T/RSF permits: 14 Total Valuation: $267,694 BLD06-00575 JASON & LIZ LOUGHRAN 1023 ARLINGTON DR NEW RAC 0 0 $15,000 BELOW GROUND POOL ADDITION FOR SFD BLD06-00366 LOREN DEETZ 628 N JOHNSON ST NEW RAC $\,800 DETACHED STORAGE BUILDING FOR SFD Total NEW/RAC permits: 2 Total Valuation: $16,800 BLD06-00578 B & H BUILDERS L L C 959 TAMARACK TRL NEW RSF $350,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD06-00509 RON SCHINTLER, INC 40 WHITE OAK PL NEW RSF $294,900 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD06-00538 TIMOTHY M RANDALL 1630 N DUBUQUE RD NEW RSF $240,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD06-00495 DAVE KRlZ 10 HICKORY PL NEW RSF 2 $224,905 SFD WITH A TT ACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD06-00545 JESSE ALLEN 318 WESTBURY DR NEW RSF 2 $223,797 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE Total NEW/RSF permits: 5 Total Valuation: $1,333,602 BLD06-00452 BEATRICE & HERBERT DA v 707 KIMBALL AVE OTH RSF 3 0 $2,864 FENCE FOR SFD Page: Date: To: From: 5 8/1/2006 7/1/2006 7/3112006 City ofIowa City Extraction of Building Permit Data for Census Bureau Report Permit Number Address ~ Imor Total Valuation : $2,864 Name TotalOTHIRSF permi.. : I ~ Use Stories Units Valuation BLD06-00476 MACHT, INC. 304 E BURLINGTON ST REP MIX REBUILD MIXED COMMERCIALIRESIDENTIAL BUILDING DUE TO STORM DAMAGE BLD06-00527 SOUTHTOWN PROPERTIES] 307 -21 S LINN ST REP MIX REROOF MIXED COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 2 o $540,000 2 $52,000 Total REPIMIX permits: 2 Total Valuation : $592,000 BLD06-00503 COLLEGE STREET BILLIARI 114 COLLEGE ST REROOF OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING REP NON 2 $28,433 Total REPINON permits: 1 Total Valuation: $28,433 BLD06-00540 KENT ACKERSON 617 BROWN ST REPLACE FOUNDATION FOR DETACHED GARAGE FOR SFD REP RAC $11,600 Total REPIRAC permits: I Total Valuation: $11,600 BLD06-00428 STEVE C BERNHARDT 18 S GOVERNOR ST REP RDF 3 NEW FOUNDATION FOR EXISTING DUPLEX BLD06-0051I GARY SLOAT 102 CLAPP ST REP RDF TRUSS REPAIR, REINSULATE, REDRYWALL, REPAIR TRIM BLD06-0046I 4A PROPS LC 923 E WASHINGTON ST REP RDF 3 REMOVE STANDING SEAM ROOF AND REPLACE WITH FIBERGLASS SHINGLES, RESHEA TH HOUSE. BLD06-00522 LUKE MIZER 1218 E COLLEGE ST REP RDF 2 REPLACE FRONT STEPS FOR DUPLEX o $75,000 $8,733 o $7,500 $200 Total REPIRDF permits: 4 Total Valuation : $91,433 RMF $319,640 $59, I 06 $12,500 $8,000 $6,075 0 $6,000 $6,000 BLD06-00514 BRADY, KEITH M 2664 TRIPLE CROWN LN REP RMF REROOF ALL TRIPLE CROWN CONDO BUILDINGS EXCEPT HIGHEST NUMBER BLD06-00555 ALPHA DELTA PI ALUMNAE III E BLOOMINGTON ST REP REROOF SORORITY BLD06-00566 RIVER CITY PROPERTY MA 1305 SUNSET ST REP REROOF RMF BLD06-00564 TY'N CAE CONDOS I 150 CAMBRIA CT REP REPLACE EXTERIOR DECKS FOR 8 CONDO TOWNHOUSES 1150-52-54-56-58-60-62 CAMBRIA COURT BLD06-00579 JEANETTE M WATERS ET A 5 WOOLF AVE REP Reshingle rooffrom hail damage BLD06-00445 HA WKEYE CONSTRUCTION 714 E COLLEGE ST REP REROOF RMF IN HISTORIC DISTRICT BLD06-00513 FANGMAN RENTALS LLC 620 CHURCH ST REP REROOF RMF RMF RMF RMF 3 RMF Page: Date : To: From: 6 8/1/2006 7/1/2006 7/31/2006 City ofIowa City Extraction of Building Permit Data for Census Bureau Report 1'= 1'= Permit Number Name Address Imor Use Stories BLD06-00547 ALPHA PHI HOUSE CORP 01 906 E COLLEGE ST REP RMF 2 REROOF FRONT PORCH OF SORORITY BLD06-00533 GARY HUGHES 409 BOWERY ST REP RMF 2 FOUNDATION REPAIR FOR RMF UNIT BLD06-00549 TIM TAFFE 726 IOWA AVE REP RMF REPLACE DRYWALL, NEW WINDOW SASH, DOOR REPAIR, REPAIR ROOF, PORCH REPAIR BLD06-00528 DAN-RICH L TD 703 IOWA AVE REP RMF 2 REROOF Units Valuation $4,500 $4,005 $3,500 $1,400 Total REP/RMF permits: II Total Valuation: $430,726 BLD06-00100 TODD MORROW 1903 MORNINGS IDE DR REP RSF FIRE REPAIR FOR SFD BLD06-0053I MICHELLE NAGLE 116 S DODGE ST REP RSF 2 rebuilding brick chimney damaged in storm BLD06-00516 MBCMC LLC 22 I S LUCAS ST REP RSF Replace porch floor framing and flooring. $ I 20,000 $6,000 $750 Total REP/RSF permits: 3 Total Valuatiou : $126,750 GRAND TOTALS: PERMITS: 78 VALUATION: $4,513,401 Page 1 of 1 ~ Marian Karr From: Gina Peters [gina.peters@ecicog.org] Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 10:01 AM To: Joan Benson; Allen Witt; Monica Vernon; A. Vansloten; Administrator Brian James; Arnold-Olson & Assoc.; Becky Shoop; Beth Freeman; C Clerk Tracey Mulcahey; Casie Kadlec; Chad; Christine Taliga; City Clerk Connie Evans; Marian Karr; City Clerk Nancy Beuter; City Clerk Tawnia Kakacek; Don Saxton; Doug; Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan; Gary Grant; Hills; Howard R. Green; IA Environmental Education Project; Steve Atkins; J. Patrick White; James Houser; Jane Tompkins; Jeff Davidson; jeff schott; Jo Hogarty; Joshua Schamberger; Kelly Hayworth; Lee Clancey; Les Beck; Linda Langston; Lu Barron; Mark K Kresowik; Mary Day; Mayor Betty Svoboda; Mayor Dale Stanek; Mayor David Franker; Mayor Don Gray; Mayor Eldon Slaughter; Mayor Glen Potter; Mayor Jim Fausett; Mayor Joei Miller; Mayor John Nieland; Mayor Kay Halloran; Mayor Louise From; Mayor Lynn Hudson; Mayor Mike Williams; Mayor Patrick Murphy; Mayor Paul Tuerler; Mayor Robert Kurt; Ross Wilburn; Mayor Rozena McVey; Mayor Thomas C. Patterson; Mayor William Cooper; Mayor William Voss; Michael Lehman; Mike Goldberg; Nancy Quellhorst; Pat Harney; Paula Freeman-Brown; Priority One; Rod Sullivan; Sally Stutsman; Sandie Deahl; Scott Grabe; Sharon Meyer; Terrence Neuzil Subject: August 24 Meeting Reminder Dear Colleagues: Just a friendly reminder to mark August 24, 2006, 5:00 p.m., for the next Johnson/Linn County Public Leadership Group meeting. The meeting will again be held at the North Liberty Community Center. Among the items to be discussed will be the Trail Link Subcommittee's recommendation on a trail alignment, a'report on the Regionalism Subcommittee's recent meeting, and discussion of the future of the City of Cedar Rapids' Aviation (helicopter) Program. A complete agenda and additional information will be sent to you two weeks prior to the meeting. See you then. Douglas D. Elliott Executive Director ECICOG 700 16th Street NE, Suite 301 Cedar Rapids, IA 52402-4665 319.365.9941, ex!. 22 319.365.9981 (fax) www.ecicog.org 7/27/2006 MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TUESDAY, July 25, 2006 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL PRELIMINARY [][ Members Present: Lisa Beckmann, Beverly Witwer, Sara Baird, Kate Karacay. Paul Retish, Scott King. Members Absent: Martha Lubarolf, GeoffWilming, Sehee Foss. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Others Present: Joe Schultz and Nicole Sneitzer. Call to Order Beckmann called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. Consideration of the Minutes of the June 27. 2006 Meeting MOTION: Beckmann moved to accept the minutes as submitted, and Witwer seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Recommendations to Council There was no discussion. Human Rights Breakfast Karacay spoke with Pak Nurack of Thai Flavors and the theme of his speech will be "How to be a Community Citizen with a Global Perspective." Karacay also noticed that the date of the Breakfast conflicts with a religious observance. Retish moved to amend the date of the Breakfast to September 21 ifthe Wayne Richie Ballroom and speaker are available on that date. King seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Movies Series Karacay reported on the success ofthe recent screening of I'm Still Here: The Truth About Schizophrenia. Bowers reported that she has asked someone from the Hate Acts Rapid Response Team to serve on a panel after the screening of Hate Crimes on October 25 at the Iowa City Public Library. Calendar The interfaith website magnets will be completed and sent out at the end of August along with a letter explaining the purpose behind the creation of the magnets. Bowers will send the magnets out to the Human Rights mailing list. Relational Aggression Witwer, Jane Balvanz and Blair Wagner are planning the presentation and hope to have some ideas for advertising the event by the August meeting date as well as a start time for the program on November 8 at the Iowa City Public Library. Handouts for International Non-Native Soeakers King passed out drafts of the handouts for International Non-Native Speakers. Commissioners were asked to take the pamphlet home and note any additions and/or subtractions and bring them to the next meeting. Retish mentioned that prior to distribution; Dr. Plugge and Marian Coleman should be sent copies of the pamphlet for their suggestions. King will decide by the next meeting what languages to get the pamphlet translated into. Youth Awards This agenda item was skipped because of Lubaroff's absence. Read Cases Commissioners read two cases where no probable cause was found. Reoorts of Commissioners King will appear on KCRG, channel 9 to discuss Gay Marriage on Sunday, July 30th at 9 A.M. Status of Cases Bowers updated Commissioners on the status of cases. Adiournment There being no further business before the Commission, Beckmann moved to adjourn. Witwer seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 7:54 p.rn. Board or Commission: Human Rights ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 (Meetin Date' TERM NAME EXP. 1/24 2/28 3/28 4/25 5/23 6/27 7/25 8/22 9126 10/24 11/28 12/26 12/27 Lisa Beckmann 111/07 X X X X NMN X X Q Paul Relish 1/1107 OlE X X OlE NMN X X Q GeoffWilming 1/1/07 X X X X NMN OlE OlE Q Sara Baird 1/1/08 X X X X NMN X X Q Bev Witwer 1/1/08 X X X X NMN X X Q Scott King 1/1/08 X X X X NMN OlE X Q Martha 1/1/09 X X X X NMN OlE OlE Lubaroff Q Sehee Foss 1/1/09 X X X OlE NMN OlE OlE Q Kate Karacay 1/1/09 X X X OlE NMN X X Q KEY: x = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member NMNQ - No meeting, no quorum 2 Dei[ MINUTES CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JULY 18,2006 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM PRELIMINARY Members Present: Regenia Bailey, Connie Champion, Bob Elliot Members Absent: None Staff Present: Karin Franklin, Tracy Hightshoe Others Present: Wendy Ford, Nancy Quellhorst CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chairperson Bailey called the meeting to order at 9:00a.m. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 27. 2006 Motion: Eliot moved to approve the minutes from the June 27, 2006 meeting, as submitted. Champion seconded the motion. Motion passed 3:0. INTRODUCTION AND DISCUSSION WITH WENDY FORD: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR: Franklin introduced Wendy Ford, the new economic development coordinator, who will begin work on August 7th. Franklin asked if the Committee had questions for Ford and said that Ford would also appreciate input of the Conunittee's expectations for the position. Elliot said that many citizens don't pay attention to what the City Council does, but many others question why the City Council makes a particular decision. He asked Ford if, as she has witnessed the City Council's decisions, anything has occurred to her to question as she has considered the City's economic efforts. Ford said that first and foremost, in researching this job and looking at the economic development policies written eleven years ago, the thing that comes to mind is that it is a document that was put together by this community and presented back to the community as a largely agreed upon way to go forward. She said she thinks there is a perceived gap between the things the City Council does and the public's remembering its input into the process of either putting it together or electing the members of the City Council. Ford said that she sees bridging that gap as being an important part of her role in carrying out the wishes of the people with particular attention to the development of business and the health of the community. Ford said that, in general, people lose sight of the fact that the community wants to go in a certain direction and a particular issue polarizes a person into thinking something can't be done or that he or she disagrees. She said that when the person can back out a little bit and remember that the decision is really aligned with these policies, then perhaps that polarization or feeling that the City isn't doing the things they want to see done could be lessened a little bit. Franklin said that eleven years between policies is a long time. Bailey agreed that it is an old document. Bailey asked Ford how she would summarize the direction that it set. Ford said she did not know ifit could be summarized. Bailey agreed. Ford said it may be time to redo it. Champion said that might be the first job - to look at it and come to the Committee with recommendations on how it might be changed to work better. Franklin said the policy includes all the financial assistance guidelines, which were put together quite a while ago. She agreed with Ford that it would probably be prudent to revisit those and see if, in fact, that is what the Council wants to have. Bailey said those were reviewed a couple of years ago, and her recollection is the document didn't set forth a particular direction but was just some general guidelines. Franklin stated that it identifies industries that are of interest and discusses the wages being an important factor in terms of financial assistance. Bailey said that industries can be identified, but then what is the next step. She said that you can create a plan, but it is like having a strategy without goals and objectives in the plan to implement. Bailey said she would be interested in knowing what steps were taken to go in those directions and then where do we need to pick up and are these industries still feasible as focal points. Ford said that as important as that is, it is also very important to communicate that and take everything back to that message. She said that one can identify a strategy, and when little steps are taken, it's all in the name of getting us here. Ford said that the more often that can be communicated, the more people understand that they may not like this decision, but it is because we're all trying to get to a given point. Bailey said that fundamentally that hasn't been used as a roadmap for this Committee or for any of the