Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-01 Bd Comm minutes MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JUNE 14, 2006 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL -IOWA CITY, CITY HALL ~ ~ APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Ned Wood, Michael Wright. MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Shelangouski STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Walz, Mitchel Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Patricia Gillette, Terry Gillette, Cindy Coyne Donna Gentry, Wally Taylor, Gary Sanders, Noah Kemp, Dan Tiedt, Chris DeGrout, Jeff Edberg, Jeanne Bancroft, Margaret Murray, Naida Brown, Stefan Strack, Chuck Becker, Wally Taylor CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Leigh called the meeting to order at 5:07 PM. CONSIDERATION OF THE JUNE 14, 2006 MINUTES Wright said that on page 6, first paragraph after the amendment, second sentence instead of "she" should be "he". Alexander said that on page 11, third paragraph instead of "unreasonable" should be "reasonable". MOTION: Wright moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Alexander seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXCOS-00007 Discussion of an application submitted by Terry Gillette for a special exception to permit a side yard reduction to allow a second floor addition to be located within one foot of the property line for property located in the Medium Density Single-Family Residentiai (RS-8) zone at 920 E. Davenport Street. Walz said the original house at 920 Davenport Street is considered a non-conforming structure because it sits within one foot of the east property line; the precise location of the property line is unclear. She noted that a five-foot minimum side setback is required in the RS-8 zone. The applicant has added on to the back of the house, thereby expanding the non-conforming structure without the required building permit or special exception. Walz said that in 2004 the Building Official received a report from MidAmerican Energy about the property for what appeared to be an illegal addition on the back of the house. Walz said the report noted that the electric service to the house was propped up on a PVC pole. It appeared that the property owner (the applicant) had screened in a deck on the west side of the house and constructed or enclosed a portion of the deck on the east half of the house. Walz stated that in July 2004 the Building Official sent a notice of violation to the applicant citing the unsafe electric service. She noted that the applicant was instructed to apply for a building permit. Later, on August 4, 2004, the Building Official requested that the owner submit site plans for the project. On August 13, 2004, the owner submitted an application for a permit for an unspecified project along with a number of sketches for the addition. However, because the information provided by the applicant was incomplete and the plans submitted were inconsistent, a permit was not issued. As an example Walz said that the plot plan submitted by the applicant showed the rear portion of the house as 18.5 feet deep, while the west elevation showed 18.0 feet and the east elevation showed 17.0 feet. The extent of the addition was not clear to the Building Official nor whether the addition was to the first or second story or both. While a permit was never issued, in January 2006 it was discovered that the applicant had completed the addition and another notice of violation was issued. Walz said that in April 2006 the applicant submitted an application for a building permit, describing the project as a second story addition. The Building Official Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 2 noted the non-conforming setback on the east side of the house and advised the applicant that a special exception would be required to permit the structure within the required side setback. Walz stated that the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board of Adjustment may grant the requested reduction in the side setback requirement if the applicant demonstrates that the approval criteria have been satisfied in addition to general standards for special exceptions. Walz said that a special exception may be granted to reduce the principal building setback if the applicant of a property demonstrates that the general special exception approval criteria and the following specific approval criteria have been satisfied: 1. The situation is peculiar to the property in question. 2. There is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements; 3. Granting the exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations; and 4. Any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical. 5. The subject building will be located no closer than 3 feet to a side or rear property line, unless the side or rear property line abuts the public right-of-way or permanent open space. Walz noted that the applicant was unable to demonstrate any of the above criteria. She said that this situation is not peculiar to the property nor is there difficulty in complying with the setback requirements. The applicant's lot is slightly narrower than the standard RS-8 lot (40 feet)-the assessor's records show the lot at 38 feet. The original, non-conforming structure sits on or within a foot of the east property line, however the west side of the house is set back approximately 20 feet from the west property line, allowing sufficient space for the applicant to build an addition. She said that granting the special exception is contrary to the purpose of the setback requirement. Walz said the purpose of the setback requirement is to: 1. Maintain light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting; 2. Provide opportunities for privacy between dwellings; 3. Reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in the City's neighborhoods and commercial areas; 4. Promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and between residences; and 5. Provide flexibility to site a building so that it is compatible with buildings In the vicinity. She said the addition to this property extends the portion of the house that is less open to air, light, and separation for fire protection and access. The addition within the required setback reduces the opportunity for privacy for the house on the abutting lot as well as the space necessary for maintenance. According to measurements taken from the aerial views, the two houses are set approximately 7 feet apart at the point of the new addition. While many residences in this neighborhood are on narrow lots, they do not typically sit this tightly. Walz noted that the applicant has not demonstrated any attempt to mitigate potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception. Finally, the addition extends the non-conforming structure within 3 feet of the side property line. Walz noted that the application for this special exception is incomplete, and the applicant has provided no information or evidence that the reduction of the required minimum setback will not impact neighboring properties nor the general welfare. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Walz said the reduction of the minimum side setback reduces light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting and the opportunity for privacy between dwellings. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 3 The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Walz said the requested reduction of minimum side setback reduces the opportunity for privacy and the safety of the adjacent dwelling and thus may impair the use and enjoyment of the adjacent property. Because the building is so close to the property, the owner and future owners will need to enter the adjacent property to maintain the east side of the house. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. Walz noted the requested reduction of minimum side setback may impede the opportunity for the adjacent property owner to add on or maintain his/her property. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Because this is a fully developed residential neighborhood this issue is not applicable. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Because this is a fully developed residential neighborhood this issue is not applicable. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. Walz said that because the addition was built without the required building permits or inspections, it may not be in conformity with other City codes. If this special exception is approved, a building permit and inspections will be necessary. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. Walz said the Housing Goals and Strategies in the Comprehensive Plan include maintaining and improving the safety of all housing. This goal calls specifically for enforcement of building and housing codes. Walz said that staff recommends that EXC06-00007 an application for a reduction of the required side setback for property at 920 East Davenport Street be denied. Alexander asked what would happen if the special exception would be denied. Walz said that the applicant would have to remove the added portion. Behr added that this would be an enforcement issue for the Building Official. Walz noted that a letter from a neighbor in support of the application was received and distributed to the board members. Public Hearina Opened Patricia Gillette, 920 East Davenport Street, clarified the aerial picture presented in the staff report saying that the picture shows the house after the improvements. Gillette said that it was never their intent to violate housing and zoning codes or to avoid obtaining a building permit. She noted that they responded immediately when the permit violation was brought to their attention in the late summer of 2004. She added that they completed a permit application and submitted the requested drawings on 8/13/204. Gillette said that contrary to information provided to the board, they did not continue to build despite the notice of violation and the improvements had already been completed in 2003. Gillette said that several months after completing the first permit application the building office contacted them requesting more information and a revision of the drawings to include more specific information. She noted that they submitted the revised drawings and did not hear from the building department until early 2006 when they requested architectural plans for the improvements. Gillette said that because they could not afford to have an architect draw the plans in April 2006 they completed a new permit application and submitted plans generated using a CAD computer program. She said that after this last submission they were first notified that they would need to obtain a special exception to obtain a permit. Gillette said that they completed the application to the Board of Adjustment on May 1, 2006. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 4 Gillette said that it has always been their intent to respect their neighbors, their neighborhood and the history of their house. She noted that a history of the property is necessary in order to fully understand the predicament in which they find themselves. She said their house was in existence in 1880, and the Historical Society believes that the first room of the home may have been in existence in 1860. Gillette noted that since that time the home has had many owners and has undergone numerous renovations and improvements. She noted that the earliest improvements appear to have been the addition of a front room, stairs, and an upstairs sleeping area. She said that later a kitchen, an inside bathroom and an enclosed back porch were added. Gillette said that according to their deed, their home was the only structure ona lot that was twice the size and extended to the east. However, she said that in 1910 the owner of the house built a new house next door. She noted that at that time there were no City regulations or concerns about the line being drawn within a foot of their structure. Gillette said the purpose of the setback requirement is to: 1. Maintain light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting; 2. Provide opportunities for privacy between dwellings; 3. Reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in the City's neighborhoods and commercial areas; 4. Promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and between residences; and 5. Provide flexibility to site a building so that it is compatible with buildings in the vicinity. She noted that because they have not in any way reduced the actual space between the two structures their improvements have not diminished light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting and that there remains adequate privacy between the two homes. She said that a majority of neighboring houses are two-story dwellings and they have not veered from the general building scale or placement of structures in the neighborhoods. Gillette said that a special exception may be granted to reduce the principal building setback if the applicant of a property demonstrates that the general special exception approval criteria and the following specific approval criteria have been satisfied: 1. The situation is peculiar to the property in question. 2. There is practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements; 3. Granting the exception will not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations; and 4. Any potential negative effects resulting from the setback exception are mitigated to the extent practical. 5. The subject building will be located no closer than 3 feet to a side or rear property line, unless the side or rear property line abuts the public right-of-way or permanent open space. Gillette said that due to the unusual age of their home and the unusual division of the lot, the situation is peculiar to the property. Further, she said that there is a practical difficulty in complying with the setback requirements. She said that there is less than one foot between the home and the property line. She noted the only way that their home could comply with the requirement of being located 3' away from the property line would be to pursue returning the line to the original location that was in place when the property was first divided. She noted that this could not be done and they should not be penalized for a property line drawn years ago without the knowledge of future Iowa City Ordinances. Gillette said that while there is less than l' of clearance between the structure and property line there is actually 8'6" of clearance at the narrowest point between the two houses. She noted that the location of a property line should not be the determinant of density instead the space between the structures should be used. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 5 Gillette said that their alterations and enlargements did not increase or extend the non-conformity of the structure. She noted that they have not extended into the space or reduced the clearance between the home and the property line. She noted that they have made every effort to provide evidence of good intent and adequate evidence to support each of the approval criteria. Terry Gillette, 920 East Davenport Street, said that the back porch was built prior to their ownership. He said that since they bought the house they worked on improving it. He said that he is sorry for not getting a permit. He clarified that the back porch was not part of the extension. He said they have only added above the porch at the second floor. He said that the footprint of the building has not been altered in any way. Cindy Coyne, 923 East Davenport Street, said that she is in support of the application. She noted that Gillette's property always shows their sense of space and landscaping as it is always pleasant to see their yard. Donna Gentry, 922 East Davenport Street, said that the new addition had not created any problems. She added that it would be more inconvenient to tear the addition down since she already has planted flowers in the area. She added that the Gillette's always have permission to fix that part of the house. Gentry said that the addition does not pose any problems. Public hearina closed Alexander said that due to additional information she sees the situation differently and even with the alterations made the footprint of the property did not change. She added that at the same time a problem is that the board should not reward people for ignorance of the rules. MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC06-00007 an application for a reduction of the required side setback for property at 920 East Davenport Street be approved. Wright seconded the motion. Aiexander said that she would vote for approval of the application. She said that an addition to the second floor is a different situation than extending the first floor. Alexander said that the property is peculiar and it would be difficult to extend the second floor due to the restrictions placed on the first floor. She said that the adding to the building does not change the light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting. She added that there is no change in the enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity because the first fioor structure already exists. She said that utilities are already in place and the area is fully developed. Wood indicated that he would vote in favor. He said that the separation for fire protection is unchanged. He noted that the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. He said that it will reduce the privacy, but it is an unusual situation in terms of boundary lines and history of the houses. He said all general standards are met. Wright said that this is a peculiar situation. He said he would vote in favor of the application. He noted that the footprint of the building has not been changed and the specific and general criteria are met. Walz suggested that if the board members were leaning toward supporting the special exception that staff would recommend the yard reduction be subject to applicant securing an access easement for maintenance of the building. This would protect future owners of the property who might not be on such good terms. AMENDMENT: Wright moved to amend the motion to include a property maintenance easement between properties at 920 and 922 East Davenport Street. Alexander seconded the motion. The amended motion passed 4:0. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 6 EXC06-00009 Discussion of an application submitted by Professional Muffler, Inc for a special exception to permit the reestablishment of a vehicle repair use and to reduce the street side setback requirement for property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 708 S. Riverside Drive. Walz said The Iowa City Zoning Code states that: "Any structure for a non-conforming use that has been destroyed or damaged by fire, explosion, act of God or by a public enemy to the extent that less than 75 percent of the replacement value of the structure at the time of damage or destruction, may be restored for the same non-confonming use as existed before the damage." Walz said that Professional Muffler was damaged in the April 13 tornado so severely that the original building could not be restored. The Muffler shop (a vehicle repair use) is a non-conforming use allowed by special exception in the CC-2 zone. Therefore, a special exception is required in order to reestablish the auto repair use in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone. Walz noted that the prior (damaged) building, which was established iri 1940, did not meet the current minimum 10-foot setbacks from Benton Street, S. Riverside Drive (U.S. Highway 6), and the old Benton Street right-of-way that are required for corner lots in the CC-2 zone. In addition, the applicant relied on a portion of public right-of-way north (a section of the former W. Benton Street) of his building for parking. In order to reconstruct a building of similar size and comply with the current requirements of the Zoning Code (minimum setbacks and landscape screening) the applicant has applied for a vacation of a portion of the former W. Benton Street right-of way so that he may add it to his property. The applicant is also seeking to purchase approximately 70 feet of City-owned property to the east of the building, abutting the Ned Ashton trailhead parking lot, in order to estabiish the required parking area for his business. Walz said that because the applicant's property is a corner, a 10-foot setback is required along both streets Riverside and Benton). The portion of public right-of-way between the applicant's property and West Benton Street includes a section of the Iowa River Corridor Trail and a well-landscaped green space, which is maintained by the City. She said the landscaped area is approximately 5 feet deep along the applicant's proposed parking area and widens to 10-25 feet along the area proposed for the building. Thus the building has the "appearance" of being set back from the right-of-way, and adequate space is provided for safety, light, air, etc. While some additional landscaping would be required along the Benton Street side of the new buiiding, in Staffs opinion the established open green space and landscaping area along the trail provide an adequate separation between the commercial operation and the street as well as screening of the parking. In addition, she said that reducing the required street side setback to 5 feet along Benton Street will allow the applicant sufficient space to orient the vehicle use areas away from the street whiie creating safe and efficient vehicle access to the service bays from the alley. The applicant's proposed site plan includes the required landscape screening and parking capacity and orients the vehicle repair bays away from the street. Though the applicant had not provided elevations, Walz indicated that the building would be required to address the street and that staff had gone over a variety of options with the applicant for creating a building that was more attractive in order to meet the goals of the district plan. Staff recommends that EXC06-0009, an application to permit a vehicle repair use and a reduction of the street side setback requirement for property in the in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 708 South Riverside Drive be approved, subject to submittal of a final site plan demonstrating all required landscaping and proposed parking layout and traffic circulation, and subject to Design Review approval of the finai architectural design (elevations) of the new building. Public Hearinq Opened: Noah Kemp, 2140 Highway 22, Kalona, said that the tomado was devastating. He said that he appreciates the help received from staff and the consideration of the board. Public heaririq closed MOTION: Wright moved that EXC06-0009, an application to permit a vehicle repair use and a reduction of the street side setback requirement for property in the in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone at 708 South Riverside Drive be approved, subject to submittal of a final site plan demonstrating all required landscaping and proposed parking layout and traffic circulation, and Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 7 subject to Design Review approval of the final architectural design (elevations) of the new building. Alexander seconded the motion. Wright will vote in favor of the application. He said the specific requirements, maintain light, air, separation for fire protection, and access for firefighting; provide opportunities for privacy between dwellings; reflect the general building scale and placement of structures in the City's neighborhoods and commercial areas; promote a reasonable physical relationship between buildings and between residences; and provide flexibility to site a building have been met. He noted that Vehicle Repair uses are allowed by special exception and should not be not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Wright said the establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress or egress and the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. Alexander will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Wood will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Leigh will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Motion passed 4:0. EXC06-00010 Discussion of an application submitted by PIP Printing for a special exception to permit more than 5,000 sq. feet of light manufacturing for property located in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone at 2650 Mormon Trek Blvd. Walz said the proposed use is limited to 5,000 square feet of gross floor area, excluding ftoor area devoted to other principal or accessory uses, unless granted a special exception by the Board of Adjustment (up to 15,000 square feet). She noted that the applicant is requesting a special exception for a printing facility of up to 12,400 square feet. The proposed building will contain approximately 20,376 square feet of ftoor area. This space will be divided into three commercial suites of 9,205 square feet, 6471 square feet, and 4,700 square feet, respectively. Walz said the initial plan is to use approximately 5,900 square feet of floor area within the largest commercial suite for the printing operation. The remainder of the ftoor area within this commercial suite will be used for accessory office uses, lobby area, restrooms, employee break room, garage, loading and storage areas. The remaining two commercial suites may be rented out to other users. However, the applicant is requesting approval to expand into the adjacent rental suite at such time as the space is needed for additional production space and requests that the special exception be approved for up to 12,400 square feet within the proposed building for the printing operation. Staff feels that the site can accommodate a printing facility of up to 12,400 square feet; however, the applicant should be aware that if the other suites are rented to uses other than a printing facility, any special exception granted for that space for a printing facility would expire. Once expired, the applicant would need to come back to the Board of Adjustment for a new approval, if at the later date they wish to expand the printing facility into other areas of the building. Walz said the proposed use meets the performance standards for off-site impacts contained in Article 14- 5H, Performance Standards. She said the proposed use will meet the performance standards for off-site impacts. There will be no emissions of smoke, particulate matter, chemicals, or offensive odors. The printing operation will not cause noticeable vibrations and there will be no bulk storage of ftammable materials. Walz said the proposed use is not one of the manufacturing uses prohibited in the CI-1 Zone. A printing facility is not one of the prohibited manufacturing uses. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 8 Walz noted that the proposed use will not exceed 15,000 square feet. She said that the applicant is requesting approval of 12,400 square feet of space for technical/light manufacturing. She added that all' general standards are met. Staff recommends that EXC06-00010, a special exception to permit a printing facility up to 12,400 square feet in size in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) Zone on property located at 2650 Mormon Trek Blvd, be approved. Public Hearina Ooened: Dan Tiedt, 526 Wood ridge Avenue, said that they might enlarge their production facilities if they do not get a tenant for one of their suites. He said that they realize that if they rent one or both suites to a tenant the special exception expires. He said that this represents an opportunity for them to grow in the future months. Public hearina closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC06-00010, a special exception to permit a printing facility up to 12,400 square feet in size in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) Zone on property located at 2650 Mormon Trek Blvd, be approved. Wood seconded the motion. Alexander will vote in favor of the application. She said that it fits in the possibilities for special exception since it is less than 15,000 square feet. She said that it will meet the performance standards for off-site impacts. She noted that it will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. She said that it will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. Alexander said that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress or egress and the specific proposed exception. She said that in all other respects, it conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. Wood will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Wright will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Leigh will vote in favor of the application for the reasons already stated. Motion passed 4:0. EXC06-00011 Discussion of an application submitted by Willowwind School for a special exception for the expansion of a general education facility, a reduction on the rear setback requirement, and the reconfiguration of the parking lot and play areas for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-12) zone at 950 Dover