work. Franklin said that it certainly hasn't been marketed, which is what Ford is talking about. Ford said that the idea is to have a plan and then to reference the plan and the ways in which the day to day decisions are executed are going to fulfill that plan. Bailey said the Committee has also talked about the downtown market mix and figuring out how that falls into this plan. Then referencing the plan, the mix, and the next steps would be helpful. Elliot said that industry has been mentioned three or four times in the discussion, but business has not. He stated that expanding smaller businesses into larger businesses is probably the most prevalent and the most frequent kind of economic development, although we tend to overlook that while concentrating on industry and 100 jobs, as opposed to looking at 50 different businesses that are going to expand from maybe three people to eight people. Bailey said that the Committee facilitates attracting industry, and that is really what the Committee works with in regard to ICAD. Champion suggested defining the two terms, as she feels they are kind of interchangeable. Elliot said that when one says industry, people specifically think of factories and factory jobs. He said he thinks that economic development looks at the wide range of business. Champion agreed. Elliot said that a little grocery store becomes a big grocery store, a little clothing shop becomes a larger clothing shop, or a TV sales place becomes a larger TV place. Bailey said that or it stays in business. She said that larger isn't always healthy; growth isn't always healthy. Elliot said there are those people in Iowa City who think there is no reason for growth. He said he is very surprised at the people who have asked why there is always talk about growth and why can't we stay like we are - people who say I don't want to be like Des Moines. Ford said that is because we have the economic stability of a university and people whose jobs don't hinge on economic growth. Bailey said that how growth is defined is also a factor - growing one's business to have full-time employees rather than part-time employees or growing a business to offer a more competitive package of benefits and differentiating one's business by services and skilled employees versus part-time, temporary workers is also a growth issue. Franklin said the position the City has worked from for a number of years is a combination of growing the tax base and quality jobs. She said that often leads to placement of new business entities within the community, because it builds the tax base as a building is built. Franklin said it could very well be the expansion of an existing business too, but what the City has focused on most is those two factors - that is f the basis for financial assistance packages - building a new building, how many employees it has, and what is the quality ofthose jobs. She said that is consistent with what the State's position has been in its programs too. Franklin said there has been difficulty with the CDBG funding for businesses for startups, in terms of looking at the property tax base. She said that sometimes they're just renting a space and may have two or three employees and pay very little. Franklin said one issue is how to massage the policy to address startups. Bailey said she thinks that is why small business does get overlooked, because they don't typically owo; they typically lease, rent, or whatever. Champion said they are paying taxes, whether they're leasing or renting or buying. Bailey agreed but said it is not as obvious as it is with new construction. Franklin said that if someone is renting, it's not new. She said that one may be paying property taxes as a business, but it's already established there. Elliot said that Bailey and Franklin were saying that with that building paying property taxes, it would be the same taxes whether the startup company were there or an existing company were there. Champion said that if there was no one there, they could allow the property to deteriorate. Franklin agreed and said that therefore maintaining the tax base perhaps should be a piece of this also. Bailey agreed and said that is especially true in the dowotowo, because there is the possibility, with the University, of things being removed from the tax base and not necessarily deteriorating. Ford said, regarding Elliot's comments, she has thought about how to respond to people who ask why we need to grow. She agreed that growth is not always a good thing but asked where the equilibrium is and if equilibrium is even possible in a community. Ford said she would venture to say it is not possible, because things change so much. She said that if you can't achieve an equilibrium and if you're shrinking, that's certainly not healthy. Ford said therefore the best thing to do is to maintain equilibrium, which is almost impossible, or grow. Champion said people don't understand that growth is becoming a worldwide problem. She said that European countries are not even reproducing themselves, and Japan is in big trouble now, because its population is shrinking and growing older. Champion said it's a complex problem in that sometime the world has to stop growing, yet it is not economically healthy when things don't grow. Elliot said that budgets grow each year. He said that 70% of a budget is personnel, and personnel get increases every year. Elliot said that if the tax base doesn't increase, there is not enough money to operate. Bailey said that we need strategic growth. She said that one of the things people are concerned about is growth. Bailey said people think it is fme for them to live here, but other people shouldn't be. She said the residential growth is an issue. Bailey said to look how far out the population is going on to Lower West Branch Road. She said there are challenges with fire services and other infrastructure challenges. Bailey said that is the primary concern. She said that she did not know that people necessarily argue too much with growing the business tax base. Champion said that might be true - that it is the sprawl that people object to. Bailey said she thinks that is how rampant residential growth is characterized. She said that if the City had more businesses, small and large. coming into town, she was not sure that people would object. Quellhorst said she thinks the City manages it very well. She said the City balances economic growth and its social responsibility and should be more vocal about it. Bailey said that is where the infrastructure questions arise. She said we have that expectation of service as the City grows. Ford said the City is very good at taking care of the neediest of the population. She said we need to do better, but the City balances it better than most of the communities she has worked in. Elliot said that Iowa City is the most schizophrenic community that he has ever witnessed. He said there is a sizeable group of people who say we are already doing far too much for, say the homeless, and then people on the other side who say we're not doing nearly enough. Elliot said we have to realize that we have to try to walk dowo the middle somewhere. Bailey said that is not schizophrenia but heterogeneity. Franklin said it depends on your perspective. Ford said this is not like some communities where everyone has the same opinion. Elliot said there are widely diverse opinions, which makes it an exciting community and a frustrating community. Ford said that is what contributes to a lot of the appeal and the growth in Iowa City; people have that sense of freedom and feel that they can find people who will agree with them. Champion asked Ford what experiences she has had that will make her succeed in this newly-created position. Ford replied that her eleven years as Director of the Convention and Visitors Bureau was a great foray into a branch of economic development and gave her a taste for growing a community, improving a community, making it appealing, and marketing that community to, in that case, the tourism community, whose ripple effect permeates every other aspect of the community. She said she had that tangent, or maybe deeper into the circle, as CVB Director. Ford said the activities that go along with that in promoting the community and creating partnerships in collaboration with community groups, such as the Chamber or ICAD and other groups in the community, provide a great base. Ford said that more recently in her roles as marketing director for the MBA Career Services unit in the School of Management and as Director of the Career Center for a year really helped her refme some of the skills that will be helpful in economic development, particularly building relationships with employers and helping them determine their hiring needs both currently and upcoming to help match our student bodies with those needs. She said it involved developing relationships and gaining the confidence of an employer to come to the University for employees. Ford said that a side benefit of that is realizing that there is a perceived lack, or a real lack, of high quality jobs in the Iowa City area. She said that we have this fantastic resource on our doorstep, the product of The University ofIowa, and if we could keep more of those people in Iowa and Iowa City, we would be better off. Ford said that between the CVB work and the Career Center Work are solid connections to economic development. Bailey (?) said that at the last "creative economy" session, Andy Stohl discussed the lack of creative jobs that attract young people to stay in the area. Bailey said she has thought about what that means, how we could accommodate that, and how to approach that. She said that some of these young people did have jobs, but those jobs weren't satisfying because they didn't have the creativeness that the people wanted. Franklin said that it was very resonant with the Committee's conversation at its last meeting about flexible jobs. Quellhorst said that is the key. She said it is not just about creative work; it's the flexibility as much as anything. Champion said that jobs that can be creative are the jobs that we don't have here. She said that her son and daughter-in-law would love to come back to Iowa City, but their jobs are highly scientific and also very flexible. Champion said those are the kind of jobs that offer creativity in the sense that no one cares what kind of hours you're working; you know what has to be done and you do it. Quellhorst (?) suggested this was a generational thing. She said she would love it if everyone would talk to five people in their twenties and ask them how they would be affected if they had a work possibility that might be conventional work, but they would be able to approach it in their own way. Bailey said that a lot of the people who have stayed here are the people who have found a way to make this work. Ford said she says it is generational, because there are a lot more people in their twenties who just won't put up with the nine to five routine. She said that younger people aren't willing to do it, and a lot of them want to go the entrepreneurial route, even though some of them don't want to take risks. Franklin said that many young people are willing to move someplace without a job and fmd a job when they get there and say that they will not take something that's eight to five and stick to that. She said that would be way too risky for her and a lot of people she knows. Franklin said it is all part of work ethic, how much risk one is willing to take, and that those in their twenties and thirties are willing to do that a little bit more. She said she did not know how to approach this in terms of looking at businesses locally. Franklin guessed that those businesses that are smaller will have greater flexibility. Bailey said it is easier for them to be a little more nimble with a work force that seems to only want to be employed on their terms, whereas in a corporate environment, it is a lot harder to move the entire organization toward that. She said that maybe that is the difference. Quellhorst said that developing an awareness is so critical - that employers understand that this is an issue and there is a way to approach it. She said the Chamber has gone down this road, and it is a huge issue. Bailey said the challenge is that the gatekeepers and the policyrnakers are often of a different mindset, because gatekeepers are often in corporate, or governmental, or university. She said that people who seek those kinds of jobs tend to be risk averse. Elliot said that it is changing significantly. He said that a person like him who came out of the depression would find it inconceivable to take some kinds of risks after seeing what happened to unemployed people. Elliot said that young people now have never seen that and have no awareness of it. He said they have confidence because things have always been taken care of, they assume that will continue, and generally it does. Elliot said there is also the flexibility that will trump career possibilities. He said he knows people who would be happy to move to Boulder or San Diego and tend bar to earn sufficient money to have the lifestyle and the freedom that they want. Elliot said that one of the things happening in this country is that the jobs that are safe are the creative jobs, and the jobs that one just has to learn how to crunch the numbers for are going overseas. He said this is a great time to have the creative, flexible workforce coming up. Franklin asked what the Chamber is doing with regard to this discussion. Quellhorst said the Chamber is working on a plan. She said it starts with building awareness and helping enough people understand that this is an opportunity and that the need exists. Quellhorst said she thinks we will be pushed into it, because the work force is not going to be there. She said it is not just about young people but is about retirees too, who will be looking for the exact same thing. Bailey asked what large employers could get on board with this. She asked what latitude, the City, for example, has to set the example of a more flexible work force. Franklin said there is flex time within her department in which people can choose their