Street. Walz said the applicant, Willowwind School, is requesting a special exception to allow expansion of a general educational facility in a High Density Single-Family Residential (RS-12) zone. In addition, she said, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the rear setback requirement for general education facilities in the RS-12 zone from 50 feet to 30 feet. Walz said that in February 2004, The Board of Adjustment granted a special exception for Willowwind School to allow a general educational facility to be established at 950 Dover Street (the former Moose Lodge) and to reduce the required rear setback for educational facilities from 50 feet to 38 feet. At the time, the applicant had not yet consulted within an architect and believed that any necessary modifications would not require expansion of the building. Walz said the original special exception (EX06- 00001) was granted subject to submittal of a site plan that demonstrates sidewalk construction along the east side of Dover Street connecting the current sidewalk to Muscatine Avenue; landscape screening along the front parking lot on Dover Street; and proposed parking layout, traffic circulation, and landscaping on the site, including identification of a designated fire lane. Walz noted that since that time, the Willowwind School has hired an architect and assessed the interior Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 9 space of the building as well as use of the outdoor areas and parking. She said that the architect has made a number of recommendations for expanding the building and modifying the outdoor activity areas. The site plan for the building shows two proposed areas of new construction at the front (south) of the building: a 400 square foot addition for a handicapped accessible entrance from the lower level with an elevator and a 1500 square foot formal entrance and conservatory and office space on the main level. She noted that the plan also shows proposed expansions on the main level (approximately 270 sq. feet each) to the four classrooms on the east, west, and north sides of the building. Walz said the site plan also shows two changes to areas external to the building: the outdoor area on the west side of the building is proposed for playground use for pre-K and kindergarten students, and the large parking area at the front of the building will be reduced by more than one third to allow development of a level grass play area at the front of the property. She said that play areas are an accessory use associated with educational facilities and do require review by the Board. She stated that the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the city, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board of Adjustment may grant the requested special exception to allow expansion of the educational facility in the RS-12 zone if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the regulations of the Sections 14-4B-4D-9 as well as and the general standards for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-4B-3A. The Board may grant a reduction in the rear setback requirement if the applicant demonstrates that the approval criteria have been satisfied. Walz said the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan encourages neighborhoods with a mix of housing and supportive land uses as well as open space and recreational facilities. She added that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the location of educational facilities and other institutional uses within neighborhoods provided that traffic circulation and pedestrian safety are ensured and adequate measures are taken to buffer neighboring property owners from the negative effects of parking and increased noise. Walz said that with the exception of the additions in the rear setback of the building, Staff believes the proposed building expansions will have no significant adverse affects on the livability of nearby residential uses. She said the proposed additions on the east side of the building will be setback more than 100 feet from the east property line. The area proposed for the formal entrance and office space on the main level is currently used for air exchange equipment, which will be relocated to the roof of the school. In Staffs view the conversion of this area will improve the aesthetic appearance of the building. She added that the two additions on the west side of the building for the enlargement of the classroom on the main level and the handicapped accessible entrance from the lower level both maintain the 20-foot side setback requirement and are screened from view of the abutting residential properties to the west by landscaping and privacy fencing that appear to be on the residential property. She said that the two additions on the north side of the building will expand further into what is already a reduced setback of 38 feet. The applicant has not submitted in time to make the package an explanation of the criteria to meet the rear setback requirements. Walz said the applicant's explanation and a memorandum signed by her in regard to the set back issue were handed out to the Board prior to the meeting. For the previous special exception, the applicant had anticipated using the open area to the east of the building as active play area. Since consulting with an architect, the applicant has changed plans for active outdoor use areas. Walz said that because the school operates during limited hours (approx. 8:00 am until 5:00 pm) on weekdays, in staffs view, the establishment of the newly proposed outdoor play areas-the kindergarten and pre-K area on the east side of the building and the grass playing field at the front of the school-will not have significant adverse affects for neighboring properties. Walz said that because excessively large parking lots are a concern highlighted in the standards for general educational facilities, the conversion of a large portion of the parking lot at the front of the property will actually bring the property into better compliance with the code. The redesigned parking area will need to meet all parking standards for capacity, circulation, and landscaping. She noted that to ensure safety, staff recommends that the playing field at the front the property be fenced to a height of 6 feet (non-solid Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 10 fencing) and, in accordance with the fence regulations, the fence must not be located within the front setback. Staff recommends additional screening for both play areas to address the potential negative affect of increase noise generated so close to residential properties. Walz said an email was received from a property owner on the west side of the school with concems about drainage issues. She noted that the email was also handed out. She said that the drainage issue could be addressed when changes are made to the play area. Walz said that changes to the parking lot and modifications to the building exterior are required to meet all zoning and site development standards, including the Multi-Family Site Development Standards. Walz said the minimum setback requirements are exceeded on all sides of the building with the exception of the rear setback, which is approximately 38 feet-a 50 foot setback is required. In the original special exception to establish the school, the Board of Adjustment reduced the setback requirements because the building was already established within the required setback. In addition, the topography of the site, with its steep slope at the rear, combined with the existing privacy fence along the property line, provides an adequate buffer, screening these properties from the additional noise and traffic generated by the school. She said that the two proposed additions on the north side of the building will expand further into what is already a reduced setback of 38 feet. She said that the applicant had submitted an explanation for the setback requirements. However, Walz said the information provided does not adequately address the specific standards for reducing the rear setback. Walz said the situation is not peculiar to the situation in question. She said that there are opportunities for expansion on the east and west side of the building which are not within the requirement setback. She said that the applicant noted in the explanation that there will be improvements to the building fayade. Staff believes there can be improvements to the fayade through change of building materials, and addition of windows, which will not intrude within the setback. Walz said the applicant raised the issue of safety access. Walz explained that fire escapes can be provided within the required setback, so safety is not an issue. Walz noted that there should not be practical difficulty because expansions can take place on the east or west sides of the building. Walz said that granting the exception should not be contrary to the purpose of the setback regulations. She said that the larger setback requirements for educational institutions are intended to address the intensity of use and to provide space for neighboring uses. She added that staff believes that backyards are meant for privacy. The specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed special exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. The Staff recommends additional screening to mitigate noise from the newly proposed play areas and fencing surrounding the playing field at the front on the property. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properties in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Walz said that the school operates during the weekdays from 8 AM to 5:30 PM and thus traffic and noise generated by the school will be limited to business hours. Staff believes that additional screening along the both play areas and fencing around the playing field at the front of the property will provide adequate buffer and separation from the neighboring residential uses. The conversion of a portion of the parking lot to playing field will bring the site into better conformance with the code and will improve the aesthetics of the site. She said that the newly designed parking lot and the additions to the school building itself will be required to meet all zoning and site development standards, including the Multi-Family Site Development Standards. Establishment of the specific proposed. exception will not impede the nonmal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses penmitted in the zone in which such property is located. Walz said the surrounding properties are already fully developed. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Walz said that in the previous special exception for the property the Board found that vehicular access to Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 11 the property via a collector (Dover Street) and an arterial street (Muscatine Avenue) meets the requirements for educational uses established in the RS-12 zone. She added that the construction of a sidewalk as required in the previous special exception will ensure safe pedestrian access to the property. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She said that on-street parking has been restricted along Dover Street in order to maximize visibility at this location. The existing traffic control at the Dover/Muscatine intersection has been evaluated by traffic engineers and has been determined to be appropriate. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. The applicant is required to submit a site plan to the building official for review and will be subject to all other requirements of the Zoning Code. Walz said that the site plan must meet the Construction and Design Standards for off-street parking, including the minimum parking requirements, proposed traffic circulation on the site, designation of an emergency vehicle/fire lane along the building, and parking layout and landscaping requirements. Modifications and additions to the building will be subject to the Multi-family Site Development Standards. The proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as amended. Walz said the Comprehensive Plan encourages the location of educational facilities and other institutional uses within neighborhoods provided that traffic circulation and pedestrian safety are ensured and adequate measures are taken to buffer neighboring property owners from the negative impacts of parking and increased noise. She added that the use of the property as a school complies with the intent of the Comprehensive Pian. Staff recommends that EXC06-00011, an application for a speciai exception allowing an expansion of a general educational facility in the High Density Single-Family Residential (RS- 12) zone be granted subject to submittal of a site plan demonstrating the recommended screening and fencing as well as the prior required sidewalk construction along the east side of Dover Street connecting the current sidewalk to Muscatine, and proposed parking layout, traffic circulation, and landscaping on the site, including identification of a designated fire lane. Staff recommends that the special exception to allow a reduction in the rear setback requirement for a general educational facility in the RS-12 zone be denied. Public Hearina Ooened: Chris DeGrout, representing Teague Architects said that they are trying to recreate the design elements of the existing school. He said they want to create an attractive building but also want to be good neighbor. He said they are trying to give the school a residential feeling as to better include itself in the neighborhood. DeGrout said that they are asking for an extension of 8-10 feet for the bump outs which will give the opportunity of breaking the mass and creating a more residentiai aspect. He said the proposal will be a greater benefit to the neighborhood and the school itself. Wood asked what the appropriate dimensions of the bump outs are. DeGrout said the vertical dimensions will be 8-9 feet, and 20-25 feet wide. Wright asked what the primary purpose for the bump outs is. DeGrout said the bump outs have an aesthetical goal as well as extending more space for classroom. He said that the classrooms are approximately 480 square feet. He added that a typical Iowa City classroom is 800 square feet. Jeff Edbera. 2041 Rochester Court, said that the design work is from the inside out. He said that the curriculum is incorporated into the building design. He said the bump-outs are not just extra space but they will also plant the right trees to attract wildlife in ways that enhance the education of the kids. He noted that he agrees that separation from residential is important and parts of the schooi are naturally screened. Jeanne Bancroft. 906 Dover Street, said she appreciates the efforts of improving the aesthetics of the building. She said that property owners have an expectation of privacy in their backyards and its feeling Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 12 like the school is moving into their backyards. She said that adequate screening is needed and is not currently provided by the school. She said she would like to work together to see that every place is screened in an attractive way. She said that she is interested in the type of fence that will be installed. Waiz said that on the side of the property solid fence couid be installed; however, due to traffic restrictions the front of the school would need a non-solid fence. Maraaret Murrav. 832 Dover Street, said the buildings on the west side of the school are O-Iot-lines; therefore each lot consists of two homes with shallow yards. She added that any1hing done to the school would be an improvement. She said that thoughtful consideration should be placed around the privacy of the area, including the placement of the dumpster close to the residential property. Leigh asked if with the proposed additions the school will still comply with the required setbacks. Walz said the school will be in compliance with the required 20 feet setbacks. Naida Brown said the school is open to adding planting and landscape on the west side of the school as to not intrude in the backyards of the residents. Bancroft said that she would like to be educated as to how these requirements would be implemented. She said there are ongoing issues with the drainage from the parking that were never solved. Behr said that if the board imposes conditions, the housing inspections department then assures that the plan is in accordance with those conditions when the applicant seeks site plan and building permit approval. Stefan Strack. 848 Dover Street, reemphasized the necessity to make sure the drainage issue is rectified. He said that when the parking fills with water everything spills into their backyards which caused 6 floods so far. Public hearina closed MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC06-00011, an application for a special exception allowing an expansion of a general educational facility in the High Density Single-Family Residential (RS- 12) zone be granted subject to submittal of a site plan demonstrating the recommended screening and fencing as well as the prior required sidewalk construction along the east side of Dover Street connecting the current sidewalk to Muscatine, and proposed parking layout, traffic circulation, and landscaping on the site, including identification of a designated fire lane; provisions be made in the site-plan to address drainage issues from the parking lot going into Dover properties and adequate screening on the west side particularly at the fire truck turnaround and recycling and trash area. Wood seconded the motion. Wright said that the additions are well within the setback requirements. He added that moving the air exchange equipment will have aesthetic benefits. The two additions on the west side of the building as well as the handicapped accessible entrance fall within the required setback and should be properly screened from the residential property. He noted that these changes will have to meet all zoning and site plan requirements. Wright said the establishment of the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided, adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress or egress and the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He noted they are recommending additional screening to mitigate possible externalities. Walz recommended that the Board could specify 53 planning, which would address those issues raised by the neighbors. Alexander would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. Wood would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. AMMENDMENT: Wright moved to amend the motion to include a required 53 standard screening for the west side of the school. Alexander seconded the amendment. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 13 The amended motion passed 4:0 MOTION: Wright moved that EXC06-00011, a special exception to allow a reduction in the rear setback requirement for a general educational facility in the RS.12 zone be approved. Alexander seconded the motion. Wood would vote against. He said that the 50 foot setback is needed, and a reduction would be too much. Wright said that he does not believe this is a peculiar situation for a further reduction of setback in the rear. He said there are many opportunities for improvement of the rear without intrusion into the required setback. Wright said he would vote against the setback reduction. Alexander would vote against the setback reduction. She said there are issues of comfort and general welfare. Privacy issues could also affect property values in the neighborhood. Leigh would vote against for the reasons already stated. Motion failed 0:4. EXC06-00012 Discussion of an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for a special exception for the placement of fill in the floodplain on property located in the Community Commercial (CC.2) zone on Ruppert Road. Behr said that representatives of Wal-Mart intend to request a deferral of the consideration. He said that the request of referral is based on the wish to submit revised exhibits. He noted there were attached exhibits to the application. Behr said that the board can proceed with the public hearing as they would typically do and take the new exhibits into consideration and if comfortable doing so make a decision. He added that the board could choose to proceed with the public hearing and if based on the new exhibits they could continue the public hearing to the next meeting. Behr said that another option would be to relate the request for referral and explain the reasons for it and if wish they could defer and commence the public hearing on the merits of the application at the next meeting Alexander asked if the deferral would require a motion from the board. Behr said that a motion would be required. Leigh said that the board did not have access to the revised exhibits and asked when they would get access to them. Behr said the exhibits could be presented at that time. Leigh said that the board had received a lot of material with this application and if new exhibits would be provided it would be better for the board to have them ahead of time. Behr said that the board should let the applicant to make the request for referral and the basis for the request and allow others to speak to the issue of deferral. Chuck Becker. 666 Walnut Street, said he is speaking on behalf of Wal-Mart. He asked the board to defer the consideration of application submitted by Wal-Mart. He said that in reviewing the materials presented to the board they discovered two mistakes and would like the opportunity to correct them and provide new exhibits to the board. He stated that the mistakes do not affect the fill or the placement of the fill but the documents have a small error. He noted the two mistakes are on exhibit 9 and 10. He said on the existing exhibit 9 there is an alley of grey on the east side of the proposal which is not supposed to be there. He said that the alley does not currently exist and they wanted to install it but city staff said that it would be unacceptable. He added that exhibit 10 who showed it would also need to be corrected to not show the alley. Becker said that due to that mistake on exhibits 9 and 10 they had the No Rise Certificate recalculated and no changes were perceived, which means that there will be no increase in flooding as a result of that change. He noted that a new exhibit 4, the No Rise Certificate, had been handed out which verifies the elimination of the alley would not have an impact on the rise. He said they are asking for referral because those documents are not accurate and they would like them to have the change, and if Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes June 14, 2006 Page 14 considering appropriate to defer the application to the July meeting they would be more than happy to present at that time. Leigh asked if there is any change to the exhibit 9. Becker said that looking at exhibit 9 there is a grey alley that is gone. He added that there is not where the fill will go, so it does not directly impact the purpose of the application but is a change to the exhibit which made them believe that the board might prefer to put the meeting off for a month. Wood asked if the same change exists on exhibit 1 0 as well. Becker said that exhibit 9 shows the existing topography and exhibit 10 shows the modified area after construction. He added that the gray is the flood plain designation and the difference in the gray areas is where the fill will be placed. He noted that there seems to be a depression where the alley way is. He noted that on the exhibit 9, the alley presented is not currently there. He said that document 10 shows the gray alley again, which was intended to be installed drainage area. He added that the staff said the installation of the alley would be unacceptable, and the changes were made to the documents. Behr said that there happens to be a final plat of the property proceeding and when city staff informed them that the alley was not acceptable was not a matter of flood plain issues but with the layout of the subdivision and not wanting a drainage way there but wanting vehicular access easements there. Wallv Tavlor, 118 3"' Avenue SE, Cedar Rapids, said that the public needs an opportunity to look at the new exhibits and examine them and in fact the documentation in the packet was prepared a month ago and not available to the public until recently. He asks the board to deny the application but at least defer the matter until the public has the opportunity to examine the information. MOTION: Alexander moved that EXC06-00012 Discussion of an application submitted by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for a special exception for the placement of fill in the floodplain on property located in the Community Commercial (CC-2) zone on Rupert Road be deferred. Wright seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. OTHER Wood will not attend the July meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:03 PM. I I Board of Adjustment Attendance Record 2006 Term Name Expires 01/11 02/08 03/08 04/13 05/10 06/14 Karen Leiah 01/01107 X X OlE X X X Carol Alexander 01/01108 X X X X X X Michael Wriaht 01/01/09 X X X X X X Ned Wood 01/01110 X X X X X X M. Shelangouski 01/01/11 X X X X X OlE Key: X = Present o = Absent OlE = AbsenUExcused NM = No Meeting I I I i I I I MINUTES Iowa City Airport Commission June 27, 2006 Iowa City Airport Terminal- 7:30 AM FINAL Members Present: Randy Hartwig, Chair; Janelle Rettig; Howard Horan; John Staley Staff Present: Sue Dulek Others Present: RECOMMENDATON TO COUNCIL: NONE DETERMINE QUORUM: Chairperson Hartwig called the meeting to order at 7:31 A.M. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: A. Taxilane - North Tee's and North Terminal Parking Lot Hartwig opened the public hearing on plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on the cost for Rehabilitation of North T-Hangar Taxilanes and North Terminal Automobile Parking Lot. No public comment was received and the public hearing was closed. Rettig moved the resolution approving plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for Rehabilitation of North T- Hangar Taxilanes, and North Terminal Automobile Parking Lot. Staley seconded the motion. Resolution No. A06-13 passed 4-0 on a roll call vote (Farris absent). ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 7:34 A.M. Chairperson Date [J;[ Airport Commission June 27, 2006 Page 2 of2 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 ( Meetinl! Date) TERM 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/13 5/1 5111 5/31 6/8 6/16 6/23 6/27 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- -- Randy Hartwig 3/1109 X X X X X X X X X OlE X Greg Farris 3/1/07 0 X X X X X X X X X OlE John Staley 3/1106 X X X X X X OlE X X OlE X Howard Horan 3/1108 X X X X X X X X X X X Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 -- --- X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present o = Absent OlE ~ AbsentlExcnsed NM = No meeting -- ~ Not a Member 2 Minutes Iowa City Airport Commission June 23, 2006 Iowa City Airport Terminal-7:30 AM FINAL Members Present: Greg Farris; Howard Horan; Janelle Rettig Members Absent: Randy Hartwig; John Staley Staff Present: Michael Tharp Others Present: Senator Bob Dvorsky; Senator Joe Bolkcom; Representative Mary Mascher; Representative Vicki Lensing; Iowa City Councilor Amy Correia; Tom Schnell Determine Quorum: Rettig called the meeting to order at 7:30 AM Recommendations to Council: None Public Discussion: None Items For Discussion/Action: A. A general discussion of the State ofIowa Aviation Trust Fund was held. A discussion was held about airport operations and improvements. B. Commission members and elected officials were given a tour of the University of Iowa's mechanical and industrial engineering research projects by Tom Schnell, Associate Professor, University of Iowa. Adjourn: Meeting adjourned at 9:00 AM Chairperson Date c:: .._~---"------_._-,---,.,----~--------_......_.._---,.~_.,-_._-~--,.. Airport Commission June 23, 2006 Page 2 of2 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 (Meetin" Date) TERM 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/13 5/1 5/11 5/31 6/8 6/16 6/23 6/27 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X X X X X X OlE Greg Farris 3/1/07 Ole X X X X X X X X X John Staley 3/1/06 X X X X X X OlE X X OlE Howard Horan 3/1/08 X X X X X X X X X X Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 --- --- X X X X X X X X KEY: X ~ Present o = Absent OlE ~ AbsentlExcnsed NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member 2 c:r MINUTES Iowa City Airport Commission June 16, 2006 Iowa City Airport Terminal-7:30 AM FINAL Members Present: Randy Hartwig, Chair; Greg Farris; Janelle Rettig; Howard Horan; John Staley (arrived late) Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: RECOMMENDATON TO COUNCIL: NONE DETERMINE QUORUM: Chairperson Hartwig called the meeting to order at 7:30 A.M. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: A. Taxilane - North Tee's, and North Terminal Parking Lot a. Update - Hartwig gave an update on the bid schedule giving the earliest date they would be able to set a hearing b. Consider a resolution setting a public hearing for the plans specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for the Rehabilitation of North T-Hangar Taxilanes, and North Terminal Automobile Parking Lot - Rettig moved to consider the above resolution, A06-11 , setting public hearing for June 27, 2006 at 7:30AM. Horan Seconded. Motion Passed 4-0 (Staley Absent) B. Runway 7-25 a. Update - Dulek gave an explanation regarding how the figures of the agreement are reached and the terms of the contract. Rettig asked if the engineering contract had been an open bid item. Hartwig responded that the Commission awarded that runway extension project to Earth Tech following a request for proposals. b. Consider a resolution approving Supplemental Agreement No.5 with Earth Tech for construction engineering services during the grading and drainage for Runway 7-25 extension including the proposed runway safety area. Horan moved to consider the above resolution, A06-12. Farris seconded. Motion passed 5-0 ~-----,---~-~"--'---'-'--"--'--'---'---"""'--'----'._----_._-~_.._..._,._-...<-,--~_.__.._,--.- Airport Commission June 16,2006 Page 2 of3 ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Rettig announced she had received feedback from some of our local legislature and they requested a visit to the airport to be on June 23, at 7:30AM. The Commission agreed to set a meeting for that date and time. ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 7:41 A.M. Chairperson Date Airport Commission June 16,2006 Page 3 of3 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 (Meetin" Date) TERM 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/13 5/1 5/11 5/31 6/8 6/16 6/23 6/27 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 -- -- -- --- -- --- --- -- -- Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X X X X X X Greg Farris 3/1/07 0 X X X X X X X X John Staley 3/1/06 X X X X X X OlE X X Howard Horan 3/1/08 X X X X X X X X X Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 --- --- X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present o = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting -- = Not a Member c;: MINUTES Iowa City Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Iowa City Airport Terminal- 5:45 PM FINAL Members Present: Randy Hartwig, Chair; John Staley; Greg Farris; Janelle Rettig; Howard Horan (arrived late) Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: David Hughes of Earth Tech, Jill Fishbaugh DETERMINE QUORUM: Chairperson Hartwig called the meeting to order at 5:49 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: NONE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MAY 11, 2006 and MAY 31, 2006, MEETINGS: Chairperson Hartwig asked ifthere were any additions or changes to the above-named minutes. Staley moved to accept the minutes ofthe May 11, 2006, meeting as written, seconded by Rettig. Motion passed 4-0. (Horan not present). Hartwig then asked members if they had any changes to the May 31 minutes. (Horan not present.) Dulek noted that there should be a clarification made to show Congressman Leach had attended the initial discussion with the Airport Commission. Hartwig reiterated Dulek's clarification on the May 31 minutes as, "A general discussion with Representative Leach." Rettig moved to accept the minutes of the May 31, 2006, meeting as amended, seconded by Farris. Motion passed 4-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Jill Fishbaugh addressed the Commission, stating that she has been asked to inquire about a grass strip next to the 18-36 runway, as there is interest by some pilots to land on a grass strip. She asked that the Commission consider this. Hartwig noted that this has been brought up before and discussion ensued regarding requirements. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: A. FAAlDOT Projects - Earth Tech - David Hughes a. Runway 7/25 i. Update - Hughes noted that the box culvert project is completed and they are in the process of getting the final documentation from the contractor. He further stated that they have received six bids on the grading project, with C.J. Moyna's being the lowest. Hughes stated that they have talked with the F.A.A. on the grant Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Page 2 of6 regarding this project and the F.A.A. 's requirements on this. Hartwig noted that identified obstructions need to be addressed. Hughes addressed the members' questions regarding the scope ofthis project. Rettig noted that she would like to see them act cautiously when dealing with private property issues. Dulek addressed the Commission regarding the bid process and how they handled the current bidding. 11. Consider a resolution awarding contract and authorizing the chairperson to sign and the secretary to attest a contract for construction of "Phase 2 Project" within the Runway 7/25 extension project to grade the area for runway extension (Horan arrived) - Dulek noted a slight change to this resolution for the members to review and answered their questions. Discussion continued on what items are covered by the grant funds and what items need to have additional funding in order to complete the addendum fencing. Tharp noted that proceeds from the Hagen parcel would be a possibility for this. Hughes added that they would also have proceeds from the property to the south. Members discussed various fencing issues, such as deer and coyote being able to get out ofthe area and fencing requirements for safety reasons. The issue of a chain- link fence versus a barbed-wire fence were discussed again, with members discussing the additional funding needed for this, as wen as F .A.A. requirements for the grant money. Rettig moved to consider the above resolution, as subject to the F.A.A. funding, A06-07, seconded by Farris. Motion passed 5-0. b. Taxi-lane North Tee's 1. Update - Hughes stated that they reviewed this again and that he gave Hartwig some additional information to take to the City for additional funding. He stated that they had an error in the "quantities" and this was corrected. Hughes stated that he feels they should delay the public hearing on this until some time next week so they can add the parking lot asphalt to this same set of plans. Hughes stated that he will have the amended plans to the Commission by Wednesday. 11. Consider a resolution setting a public hearing for the plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for the Rehabilitation of north t-hangar taxi lanes- Hartwig asked ifthe members agreed to defer this resolution. It was decided to defer this issue until 7:30 2 Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Page 3 of6 AM. on Friday, June 16, to set the public hearing. (TAPE ENDS) c. ASOS Relocation - Hughes stated that as part ofthis project there is a requirement by the FAA that the City be responsible for $4,000 to move the equipment. He stated that plans have been drawn up, but until agreements are in place, nothing can happen. The members discussed having no service for a period of days and how they could eliminate this shutdown. Rettig suggested speaking with one of the congressional office liaisons regarding this. d. T -Hangar Floors- i. Update - Hughes stated that he met with the contractor on this and he is working on taking care of some of the problems they encountered. 11. Consider a resolution accepting the work for the Hangar B&C Concrete Flooring Project - Staley moved to consider the resolution as stated above, seconded by Horan. A06-08 Motion passed 5-0. e. Hangar K i. Update - Hughes stated that this project is complete. ii. Consider a resolution accepting the work for the Hangar K Roofing Project - Rettig moved to consider the resolution, A06-09 as stated above, seconded by Farris. Motion passed 5-0. B. South Aviation Development 1. Update - Hughes stated that they have been working with the F.AA on a planning study for this area, as well as possible grant funding. Rettig asked for some clarification on the resolutions associated with this project. ii. Consider a resolution accepting FAA Grant Offer 3-19- 0047-12-2006 for an Update Master Plan study - Rettig moved to consider the resolution above, A06-10, seconded by Staley. Motion passed 5-0. 111. Consider a resolution approving Supplemental Agreement No.4 with Earth Tech for engineering services for airport layout plan update for the area south of runway 12-30 after closing runway 18-36 - Rettig moved to consider the resolution above, A06-11, seconded by Horan. Motion passed 5-0. C. Aviation Commerce Park - Hartwig noted that Harry Wolf with Iowa Realty was unable to attend this evening's meeting, but that there isn't much to report on this currently. Dulek noted that there are some Wal-Mart issues on the City Council's 3 Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Page 4 of6 agenda regarding extensions to their agreement for this land. Members asked questions of Dulek regarding this situation. D. Eastern Iowa Pilot's Association - Kim Brogan-Coleman i. Current Lease/Operations Agreement Expires May 31, 2006 - Tharp stated that Ms. Brogan-Coleman did pack up the end of May, but that he has not heard anything from her. He noted that she has paid her account in full, including the back-owed money. Hartwig suggested they look into uses for this hangar. Tharp suggested they use it as overflow space for now. E. T -Hangar Leases - Tharp noted that they should take this month to review this lease, suggest wording changes and rates, and then approve it at next month's meeting. Then in August, Tharp can begin sending out leases. Tharp gave the members current rental information on the t-hangars and explained the difference in pricing structures. Hartwig then gave some history on how they have arrived at their lease rates. A discussion ensued