hours within a range, with the expectation that a work product will be completed. Quellhorst said that one shouldn't think of this just in terms of work hours, because it is much broader than just flex time. She said it is much more than that, including things like working from home, having a flexible environment, and having the ability to leave during the day to participate in some kind of community or service activity. Elliot said the person who ran the entrepreneurial center at the College of Business felt that it was in the wrong college, as he felt the College of Business was too conservative to have the entrepreneurial center. Elliot said that some forward thinking and flexible thinking managers can see the cost savings from working at home. He said that flexibility comes from managers, and there are still way too many managers who don't understand. Elliot said one has to understand that we should evaluate people on their productivity, not on their attendance. Quellhorst agreed and said that, on the continuum, we start with building awareness. She said there is potential to market and brand this corridor with this. Quellhorst said people could be drawn from all over the place. Bailey said this will involve not only awareness but training managers to a degree. Champion said that as younger people become managers, all that will change anyway. Quellhorst said that there are a lot of ways that people can approach their jobs with flexibility, and it has to do with taking ownership, taking responsibility for their areas, and flexibility within that. She said that it is a broad mindset. Franklin said that what it requires is that managers have to define jobs and outcomes much more precisely. Elliot said that is what people are being trained to do in a lot of our traditional institutions. Ford said that she thinks there is a shift toward that now, and that's why there is a lot of talk about aligning goals, objectives, and strategies toward that end goal. Ford said that in the College of Business, a class that she taught was all about career management and self management, as well as some of teamwork. She said that one of the most interesting aspects of the class was the fact that she was assigned to teach goal setting and marry the two ideas of corporate goal setting and personal goal setting and look at creating that triangle with the ultimate goal at the top, with the steps taken to achieve that goal mirroring your personal life and your business life. Ford said there was dialogue about if one is going to work and punching a clock, where are you going with that. She said the discussion focused on having all activities aligned with what the outcome is supposed to be. Quellhorst said she thought we are all better served by that. She said she did not understand that mindset of being on time and being at your desk. Quellhorst said the important thing is to get the job done. Franklin said that workforce development has never been a strong focus of what the City is involved in. She said that is true for a variety of reasons, mostly because workforce development has been done in other segments of the economic development community. Franklin said that if there is a way, as the planned strategy is put together, to be useful to that, she would like to hear about it. Ford said that one idea might be to go to the Society for Human Resource Managers. She said that to have a chamber and/or Iowa City led program or track within their meeting that focuses on creating the creative workplace might be a real branding opportunity for our area. Elliot said that HR is an emerging profession. He said this conversation gives a feel for where the thought processes are. Franklin said the Committee put a work list together before the position was advertised. She said there is a lot of basic information for Ford to learn about the different financial assistance packages and programs, State programs and how the systems in the City work also. Ford said she is looking forward to starting her job. Champion said it is important for Ford to know that people are willing to adjust and change. Bailey said she is interested in moving forward on the market mix/event mix downtown issue as quickly as is feasible. She said that envisioning opportunities for what the downtown is and could be should be created, and that will be helpful to those interested in developing south of Burlington. Bailey asked Ford if she had any questions for the Committee. Ford asked each member for his/her expectations from her in ,this job. Champion said she would like to see some positive economic development to grow the tax base in a proper way. She said the City seems progressive and seems to have everything, but it is behind. Champion said the City probably needs two fire stations at this point. She stated that has to somehow become a priority, because public safety really has to be provided for people, or the community disintegrates. Elliot said he expected that Ford would be very knowledgeable and within, at least a year, be able to tell the Committee if there is a profile of the kinds of businesses and industries, commercial properties, that are interested in Iowa City, and if there is a profile of those that are not interested and why not. He said that he would expect Ford to be on top of things and be able to give an idea of which is the best way to go - to direct what can be done to encourage those who are interested and how to identify the ones that will be beneficial for Iowa City. Champion said there are things that she does not personally consider economic development, including gambling and malls. Bailey said she would expect that Ford would be a visible player in economic development and bring the City as an equal partner to the economic development table. She said that the Committee doesn't do this alone but should be part of the conversations that are happening. Bailey said she also expected Ford to approach the job creatively and expected her to think in terms of ten and 15 years, not now and five years from now. She said that we tend to default to retail, and she thought that is not always the best strategy. Bailey said that she is interested in looking at how to build the retail centers creatively and sort of tightly, instead of rezoning all of our commercial to retail or to less lucrative economic development approaches. She said she was also interested in developing the aviation commerCe park and looking at areas east to grow that tax base and also to grow the diversification of the business that we have here. Ford said she is interested in a creative, intense and focused approach. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:50a.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte Council Economic Development Committee Attendance Record 2006 Term Name Expires 1118 2/16 3/10 3/15 3/30 4/4 6/27 7/18 Rel!enia Bailev 01/02/08 X X X X X X X X Bob Elliott 01/02/08 X X X X X X X X Connie Champion 01/02/08 OlE X X X X X X X Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = AbsentlExcused I I I I I I MINUTES PLANNJNG AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL JULY 20, 2006 fl1r PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Bob Brooks, Beth Koppes, Terry Smith, Dean Shannon MEMBERS EXCUSED: Wally Plahutnik STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: John Hieronymus, Cal Lewis, Kevin Digmann, Pam Michaud RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent), SUB06-00011 , a final plat of Hollywood Manor, Part 9, a 4.84-acre, 12-lot residential subdivision located at the ends of Wetherby Drive and Tofting Circle subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:33 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEM: REZ06-00015, discussion of an application submitted by Hieronymus Square Associates for a rezoning of 1.12-acres of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone. Miklo said in 1992 the area generally between Burlington and Court Street was designated for redevelopment and expansion of the downtown in the Near Southside Plan. The Near Souths ide Plan and 1995 Near Southside Design Plan are part of the Comprehensive Plan. They were adopted to guide development south of Burlington Street. The plans emphasize commercial development between Buriington and Court Streets, and residential development between Court Street and the railroad track. The plan acknowledges that given the market there would be some residential development between Court and Buriington Streets. The plans also address the issues of parking, open space, pedestrian access, traffic circulation, historic preservation and amenities. The pians encourage that the character of the downtown be transferred south of Burlington Street and recognize that improvements to Burlington Street will be necessary in order to bridge the two sides of the street. Miklo said in a related matter, the City Councii is currently considering a median landscaping improvement plan to Burlington Street. In 1992 the City adopted two new zoning districts to apply to the Near Souths ide Neighborhood area, the Central Business Support zone (CB-5) and the Planned Residentiai Muiti-Family zone (PRM). The relationship between the CB-10 zone north of Burlington Street and the CB-5 zone south of Burlington Street was intended to create a hierarchy of taller buildings and more intense development in the downtown core with a step-down to the CB-5 south of Buriington Street. The CB-10 zone allows for a floor area ratio (FAR) of 10; there is no building height iimit in the CB-10 zone. The airport overlay restricts most of the downtown buildings to between 12 and 14 stories. The CB-5 zone allows a base FAR of 3 and a height maximum of 75-feet in the commercial zone which would allow for six-floors of commercial development with the potential for some residential development. The CB-5 zone also contains a bonus provision allowing for increase in FAR for projects that contain public amenities or benefit such as affordable housing and open space. The applicant's proposal was to rezone the area at the intersection of Ciinton and Buriington Streets to CB-10. The transfer of the CB-10 zone to the south side of Burlington Street would be in conflict with the current poiicy of having the step down and the transition in intensity and building height. The City would consciously need to Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 2 change the existing policy to allow this zoning to occur. Staff felt there was some merit to re-examining this policy which was adopted 14-years ago. Considerations included: . Are there public interest considerations that would support a change in policy and therefore a change in zoning? Staff examined the CB-10 area closely in the downtown and noted that the current FAR of 10 had not been achieved anywhere in the downtown area. Most downtown properties had a FAR of 2 or less. Exceptions included the Iowa State Bank Building & the Sheraton Hotel (FAR of approximately 5); Jefferson Building (FAR of approximately 6), Vogal House, Whiteway Building (FAR of approximately 6) and the Plaza Towers (FAR of approximately 4.75). Staff felt that raised the question as to whether a FAR of 10, twice the size of most of the largest buildings currently in downtown, would be appropriate. Staff felt it might not be appropriate as the downtown area contained a collection of both historic and contemporary buildings and a streetscape that the City and private sector had worked hard to maintain. The introduction of such large buildings would change the character and ambiance of the downtown area. . Would it be appropriate to consider zoning areas south of Burlington Street CB-10? The area between Burlington and Court Street and further south of Court Street did not display the same character as the core of downtown in terms of streetscape and scale of buildings. There was quite of bit of under- and undeveloped properties, empty areas and parking iot areas south of Burlington Street. Staff felt it might be appropriate to encourage the market for higher density properties to develop along Burlington Street on both the north and south side. That change could have the potential to relieve or to shift the market for future high-rise development into that area instead of in the downtown core area. Staff felt it might be appropriate to consider overlays or other controls in the CB-10 zone so that it would not develop at such a high intensity. Such a change would take considerable study. In the interim staff felt that CB-10 zoning on the south side of Burlington Street would provide a relief or another alternative location for that intensity of development. . If the poiicy was changed, which areas south of Burlington St. should be considered for rezoning to CB-10? The City had already received additional requests for CB-10 zoning south of Burlington Street. It was Staff's feeling that there needed to be a logical extension with parameters. Instead of the City rezoning the entire area it would be an option to wait for property owners to make a request for rezoning and make a case-by- case determination in relationship to any new policy that might be adopted. . Are there conditions that should be applied to any areas rezoned to CB-1 0 to address the parking and urban design issues identified by the Near Souths ide Plan and Near Southside Design Plan? The Near Southside Plan discussed parking at length; to address the concern of the potential for parking for housing to displace or compete with commercial development the City had implemented the Near Southside Parking Facility District. The District allowed properties in the CB-5 to provide residential parking on site but they were also required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. The thought was that Council had utilized the 75% requirement to act as a disincentive for residential development and encourage commercial development. Staff felt that if the CB-10 zone were expanded, the parking impact fee should be applied in some form. Miklo said some credence should be given to the Near Souths ide Design plan which discussed the character of downtown in terms of scaie, building material, signage, color, etc. to provide guidance for the development south of Burlington Street and to ensure that the new development would be in character with the downtown. Staff felt there might be some conditions that the Commission might wish to consider in terms of design of the developments as they came through the process. A review of the Commission's role had been requested at the informal meeting. Currently the CB-10 zone did .not automatically require a design review through the Staff Design Review Committee; it was only required if an applicant applied for tax abatement or TIF. There were some zoning code requirements in terms of articulation of the building that the Building Official would review as part of the building permit. If a majority of the Commission were concerned about larger issues referred to in the Near Souths ide Plan, those concerns could be addressed in a Conditional Zoning Agreement. . Traffic Implications The Traffic Planners had looked at the proposed design very closely and felt that the proposed circulation system was appropriate. Jeff Davidson would be in attendance at the next informal meeting to address the Commission's concerns regarding proposed improvements to Burlington & Clinton Streets and Court Street. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 3 . Infrastructure Needs Sanitary sewer capacity would need to be looked at in the City's Capital Improvement Plan. Regardless of whether this project went forward, Staff felt sewer upgrades needed to be looked at given the City's policy of encouraging development in the downtown area. Summary: The rezoning proposal was not necessarily consistent with the current policy as adopted in the Near Souths ide Plan. Staff felt there was some merit to considering higher intensity south of Burlington Street in order to take some of the development pressure away from the downtown core and to help preserve the existing character of the core. Those objectives couid be met by rezoning additional land to CB-1 0 zone on the south side of Burlington Street and/or looking at further regulations in the core of downtown itself to prevent over intensity of development, which could be done independently of this application. Staff recommended deferral of the application untii the issue of policy change be resolved. Eastham asked if Staff were suggesting that the Commission could look at this particular rezoning request independently and not rezone large parts of the area south of Burlington Street. Miklo said that was correct, the City would not see this as a spot zoning as the area had a very clear relationship to the area just north of Burlington Street. In the near future the Commission would have additional rezoning requests for the general area being discussed. Public discussion was opened. John Hieronvmus, Managing Partner of Hieronymi Partners; Kevin Digmann, Hodge Construction; Cal Lewis, architect; Dwight Doverstein, Neumann Monson. Hieronymus said his mother, Frieda, had been a key figure in the development of downtown. Her vision for Iowa City had always been that it would always be more than just a campus town for the University. When urban renewal had become stalled, Frieda had stepped forward and put together some local investment groups to try to salvage the stale environment for the rebuilding of downtown. Her biggest undertakings had been Plaza Centre One on the Ped Mall; the development of Old Capitol Mall; and Capitol House - a 5-story low income elderly housing endeavor. He was trying to follow in his mother's viewpoint in what couid be done for the community and for downtown. Over a long period of time, Frieda had amassed several small parcels of land which when put together comprised much of the block being discussed. The City had taken a large portion of it for the parking ramp, but his family was left with 2/3 of one-half of the block to develop. His mother had also always felt that Iowa City lacked quality office space. At Staff's request his project team had put together a PowerPoint to provide a compiete picture of the building, the vision for this particular area and why they were requesting the rezoning. Cal Lewis, said the project team had been working together for the past year and also with City Staff to make sure their efforts were consistent with Staff's ideas for the evolution of Iowa City. In 1993, Frieda had involved him in the current project for the first time. At that time she had been 80+ years old and had told him of her concerns for the future of Iowa City. Her inspiration had stuck with him for the last 13-years that he'd been involved with the project. PowerPoint presentation Lewis said in the initial analysis phase the team had considered: the communitv itself including its architectural heritage, its diversity, the connection of the UI to downtown Iowa City. Traffic - Historically Burlington Street had been seen as a barrier to be jumped over. The project team felt that Staff was correct in viewing Burlington as a connector, a place to focus new deveiopment, high-density, commercial. Creating a safe environment for pedestrians & encouraaina foot traffic in the downtown area. This had started with the evolution of the Ped Mall. The connection between the campus and the city strongiy encouraged that type of interaction. They wanted to maintain that connection. Parkina Structures - Three structures within one block was a positive feature. They were interested in creating streetscape interaction rather than what was generated by a parking garage. Scale - The CB-10 zoning and the increased density allowed by the FAR would be compatible with the existing high vertical expression buildings. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 4 Existina buffer - The court house and post office were fixed; a stable environment so that the developers could be assured that the area was going to remain that way. It created a safe edge and a buffer to any other kinds of scale developments that might want to occur south of Burlington Street. Lewis said they'd provided a visual pre-view. The number one question for the Commission to consider was did they think this project would be an asset to Iowa City? Would CB-10 zoning on this site help to facilitate this project or a similar project? If Burlington was seen as the gathering place of new development rather than a barrier, this site became a natural and appropriate place for this project to occur. This development was not taking away things or changing the scale of the urban downtown fabric or pushing into lower scale residential areas. It was filling a need in a very concentrated area. What needed to be done to take advantage of this very unique site and this very special window of opportunity? Lewis said there was a team of developers willing to invest $40 million of their money into this project, right now. That $40 million was only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the benefits both economic and cultural, getting the quality of people that would be attracted to come and live in this place and all the resources that they could help share with the City and create the quality of lifestyle that Iowa City aspired to. They would be a very positive, reinforcing group to help that process occur. Kevin Diamann, Hodge Construction, said they'd been working on this project for a year. They'd analyzed what was south of Burlington and what was available in the short run that could potentially be developed. They were all very anxious to get going on this project, they'd heard a lot of support from the community for the project, it would be a good thing for downtown. He understood that the zoning needed to be looked at but looking at their project and what surrounded it, it would not affect anyone in the short term. Miklo said it was Staffs opinion that this application could go ahead independently, but the policy for the larger area needed to be looked at. If the decision was made that CB-1 0 zoning was appropriate south of Burlington, then the Commission could go forward with the rezoning without waiting on looking at the other areas. Eastham asked Hieronymus if he wished that they were on the other side of Burlington Street. Hieronymus said no; his mother had started putting together property approximately 30 years ago. At that point, she'd always seen that the City had to grow to the south. It was enclosed in a nine-block area primarily by the University and by City buildings. If the City were to grow at all, which it needed to do to stay vibrant, it would have to grow to the south of Burlington Street. She'd put together this parcel of land because she'd believed that it was the most appropriate place to have it done. Smith asked what was the time frame Hieronymus was working under and what was the criticality of getting some direction from the Commission. Hieronymus said they'd been working with this particular developer for a year. The project had been at the point of construction drawings in 1 995. They'd removed smaller structures that had been in the way then. Hodge Construction and Hieronymi Partnership had formed a joint venture which had had a life of 18 months to investigate this idea and to see if they could come up with a project that they believed would fit the vision of what Hieronymi Partnership wanted and would be a doable and reasonable project for Hodge Construction to become involved with. They'd since discussed extending the project another 6-months. One year of that time had now passed, this was the first critical step in getting the project done. If the zoning didn't change, they would not be able to build this building. After this step came several others before they could even begin to market and see if they could get the type of commitments that were financially necessary to build this building. That would also be critical as to whether or not they could achieve this project. Smith asked Hieronymus if he would be willing to extend the 45-day limitation period past the 7/31/06 date. Hieronymus said Staff had asked them if they'd be wiling to grant an extension. If the Commission saw this as an independent project and would go ahead and vote on it, they could move forward. If the Commission didn't feel that they could do that, then perhaps they could extend until the Commission's next formal meeting. The project team was already on a time crunch in connecting their partnership to see if this project could even be done. They had one year to get it to the point of being ready to break ground. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 5 Freerks said she appreciated their desire to move forward quickly but the Commission had just received their information packets that week-end. She felt the Commission owed it to the community and to the project team to spend more time and consideration on the application. She hoped that they'd be willing to extend the limitation period, it would be to everyone's benefit not to speed through it. Digmann said at the informal meeting they'd looked at how they could shift the building on the site and other modifications. They'd not spent a year planning without looking at many designs/options in order to get the best of both worlds. They'd tried to locate the building on the site so it would maximize views for everyone and to create the lower level to be as pedestrian friendly as possible. Eastham as.ked if they'd calculated the FAR and the number of residential units. Hieronymus said the FAR was right at 5. Lewis said approximately 150 residential units with approximately 250 bedrooms, there would be some variability depending on exactly which mix they ended up with. Koppes asked what were the 100 parking spots within the building designated for? Digmann said it was planned for residential; however until they knew they had the go ahead they were not set on the mid-rise condo units. They wanted to keep those floors fiexible, they might end up commercial or something else. Eastham asked if they were planning on changing the design depending on what the market analysis showed. Digmann said if they were successful with the CB-10 rezoning they would continue with this design on the outside. If they had a retail tenant that needed different square footage, they would "bump up" the first level to accommodate. They wanted to keep it as fiexible as possible. They didn't anticipate changing the footprint very dramatically for any particuiar user at this point. They'd tried to be fiexible enough in design to accommodate any tenant. Lewis said one of the things they'd focused on was a design base that had enough flexibility that it could accommodate different use types. It was very systemic so it could be efficient to build. There was a module that dealt with housing, a model for office, etc. They didn't want to reorganize the building, but within the basic frame work they'd tried to build in some flexibility of use which one had to do as an intelligent developer when you couldn't go out and market until you knew you had a project. Flexible intelligent planning. In consideration of all their investments to date, they didn't want to have to redesign the building. Pam Michaud, 109 S. Johnson Street, said she'd lived in Iowa City for 33 years including downtown near College Green Park on Johnson Street for 16 years. Her concern was that the applicant was asking for more than double density. Had they built in any sustainable or "green" features in the building with either recycled materials or reused content or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) recommendations that would be appropriate for this site. She'd done research on incorporating sustainable materials in to the building, solar heated water, things that wouldn't put an additional drain on city resources. She thought the design was very innovative and liked a lot of the building's elements which had been very carefully considered. Normal, Illinois, on its website homepage had a statement regarding all new construction involving green features being incorporated. Michaud distributed a definition/ informational handout to the Commission. Public discussion was closed. Cal Lewis said these types of issues had been considered at the initial stage of the project. Issues of the environment, energy and sustainabllity were very critical; it was an integral part of the way he thought about architecture. Specificity of LBED and LBED requirements was a whole layer of effectiveness. Big picture issues had been addressed from the beginning. Miklo asked the applicant to clarify if they were waiving the 45-day limitation period to August 3, 2006. Hieronymus said they'd like to wait and hear what the Commission was willing to do, if they'd go ahead and vote the project team would appreciate that opportunity. If the Commission felt they couldn't vote, the team didn't want the project to die at this point because they couldn't get the zoning changed. Smith asked if the building as proposed was within the CB-10 zoning requirement(s). Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 6 Miklo said there was some question if the ground level met the store fronts requirements. Staff had been working with the applicant, they were almost there, but there were still some things In question. In terms of height and FAR, it was compliant. Smith said given the fact that the proposal was not consistent with Plans that were 14-years old, was it correct that the existing Plans were a part of policy but not necessarily a part of City Code? Was there a legal obligation for the Commission to move forward with modification of the Plans prior to moving forward with the rezoning or did the Commission have the latitude to consider one ahead of the other or both in parallel? Behr said he thought the Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended. If the Commission wished to recommend the rezoning, they could do both at the same time. Technically the Comprehensive Plan amendment would precede it, but both could go through the Commission at the same time. Koppes said a public hearing would be required which would have to be announced so they could not decide both Items at the current meeting. Behr said if the Commission wished to vote yet that evening, they could 'catch up' with it. It could be held at the Council level and the Commission could follow with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Miklo said Staff would not advise voting on the zoning until the policy decision had been answered. He was not sure if an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be necessary or not. They first needed to decide if they were changing the policy, then decide if an actual amendment was needed, then they'd have to go through a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Brooks said one of the applicants had said that they'd spent the last year developing their plans. To expect the Commission to take this, contemplate it in a short period and make the decision to change something that was fairly significant to the future growth and functionality of the downtown was not feasible. There were a lot of issues that needed to be discussed and ironed out. Regardless of whether the rezoning went forward, there was a whole policy discussion that needed to take place including the Parking Impact Fee District. He felt that the Commission had a lot of homework ahead of them before he would feel comfortable voting on a rezoning. Freerks said she agreed. The Commission needed to give some direction regarding the whole concept of moving the zoning south of Burlington and how the Commission felt about items identified for consideration by Staff. Also discussion about the building on its own space as well. She felt there was a lot of merit to moving the CB-10 zoning across Burlington Street and in terms of protecting the wonderful features that were already In place in downtown. They needed to discuss a FAR of 10 or if they wanted to cut it back down a little to something more realistic. No development had even come close to reaching that scale. They also needed to discuss, if they were to recommend a rezoning would it be piece-by-piece or an overall rezoning. Freerks said the applicant had done a good job of not pulling a building on the entire block, of not filling in the entire block. However, who was to say that the next applicant wouldn't want to do so. They needed to consider all the scenarios that could come forward. She appreciated that the applicant had addressed some of the concerns that she'd voiced at the informai meeting. With respect to the glass and ambiance created by the building, as a pedestrian who might never enter the facility, she wanted to consider how pedestrians would feel walking under the glassed area. She'd heard of glass sky-scrapers in other cities creating 'ghost towns' of areas where there was very lillle street life. Freerks said it was very important to her to make sure that people would feel invited into the open space. She feit that the applicant understood what she meant, but a CZA would be a tool to heip the Commission feel more comfortable In specifying conditions in the City's best interest associated with this project. Trees: The trees were shown to grow up against the building's overhang. How would that work in terms of future growth for the trees. Miklo said the trees would be in the right-of-way, it would have to be a careful choice of trees in consultation with the City Forrester Courtvard and Service Area: After seeing the visual presentation and from comments made by the architect, that area seemed to be more vehicular oriented. People living in the building would have pets, where would they go with their pets? She asked if there could be more green space, an area to be really enjoyed by people. She wanted to see the open space be a real asset and hadn't noted too much green space in the visuals. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 7 Streetscaoe and Courtvard: It would be very important for them to invite people in. She wanted the area to be the best that it could be. Then hopefully everyone else who built a development in the future could do something as wonderful as their project. Eastham said Staff had requested the Commission to consider extending higher density multi-level development across Burlington Street. From what he'd heard so far, he saw a number of reasons to support the change. If there was a majority of the Commission who felt the same, he thought the decision could be made relatively speedily but not that evening. The question remained, did this particular proposal meet design criteria. His interest was not to confuse the developer or himself; he personally preferred that they adhere to the existing design criteria and processes that were in the Zoning Code. Smith said it looked like a good project. He applauded the team, their time, effort and expense that they'd already put into the project. There were some policy decisions that needed to be made. There seemed to be some consensus that the project was heading in the right direction. He didn't feel there was a reason to penalize the team or this project based on the fact that the Commission needed to make policy decisions. Motion: Smith made a motion to approve REZ06-00015, a rezoning of 1.12-acres of property located at 314 & 328 South Clinton Street from Central Business Support (CB-5) zone to Central Business (CB-10) zone. Shannon seconded the motion. Smith said the Commission should challenge themselves to move forward with the appropriate policy changes. Koppes said she would prefer that the Commission defer their vote in order to discuss parking issues and the Parking District Fee. It seemed that the general consensus was that CB-1 0 zoning would be appropriate. Miklo said for a CB-5 zone south of Burlington Street, developers were required to pay a fee for 75% of the required parking spaces for residential units. A CB-10 zone required no residential parking and the fee would not apply to this property unless it was made a condition of the rezoning. Staff had a concern for the equity issue of the other property owners in that same parking impact district that had been paying into that fund and for future developments. Staff didn't feel the parking had been adequately addressed and suggested a deferral in order to allow time for the discussion to occur. Eastham said Smith's was a good motion, however he wished to suggest tabling the motion until the next meeting in order to allow Staff time to prepare a set of recommendations in terms of the Comprehensive Plan and the provisions which would apply to this project. He was in agreement to move forward as quickly as possible, but yet that evening was not necessary. He felt it would be advisable to have as many members of the Commission present as possible. Miklo said a probable time schedule would be at the next meeting to identify and come to terms regarding any conditions such as parking, traffic, mix of uses in the building, green space in the courtyard. Staff would need to decide if an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be needed and a public hearing set for August 17. Then they could vote on both the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the rezoning and send both on to Council. Freerks said she did not feel comfortable making these types of decisions in such a rushed manner; it would set a precedent for others looking for a rezoning. There were way too may unanswered questions; she wanted to be sure that everything was in line with what other people were allowed and required to do. Brooks said his intent was not to vote down the application but to give the Commission another two weeks or what ever time was required to iron out the unresolved issues so he could feel comfortable voting on it. He wanted to be sure that the Commission was not setting any precedents or sending any messages to others who would ask for comparable zoning changes in the future. It would be nice if the Commission could have a year to understand and develop this scenario, but they didn't. Miklo said typically the Commission took two meetings to discuss and consider major rezoning requests. The applicant had met the deadline to have their application on the previous agenda but given the significance of the requested rezoning, the magnitude of the project, potential impact on the community and the change in policy, Staff had taken an extra two weeks to prepare the staff report. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 8 Eastham requested Smith and Shannon to withdraw their motion. Brooks said he sensed that everyone was excited about the project but it was more a process question and the need to feel comfortable that all issues had been clarified before they voted on it. He personally wanted to make sure that they were not agreeing to something that would later come back to bite the Commission. He was not ready to make that commitment yet. Freerks agreed. Smith said he did not want to see the project fail, in the interest of preserving the project he would withdraw his motion. Shannon said he would withdraw his second. He wanted the Commission to do this correctiy but didn't want to see the discussion get bogged down and talked to death as had occurred in the past. The big items and political decisions would be made at the Council level. The project would be an asset to the community. Brooks asked the developer if they could anticipate an extension until August 17 at the latest. There appeared to be general support for the project; the Commission had had only a few days' to think about the project while the project team had had years to think about the project. The Commission represented the citizens and the interests of the community. They needed to be able to provide a well prepared and thoughtful position and policy to the Council. Digmann said they'd been visiting with the City for 6-months regarding this project. To hear that the Commission had just heard about it two days ago was a surprise to him. They'd already invested a lot of time and money, they wanted to go through the steps and get the project done. Digmann said if given any extension, the Commission would take that long to make a decision. He'd agree to August 3"' and then revisit the issue. Hieronymus said they'd be willing to defer to August 3"'. If it went beyond August 3"' they'd have to consider if it would be better to go to the Council without a recommendation from the Commission. They saw theirs as an independent request and they couldn't move forward until they'd gone through the whole process. Smith made a motion to defer REZ06-00015 until August 3, 2006. Eastham seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). REZONING / DEVELOPMENT ITEM: REZ06-00010/SUB06-00008, discussion of an application submitted by Don Cochran for a rezoning from Interim Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zone to Low-Density Single-Family (RS-5) zone and a preliminary plat and a final plat of McCollister Subdivision, a 2-lot, 9.53-acre residential subdivision located east of South Gilbert Street and west of Sandusky Drive. Terdalkar said the property was an Iowa City landmark and listed in the National Register of Historic Places. There was no new construction proposed on the property at this time, just a subdivision in to two residential lots. The parcel contained woodlands, groves, isolated large trees, sensitive, and protected slopes. The plat did not delineate the construction areas nor the specific deveiopment area on lot two. The extent of the sensitive areas that would be disturbed was unknown. The applicant had been informed of the deficiencies and had indicated that they would submit new drawings but had not done so yet. Staff recommended deferring the application. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Koppes made a motion to defer REZ06-0001 0/SUB06-00008 until 8/3/06. Smith seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB06-00011, discussion of an application submitted by ST Enterprises LC for a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9, a 12-lot, 4.84 acre residential subdivision located west of Russell Drive and south of Burns Avenue. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 9 Miklo said the plat was in order. Staff recommended approval of the plat subject to approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve SUB06-00011, a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9, a 12-lot, 4.84-acre residential subdivision located at the ends of Wetherby Drive and Totting Circle subject to Staff approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. Eastham seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). OTHER ITEMS: There were none. CONSIDERATION OF 7/6/06 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Koppes seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Smith made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 pm. Eastham seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0 (Plahutnik absent). Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:lpcd/minuleslP&ZI2006lO7 -20-o6.doc I Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2006 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/5 1/19 2/2 2/16 3/2 4/6 4/20 5/18 6/1 6/15 7/6 7/20 B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X X X X X X OlE X X I C. Eastham 05/11 ---- -- -- -- -- ---- ---- ---- -- -- X X X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X X OlE X X X OlE X X E. Koppes 05/07 OlE X X X X X X X X X OlE X W Plahutnik 05/10 X OlE X X X X X X X X OlE OlE D.Shannon 05/08 X X X OlE X X OlE X X X X X T. Smith 05/06 X X OlE X X X X X X OlE OlE X INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Exoires 2/13 2/27 4/17 5/15 7/17 B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X X C. Eastham 05/11 ---- ---- ---- X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 X X X X X I W Plahutnik 05/10 X X X X OlE D.Shannon 05/08 OlE 0 OlE X X T. Smith 05106 X X X OlE X Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused I , ! MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2006, 6:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL PRELIMINARY ~ Members Present: Jerry Anthony, Marcy DeFrance, William Greazel, Holly Hart, Matthew Hayek, Kelly Mellecker, Brian Richman, Michael Shaw Members Absent: Thomas Niblock Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Public Present: Maryanne Dennis, Charles Eastham, Dan Smith Call to Order Richman called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. Commission members introduced themselves for the oenefit of the new memoers. Aoproval of the April 20, 2006 Meetinq Minutes MOTION: Hayek moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Greazel seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 5-0. Anthony, Hart, and Shaw not present. Public discussion of anv item not on the aqenda Hightshoe said there is a commission meeting scheduled for August 17, which is the Thursday after the Community Development Celeoration. She asked if the commission memoers would like to reschedule to meet right after the ceieoration on Tuesday, August 15 instead. The celeoration is 4:30-6:00, with a program beginning at 5:00. The Ceiebration will be in the new Family Resource Center at Grant Wood School. She asked for a preference from the commission memoers present. Richman said moving the meeting to Tuesday after the celeoration is fine with him. Greazei said he would email his preference to Hightshoe. Mellecker said the current meeting would be her last, since she will be moving to New York for school. Anthony arrived at this point. Hightshoe updated Anthony on the current discussion aoout the next commission meeting date. Hayek said it seems like the commission memoers are fine with doing a combined meeting. Anthony agreed. Hightshoe announced that the August meeting wiil follow the Community Development Celeoration. New Business Long asked if the discussion about the bylaws could be first. Anthony agreed. Holly Hart arrived at this point. Discussion of HCDC Bylaws, Specifically Article 4, Section B and Article 6, and Application Form Dulek asked if the commission members had any questions regarding the bylaws or the memo included in the packet. She said HUD does not have membership requirements at this point, and noted that the application question was raised oy someone who brought it to the council. Anthony asked if any of the changes are aosolutely necessary. Dulek said no, out the phrase about a "HUD requirement" makes the oylaws inaccurate. Anthony asked for confirmation that if the commission continues to maintain those preferences, it would oe acceptaole to remove the phrase "as required by HUD" from the oylaws. Dulek said yes, and whether the categories are retained or changed is up to the discretion of the commission. Greazel said at the minimum, the bylaws should be changed to remove the reference to HUD. Hightshoe asked if the preference categories should be maintained. MOTION: Greazel moved to accept the change as noted by Anthony. Mellecker seconded. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 2 Dulek said the actual decision on changes to the bylaws requires two meetings. Anthony said the motion could be tabled, then the commission could discuss before bringing the motion up from the table at the next meeting. Dulek said yes. Hightshoe asked if the commission members would like to make any other changes. Greazel asked what is done with the information, whether it is relevant to what the commission does. Anthony asked if there currently are representatives from construction and finance on the commission. Hightshoe said DeFrance has a background in construction, and there have been lenders on the commission in the past to represent finance. Long said confiicts of interest make it difficuit to keep a representative from the Local Homelessness Coordinating Board on the commission, because most of those groups receive CDBG funding. Anthony suggested removing that category. Hightshoe asked about the need for race and age information. Richman confirmed those are not in the bylaws, just on the application. Hayek said there is a recommendation to change the application as well, so there are three things being addressed. One already has a motion. Richman said it wouid be valuable to have people from the construction and finance fields on the commission. He asked whether that should be in the bylaws. Greazel said if there is a problem with compliance, the question should be investigated. Hightshoe said while there is currently no active recruitment from those areas, it could be done. Greazel asked about adding the phrase "if at all possible" to that part of the bylaws. Richman said that is what is currently written. Hightshoe said there could be an active effort at recruitment. Richman said even if those representatives are not actively recruited, it is good to have something in the bylaws that gives the council guidance on what would be valuable when they consider new members. He said he would like to only remove the reference to HUD. Hightshoe asked whether changing or removing information from the application wouid require council approval. Dulek said no. Mellecker asked if the council gives preference to seniors or disabled persons, for example. Anthony asked what is done with the information. Hightshoe said the city clerk's office collects it and shares it with the council, but she is not aware of any reports being released. Richman said the issue is probably that representatives from certain populations would be helpful on the commission, given that much of the funding is geared towards those with lower income and disabilities. Hightshoe asked if the commission members think asking all applicants their income information is valid. Long pointed out that the application information becomes public information. Hayek said specifying "lower" income might exclude qualified individuals of moderate income. Hightshoe said that for CDBG, "lower" would be anyone under 80 percent of median income, but not everyone would know that. Mellecker said she would assume it is less than median income. Hayek asked if the legal department recently did an investigation about whether receiving funds constitutes a conflict of interest. Hightshoe asked for confirmation that he means whether someone receiving, for example, tenant-based rental assistance could be on the commission. Dulek said that could be a conflict. Hightshoe asked how that would be identified. Dulek said an analysis would be done on the individual, including whether they received CDBG assistance. Greazel asked if there was a recommendation from staff. Long said the information is not used, except in the sense that they strive to have as diverse a group as possible. No one is disqualified based on their answers. If someone is uncomfortable filling it out, it is voluntary. Long asked if any other commissions have similar questions on their applications. Dulek said only the Human Rights Commission has similar questions, but none have questions about socioeconomic level. Hightshoe said because of the nature of the commission, it would be good to have representation from the lower-income community. Whether that should be made public information might be too much of an intrusion of privacy. Hayek asked about putting the preferences in the bylaws, along with the statements about construction and finance, so then it is a guideline and something to strive for, but not a matter of disclosure that is made public record. Richman asked how the council then is going to determine whether people meet these preferences. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 3 Long said the council does ask what the current makeup of the commission is when new appointments are needed. Greazel said it is not ali that integrai to the function of the commission, so if disclosing the information discourages people from applying to be a part of the commission, then the preference categories are not serving their purpose. Anthony asked whether a decision could be made today. Hightshoe said no. Long said it would be on the next meeting agenda. Greazel noted that additional questions and suggestions could be emaiied to Hightshoe, as necessary. Anthony recommended moving to the next topic. Community Land Trust Presentation - The Housing Fellowship Dennis handed out copies of Housing Feliowship brochures and a copy of an article about the Land Trust program in Boulder, Colorado. She said she and Long attended the National Community Land Trust Conference recently, which is where she got the article on Boulder. She said she also has copies of the Land Trust lease available for people who would like to review it. Dennis introduced herself by saying she is the Executive Director for the Housing Feliowship (HF), located in Eastdale Plaza. Community Land Trusts (CL Ts) offer housing options for low- and moderate- income segments of the population. CL Ts were created to keep homeowners hip options affordable, and are typicaliy run by a non-profit organization. Essentialiy, the land is held by the non-profit organization, while the owner holds the improvements or the home. Dennis said the homeowner and the CL T enter into a long-term ground lease. The HF buys a piece of land, build a house and seli it, but they do not seli the land, instead entering into a 99-year ground lease that Is renewable at the end of the term. The benefit of this structure is that the cost of the house is reduced because the price of the land is not included. Restrictions on the resale price limitations are included in the lease. Dennis said she learned at the conference that there are a lot of CL Ts in the country. They are springing up ali over, and different non-profits use them to accomplish different goals. Sometimes they are used as preservation of long-term affordabllity, which is one of the reasons the HF uses them. They aiso are used for promotion of first time home ownership, neighborhood preservation, neighborhood restoration, and to block commercial development. Conventional wisdom is that the motivation of the CL T should be clearly defined in the purpose of the individual program. Dennis said in order to block commercial development; some organizations anchor a CL T home on four corners of a specified area, which effectively removes the land from the speculative market. The non- profit will never seli it, so no commercial interests will be able to buy the land. Dennis said the HF uses CL Ts to promote home ownership to income-targeted. buyers, and ensure their long-term affordability. The overali mission of the HF is to increase access to and availability of affordable housing in Johnson County. According to information from the Iowa City Area Association of Realtors, the average lot price in Iowa City/Coralville increased by $11 K in one year, from 2004 to 2005. Similarly, there was also a $30K increase in the same time period in the average price of homes. Dennis noted the averages include every piece of real estate sold in Iowa City and Coralville. When looking only at single-family homes in Iowa City, the average price in 2005 was $253K. In contrast the debt capacity of a family of four in Iowa City at 80 percent median income is between $145K and $155K, which assumes $5K down payment, $200 per month utility costs, and $500 of other monthly debt. Dennis said the HF has only done CL Ts in Iowa City so far, because of the use of HOME funds. They acquire the land either with a HOME grant, or a declining-baiance forgivable loan. The grants are easier, because the loan does have a mortgage attached to it, which lenders to take into consideration when evaluating a loan application. The HF builds the houses through private construction financing, and recently they have also gotten lower-interest loans from Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. They payoff those loans from the sales proceeds when the improvements on the iand are sold. The houses are sold on the MLS through a local realtor, who donates his commission to the project. Any administration costs incurred by the HF are also paid for from the proceeds of the sale as well. Dennis said 13 houses have been sold in Iowa City so far, eight ranches with basements, two duplexes on slabs, two duplexes with basements, and one two-story with a basement. 12 have been new Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 4 construction, and one was an acquisition of an existing home that they rehabilitated. They always include egress windows and rough-in plumbing in the basements of the homes for future finishing. The covenants In the various neighborhoods do restrict what the HF can build. Dennis said people need to apply to qualify for a CL T house. They can apply at any time, and they must include a copy of their most recent tax return. Income is verified again at the time of sale. The process of verifying income and then approving or denying applicants is not an intense process because the HF does not build or sell a lot of houses at once. They maintain a file of approved applications, and then when a house is under construction, they contact the applicants to see if they are still interested and qualified. Dennis said buyers must go to a lender that is approved by the HF, and the options currently are Hills Bank, Wells Fargo, and Iowa State Bank. They do that because there are many lenders that will not loan on CL Ts, and time is wasted by going through the process elsewhere. Greazel asked what happens if someone defaults on their mortgage. Dennis said it depends. If it is a Fannie Mae loan, Fannie Mae includes a rider that states the land lease goes away. Greazel asked for confirmation that the non-profit might lose the land. Dennis said yes, but practically speaking, what typically happens is the mortgage holder looks at the abstract and sees that the HF owns the land and asks them If they want to buy the house. The biggest reason the lenders do not like to do CL Ts is because they cannot do desktop underwriting, so they require a huge amount of time to do it by hand. It has nothing to do with whether the HF has a preference about the banks, it is just because those banks will lend on CL Ts. Greazel asked whether there are restrictions on second mortgages. Dennis said not necessarily, but they still have to be mortgage-qualified. Because the HF owns the land, they are made aware of any activity, and they have the right to tell owners they cannot go to a mortgage-broker. Dennis said what she learned at the conference is that most CL Ts in the nation have an intensive homeownership education program. The experience of the HF is that the people they sell to in Iowa City are very bright and educated, and most cases have been successful. She said the other side of the application process is that the house will be on the MLS, then the realtor calls the HF if other people contact him directly, then she sends them an application and starts them on the process. Dennis said buyers in the program have to have an income between 60 and 80 percent of the area median income. The household incomes they have been selling to are quite a bit lower than the cap. The other thing is that the house they acquired on Stanford Avenue was on the market for 89 days, which was due to the fact that it was listed on the market while it was being rehabbed, and the buyers were going through a secondary-market approval, which slowed things down. That skews the averages a bit. Richman asked for confirmation that the HF currently has seven active applications, and only build one or two houses a year. Dennis said yes. Richman asked if potentially people on the list might not get a house for a few years. Dennis said yes, and when she calls applicants to follow up, a lot of times they are no longer looking. If they are still looking, however, their income needs to be reverified at the time of the sale. Dennis said one of their current projects is a student-built house in the Feel Good Project, which won the 2001 Iowa City Community Development Award for Fostering Community Partnership, and was featured on the national HUD website. The local partners in the project are the city, the Association of Realtors, the Homebullders Association, and the Iowa City Community School District. Four houses have been built in this program. The HF purchases the lots with HOME funds, and then the Vocational Training Council of Homebuilders provides technical expertise and assistance, while students build the house. The HF guarantees that they will purchase the house at the end of the year, which is then sold as a CL T. Dennis said the land lease is based on a document developed by the Institute for Community Economics. The lease is a lengthy document that is difficult to summarize, but the key point is that the HF lease has been approved by Fannie Mae and Countrywide, which is not an easy thing to accomplish. Countrywide is the market that services the Iowa Finance Authority first home loans, so HF buyers can qualify for those. The homeowner has full and free use of the land, but when the house is sold, the owners must find an income-qualified buyer. An attorney must verify that the buyer understands the lease, and there is a resale formula in the lease that limits the resale price of the homes. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 5 Dennis said the home must be sold to an income-targeted buyer, or the HF has the option to purchase the improvements back and resell it. The homeowner is charged a monthly fee for use of the land, which is currently $20 per month. Long asked how property tax is handled. Dennis said it depends on the CL T. If the HF pays the property taxes, they charge more for the monthly land fee. In the HF lease, the owner of the home pays taxes on the iand, and any improvements. Greazel asked if iand is exempted from taxes. Dennis said no. Richman asked for confinmation that the ground lease for all the houses Dennis discussed is $20 per month per house. Dennis said yes. Essentially the HF is subsidizing the land, while the homeowner still retains all the rights for free use of the land. She said the HF also has occupancy and use restrictions. The home must be used as the owner's primary residence, so they cannot be rented out. The lease defines what is considered a "major" improvement to the home, and those need to be approved by the HF. Shaw arrived at this point. Dennis said in terms of equity and resale, the longer the owner lives in the home, a larger percentage of the increase in value the owner will receive when the house is resold. The fonmula is stated in the lease, and is how the house remains affordable. This only applies when the house is sold. If the first buyer lives out her life in that home, she can will the home to her heirs. Hayek asked how the house is appraised with that sort of restriction, and whether the lender hires the appraiser. Dennis said they have done a lot of work with the appraisers, and Fannie Mae has a guide on how to appraise CL T homes. Any appraisal on any home separates out the land, however, so it is not too complicated. Dennis said the resale price is the original appraised value of the house plus the percentage of change in the increase in the value based on your length of residency, which is what comprises the purchase option price. That is what needs to be explained to potential buyers. They have only had one sale so far, and it was successful. Dennis said in closing, through CL Ts the house remains affordable for subsequent buyers, and it is a one-time investment that continues to benefit low-income buyers throughout the lease term of 99 years. Also, the lease is renewable for another 99-year term at the time of its expiration. DeFrance asked who the HF purchases lots from, and whether they pay appraised value or more for them. Hightshoe said lots must be purchased for no greater than the appraised value. Dennis said three lots have also been donated for this program. Anthony asked whether the HF would like to have the program expanded in the area, either through them or someone else. Dennis said yes, through the HF or anyone else would be fine. This program is great for first-time home ownership, and the HF does not have to be the only group involved. There are also a variety of approaches to the leases and other aspects; another group would not have to adopt the approach that the HF uses. Anthony asked what the challenges are for expansion of this program in Iowa City. Dennis said lenders who are willing to do CL Ts, but that is also a nationwide problem. Richman asked for confirmation that the same problems exist for buying lots for CL T houses as for other programs. Dennis said it is both the price of the lots and the covenant restriction's. The buyer pool is becoming smaller, because the council has to approve every site individually. Since there are restrictions on certain elementary attendance areas, the available areas have covenants that create problems with building houses their buyers can afford. For example, if the area requires a 1500 square foot house, the HF cannot build a house there that their buyer incomes can afford. Anthony asked whether Dennis has seen a rise in areas with restrictive covenants over the past years. Dennis said no, all subdivisions have covenants, and the ones with the less expensive lots usually require houses that are 1000 square feet. That works well for them, since they usually build 1100-1300 square Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 6 foot houses. Anthony asked whether there is a difficulty with finding buyers for the program. Dennis said no, but it can be difficult to explain the program to people. Dennis said Mayo Clinic has invested a lot of land into CL Ts in Rochester, and their restriction is that if, for example, a nurse buys the house, then the house must be sold to a nurse. Some other very expensive towns have CL Ts that serve fire fighters and teachers. Long said a project in Boulder involved a non-profit and the city putting a mobile home park that was being threatened by development on a land trust. The city bought it as part of a flood project, and then sold it to the non-profit. Hayek left the room at this point. DeFrance asked whether the HF had any property locations in mind. Dennis said they look on the MLS. She added that when the program first started in 1998, they were able to acquire a lot valued at $18K, and in just that amount of time the lot prices have risen drastically. Greazel said one of the vaiuable aspects of infilllots is that their covenants have expired or they did not have one originally, so they do not have as many restrictions. Hayek returned to the room at this point. Dennis said these programs have a lot of success in communities with a lot of infill available, or where there are a lot of properties that need to be torn down. Iowa City does not have either of those situations. DeFrance asked whether any properties affected by the recent tornado would be available. Dennis said no. Introductions were done for the benefit of those absent at the beginning of the meeting. Hightshoe said Greazel's and Shaw's terms are expiring, so they will need to reapply for another term. Review of Allocation Process - Creation of Subcommittee Anthony said last year a subcommittee was created to review the process and produced some very good recommendations that were implemented last year. He asked whether the commission members feel the need to revisit the allocation process. Greazel said one of the things the commission discussed earlier was being more focused and deciding what they wanted to accomplish with the limited funds that need to be allocated. It would be good to discuss a plan before going into the process rather than being reactionary to whatever is presented to the commission. Anthony agreed that it is good to be focused. He said that would be different than what was evaiuated last year. Last year the commission iooked at the application process. This would be a review of the commission's efforts. Anthony asked whether the other commission members think having this sort of focus would be beneficial, and if so, should a subcommittee be created to discuss it. Shaw asked what method would be more efficient. Anthony said the committee approach last year was very good, and seemed to work efficiency. Hayek said the changes from last year were great, so the application process does not need to be reviewed again. Anthony said it would not be tinkering with the application process this year. Hightshoe said It would be more along the lines of additional information to be sent out with the applications, to let people know what sorts of projects the commission is looking for. Anthony said the focus could be just for one year. Richman said it would need to get done sooner rather than later, because applications will be due soon. It does not seem fair to put out guidelines a month before applications are due. Mellecker asked whether this would be similar to the CITY STEPS plan. Greazel said the problem with CITY STEPS is that it Is ambiguous. There are times he would like to focus effort in a project to allow it to really get off the ground and viable. He would like to give some projects a bigger impact so they can be done right, instead of spreading things out so thin. Greazel said he does not know if this has been tried before, to have the commission establish guidelines rather than react to whatever the applicants submit. Hlghtshoe said that CITY STEPS is reviewed each year, but setting a focused priority has never been done before, and would need to be approved by the council. This would have to be done soon in order to get quality applicants for the focus area. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 7 Hayek said that though the commission has a tendency to fund a lot of projects with a little money, they all tend to score high according to CITY STEPS. He asked whether creating a focus is permissible. Hightshoe said yes, because federal funds are allocated at the council's discretion. Council would have to agree with whatever focus the commission would like to establish. Shaw asked if the commission would need to make a recommendation to the council. Hightshoe said yes. Long said this would need to be done by mid-August. Richman said it is unlikely anything formal would be in place before September, which is already almost too late. Richman suggested forming a subcommittee to implement this for next year. Hightshoe said in terms of CITY STEPS, almost all public services and several other items are high priorities. Mellecker said she thinks a yearly statement would be good, so some areas are not mislabeled a low priority. Hightshoe said CITY STEPS is revised every year, and amendments need to go to the council for approval. That might be a way of focusing efforts, through amending CITY STEPS, and then it would be reviewed on an annual basis. Richman asked when CITY STEPS is reviewed. Hightshoe said it is reviewed in September, approved in October. It is only taken to council if there are amendments. Hayek said it would be hard to downgrade high priorities to medium or low, because they are high priorities whether the commission chooses to focus on them or not. Instead of going through an extended review process that has to go through council, instead would it be possible to just decide on one area within the commission and go with that. Shaw asked for confirmation that Hayek is leaning towards Mellecker's suggestion of a commission mission statement for each cycle. Anthony said that approach avoids the issue of having to downgrade priorities. They all remain high priorities, but are not being focused on all the time. Hayek noted that a lot of non-profits depend on a relatively steady stream of funding. Hightshoe said there could also be an issue where it is just the right time for a group to do a particular project, and if it does not fall within the focus of the commission, the opportunity could be lost. Richman said he thinks the focus would not be centered so much on housing and public service projects. He said he is thinking more in the public facilities project area. Anthony asked whether the council had discussed what might happen to the public service funds. Long said council will talk about it in August. Anthony asked whether there is consensus on if a subcommittee should be formed or not. No commission members voiced opposition to forming a subcommittee. Anthony asked for volunteers to serve on the subcommittee. Shaw said he would be willing to serve on the committee if there are specific objectives and a timeline. Hart said she would be willing. Hightshoe said if this will not be effective for this year; it could be done in conjunction with community input received during the CITY STEPS review process for implementation next year. The subcommittee would work with city staff to come up with a focus based on recent community input on community needs. Also it might be good to hold off until new appointments to the commission are complete. Anthony agreed. Discuss Inclusionary Zoning Shaw asked whether there was a meeting at the library about inclusionary zoning. He saw that one of the meeting rooms was set aside for a meeting about inclusionary zoning. No other attendees had any information. Anthony said materials regarding this topic were sent out in the April meeting packet. Hightshoe said this would be a subcommittee situation, to research the issue. She said a problem should be identified that the proposed regulations attempt to address, before looking at the merits of inclusionary zoning. That might be a longer process. Then the subcommittee would bring their conclusions and recommendations to the full commission for discussion. Anthony said first the subcommittee would look at whether or not inclusionary zoning is needed, rather than the mechanisms involved. If the subcommittee decides that inclusionary zoning would be beneficial, they need to first convince the commission before it goes any further. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 8 Hayek said the fuil commission should also see the information the subcommittee reviews. Hightshoe agreed. Anthony said the subcommittee could look at the information that staff supplies, as well as the market conditions in Iowa City. Then they would make a determination whether or not it is needed, and present their evidence to the commission. Mellecker said the first question should be confined to why inclusionary zoning is needed, not any sort of policies or other discussions. Shaw asked for confirmation of what question the subcommittee should be addressing, why it is needed, or whether it is needed. Hightshoe said she thinks the first question is what issue or concern the commission is trying to address, and then whether or not inclusionary zoning would help that identified issue. Long said the solution might not be inclusionary zoning. Hightshoe said she anticipates that the subcommittee would be working with staff and also consulting with Planning and Zoning. P&Z staff would have to have time to research and evaluate any recommendation before it went before council. Richman asked whether there was general agreement to form a subcommittee to discuss this. No commission members voiced objections. Long said there are other groups in the community that have an interest in this topic, which the subcommittee could meet with. Hightshoe said that the commission members would be invited if the subcommittee meets with any outside groups, and summaries of subcommittee meetings would be included with commission agendas. Hayek said it is a very compiex and difficult topic to discuss, so the subcommittee tasks would need to be very focused. Anthony asked for volunteers for the subcommittee. Anthony, Hart, Hayek, and Shaw volunteered. Hayek said he might be leaving the commission at the end of the year. Anthony said the subcommittee would meet to decide on a process. Smith said his group, which involves the Homebuilders Association, the Chamber of Commerce, Housing Fellowship, and others, is very interested in and discussing this issue. There appears there are overlapping areas of interest, so he hopes to work with the commission and subcommittee during the discussion. Shaw left at this point. Announce Upcoming HCDC Vacancies Hightshoe announced that Shaw and Greaze!'s terms will be expiring soon and they must reapply if interested. Hightshoe confirmed that Mellecker is leaving so an additional spot will be open. She said applications for these two vacancies are due to the city clerk's office by July 26. Old Business Discuss National Community Development Week Celebration Hightshoe said the celebration wouid be held at Grant Wood Elementary on August 15 from 4:30 to 6:00 p.m. The plan is to have a band from 4:30 to 5:00, with the program beginning at 5:00. The principal at Grant Wood will do some introductory remarks, and the principal from Southeast has agreed to be the guest speaker. Regina Baiiey will be handing the big checks and awards. Awards decisions have not been made yet. Hightshoe said she is trying to arrange to have developers set up some information about future private development plans for the Highway 6 area as well. Review of Down Payment Assistance Program Long reported that no money has been spent. The lender told him they are having a difficult time finding interest in the program since it has a $5K cap and house prices have increased. Lenders also make more money doing 100 percent financing than with other strategies. The higher the interest rates go, however, the more attractive the program might be. The commission needs to decide what to do with the money. Hayek asked whether the money could be used for closing costs. Long said yes. Richman asked whether It would be possible to market the program directly to buyers, rather than through the lender. Hightshoe Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 9 said part of the problem is that it is not a grant, so they have to pay it back. Also, if the buyer is going with the IFA first-time-buyer program, they cannot combine assistance, so they do not qualify. Richman asked for confirmation that the problems are that there are too many competing programs, the program is overly complex, and it is being poorly marketed. Richman said if there are so many problems with the program, then the commission should consider doing something else with the money. Hightshoe said the money could be recaptured and allocated during the next round. Long said the city could also take over administration directly. He added that the city has written letters to all the realtors and lenders in town, so people know about it. Also, they do receive inquiries into the program, but once people hear the parameters, they go elsewhere. Richman said there is no incentive for lenders or realtors to market this program. Anthony asked whether the restriction on not combining this with other sources was flexible. Hightshoe says the restrictions are on the other sources, not with our requirements. Mellecker asked for confirmation whether the money would go into the next round's funds if It was recaptured. Long said yes, or to cover overruns. Richman asked whether this was from HOME or CDBG. Long said CDBG. Hayek said it seems odd that there is not a need for the money. Anthony said part of the problem stems from housing prices. Most of the houses that would be priced in the range where people in this income bracket would qualify for the assistance were built before 1978, which leads to issues with lead paint. Hightshoe agreed that is another problem. As these are federal funds, the city cannot fund a house built prior to 1978 due to lead based paint issues. . Hayek asked whether it would be possible to increase the grants to $10K. Long said the lender says that would help. Hightshoe said the city could also look at combining with other programs, such as with the Housing Fellowship or the Iowa City Housing Authority programs for homeownership. Hayek suggested giving the money to the Housing Fellowship. Richman said if that is the case, then the commission should recapture the money and reallocate it. Richman asked whether the commission needed to make a decision on this at the current meeting. Hightshoe said according to council policy, it was required that half of the money be spent by March 15. If not, the commission must reevaluate the project and could recapture funds based on the circumstances. Long said since it is already past the beginning of the year, the commission could wait until December to decide. Hayek asked whether there was a chance to spend the money before December. It might do some good in the current program, and if not, the money could still be recaptured by the time the commission allocates next year's funds (FY08). Richman asked when the applications for next year's CDBG funds go out. Hightshoe said November. Richman suggested waiting until October 15, and if the money is not spent, then recapturing it and putting it with next year's funds. Hightshoe asked whether the funds would have to be administered through the current lender if city staff made some arrangement with other groups. Long said it does have to go through Hills Bank. MOTION: Richman moved that the program continue until October 15, at that time any remaining balance would be recaptured and allocated in the next funding round. Greazel seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Monitorinq Reports Economic Development Fund and Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity Greazel distributed a summary to all the commission members. Hightshoe said $200K would be carried over to the Economic Development Fund for allocation, which includes money from previous years as well as this year's allocation. As indicated on the report, some of the applications have been successful, but the majority was not able to maintain the business past three years. Hightshoe said the plan for this fiscal year is to involve lenders more in the process, and have the city do more gap funding for people who can get some private financing but are collateral thin, for example. The goal is to have more success stories. She said she would still be the contact for the fund, and will present to the Economic Development Committee in a couple months. She has talked to the Small Business Development Center, and they thought that approach would be attractive to lenders. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes July 20, 2006 Page 10 Long said nine percent of the CDBG/HOME budget is taken out for economic development, which includes both CDBG and HOME funds. Since only CDBG funds are eligible for economic development, staff is taking a request to council that just nine percent of CDBG funds be used for economic development. Greazel noted that Habitat for Humanity spent their money purchasing lots. Goodwill Industries, Planned Parenthood, Housing Rehabilitation, Downpayment Assistance Mellecker said Goodwill spent their money and is all done. She was not able to talk to Planned Parenthood. Long said their project is finished, which included moving the entrance out of the public right of way to protect their clients, redoing the lobby, and installing a new counter top. The owner of the property paved the lot and installed a privacy fence. Mellecker said that Housing Rehab spent some of their money, but stopped because the rest of their funding was tied up in Congress. They finished up their existing projects, and have been getting tornado repair requests recentiy. Long said the funds were released on July 19. Mellecker noted the status of the Downpayment Assistance program was discussed previously. Hightshoe said that at the August meeting, staff would do the updates on all FY06 projects and carryover projects that had not been reviewed this past year. Long said the Senate Appropriations Committee increased CDBG funds for the first time in five years. That means there should be approximately a $200 million increase nationwide. Adiournment There being no further business to come before the committee, Hayek moved to adjourn. Greazel seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. S:/pcdfminulesfHCDC/2006f07 -2G-06.doc i i I Housing & Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2006 Term Name Expires 01/19 02/16 03/09 03/23 03/29 04/20 07120 Brian Richman 09101/07 X X X X X X X Holly Jane Hart 09101/07 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X Jerry Anthonv 09101/08 X X X X X X X Kelly Mellecker 09101/08 OlE X X X X X X I Lori Bears 09101/07 X OlE X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Marcy De France 09101/09 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X Matthew Havek 09101/07 OlE X X X OlE X X Michael Shaw 09101/06 X X X X X X X Thomas Nihlock 09101/08 X X X OlE OlE X OlE William Greaze1 09101/06 OlE X X X X X X Yolanda Spears 09101/06 -- -- X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Key: X = Present 0 = Absent I OlE = AbsentlExcused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member