regarding the various hangars and how they were funded in the past, as well as how new hangars could be funded in the future. Tharp brought the discussion back to wording changes in the lease. He pointed out the various issues that he has identified and gave members his thoughts on each. (TAPE ENDS) The members agreed with Tharp on the issues he raised with Item 10 - Alterations. Rettig asked ifthey shouldn't add something about batteries to Item II - Hazardous Materials. Dulek noted that this is under a different item. Tharp will have a final version for the members at next month's meeting. F. Airport "Operations": Strategic Plan-Implementation; Budget; and Airport Management - Tharp noted that overall they are doing "fine." Rettig asked for some clarification on several line items. Hartwig briefly touched on a few items. Horan asked if they couldn't make their own repairs to the pump area and the discussion turned to this. Hartwig gave some history on how they had planned on this being handled and how things actually turned out. Tharp stated that he would speak with Jerry about this and see if they can't come up with something. Rettig asked about having the bushes trimmed and weeding done to enhance the appearance. Tharp will contact the City on this. a. Current Management and Consultants Agreements - Rettig stated that she requested this be on the agenda as she wanted to discuss the different levels of management they currently have. Hartwig gave her some history on this issue, stating that things have changed with the addition of Tharp's position. Rettig asked that they review some of these items to make sure they are spending in the right areas. Hartwig asked who would be interested in serving on a committee to review this, and Rettig and Hartwig decided that they will work on this. G. Subcommittees' Reports - Farris noted that he and Tharp were in contact with the janitorial service for the terminal building and that they have reviewed tasks and 4 Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Page 5 of6 gone over what is needed. He stated that the current service gave them a cost of about $250 per month for two days per week of service and basic cleaning duties. A new agreement would have 3 days of service and include yearly maintenance on floors and other areas. This would include stripping of floors and other maintenance-type issues that have been let go. Horan suggested they give more feedback to the company that handles these tasks so they know exactly what the Airport expects. Dulek suggested that Tharp speak with the City and see what janitorial services they have and possible use by the Airport of such services. Tharp also discussed replacement costs for chairs in the conference room. Hartwig asked that he put some figures in writing for the Commission to review. H. Chairperson's Report - Hartwig stated that he wanted to recognize the coverage of Rick Mascari's airplane in current edition of Plane & Pilot. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Rettig stated that Congressman Leach carne for a visit last month, as stated in the earlier minutes. She stated that the Legislators should be making some movement on this issue soon. Rettig stated that she would also like to invite Harkin and Grassley and/or their stafffor the same type of visit. Rettig also brought up that she and Tharp met to put together room rental information for the Airport conference room. She stated that they have a tentative proposal for the Commission and that it is somewhat similar to the Public Library's guidelines. Rettig and Tharp asked for the members to review this information and stated that they would like to readdress it at a future meeting. Horan stated that he would like to propose painting the wind T, as nothing has happened with this in the past. He also asked about upgrading the windsock, stating that it is looking bad. Horan also thanked Rettig for getting Leach to the Airport and her efforts in this. (TAPE ENDS) Tharp stated that he has been approached about the carpet on the main floor and painting, stating that he agrees they could use some "beautification" of the terminal building. Hartwig stated that he should get some costs on this. Hartwig also suggested they put money aside for this every five years or so, and that way it can be a regular item in the budget. Rettig then brought up the signage situation with Hertz, stating that they should be consistent on the types of signs allowed. STAFF REPORT: None. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: July 13, 2006@5:45P.M. ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 8:12 P.M. Chairperson Date 5 --,-~----,.~-----,_._-_.._".,.__.....,-,-~..-..._----._.._---_.~._--- Airport Commission June 8, 2006 Page 6 of6 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 Meetine Date) TERM 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/13 5/1 5111 5/31 6/8 6/16 6/23 6/27 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 --- -- -- --- -- -- --- -- Randy Hartwig 311/09 X X X X X X X X Greg Farris 3/1107 0 X X X X X X X John Staley 3/1106 X X X X X X OlE X Howard Horan 3/1/08 X X X X X X X X Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 --- -- X X X X X X KEY: X = Present o ~ Absent OlE ~ AbsenUExcused NM ~ No meeting --- = Not a Member 6 MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 2006, 6:30 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL "'ROV'. r::: Members Present: Jerry Anthony, William Greazel, Matthew Hayek, Kelly Mellecker, Thomas Niblock, Brian Richman, Michael Shaw Public Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Bob Burns, Dan Garrett (Iowa Equity Fund), Krista Noah (Planned Parenthood) Staff Present: Call Meetino to Order Anthony called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Aooroval of the March 9. March 23. and March 29. 2006 Meetina Minutes MOTION: Hayek moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mellecker seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Greazel arrived at this point. Public Comment of Items not on the Aaenda Richman asked if the commission should reconsider allocations in light of the recent tornado. Long asked if he had suggestions. Richman said he did not have any particular suggestions, and he has not heard any assessment of damages to public facilities. He said his question centers on whether there are other priorities now. Long said people are still trying to assess the damage, so very little is known at this point and funding gaps are unknown. He said the city is working with The Housing Fellowship with their damages, since CDBG funds were involved in some of their projects. Greazel noted the funds which were held back during allocations are still available, and the commission could consider future applications. Long said the city is still waiting to hear from the federal government on whether the area will be declared a disaster zone. If so, some requirements for applications are waived and money could be shifted around more easily. Otherwise, projects need to go through the normal application. Anthony asked what the timeline is for the disaster area designation. Long said it could be up to 30 days. He said the city has not heard from non-profits regarding desired funding or if they received any damages. Hayek said he had heard several of the rental houses on Iowa Avenue were underinsured, so there may be gaps in that area. Anthony said there is a request to have the Iowa Equity Fund presentation before discussion of the annual action plan. He asked if there were any objections from commission members. There were no objections. Presentation bv the Iowa Eauitv Fund Reaardina Low Income Housina Tax Credits Garrett introduced himself as a representative from the Iowa Equity Fund. The Fund is a non-profit tax credit syndicate that buys tax credits on affordable housing projects. The Fund is part of a larger company called Midlands Housing Equity Group, based in Omaha, Nebraska. Garrett said the state awards the tax credits for low-income projects, and the required compliance period in Iowa is15 years, though an extended period is an option. The Fund is designed to help those with low to moderate incomes. It actually consists of four funds with four offices. Iowa Equity has two funds, and his area, called Fund Two, is handling about $20 million this year. They have syndicated projects all over the state for both historic and adaptive rehabilitation, and assisted living. They have just completed their second assisted living project and plan to do four smaller ones this year. Garrett said tax credits are very competitive, so the Fund would like to get in on the ground floor. The Fund's greatest offering is that it is local. The national syndicators are aggressive, and there is more money available. He said the Iowa Equity Fund is trying to work with people who might need the services and get in on the ground floor. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 2 Garrett said the Fund is asked by an investor to help non-profits with existing stock turn them into tax credit projects. What happens is that a limited partnership is created, with the syndicate holding 99.99 percent ownership. The non-profit sells the project to the limited partnership, and holds .01 percent ownership. The resultant tax credit equity helps with rehab done on the unit, and builds a reserve. Also, tax-exempt properties become taxable. There is a formula for calculating affordable housing tax credits based on state code, so it is not the same as becoming 100 percent commercial. Garrett said the tax credit money, which covers typically 60 percent of the project costs, is not public money. It is investor money, such as with Wells Fargo, Bank of the West, and Fannie Mae. They get dollar for dollar tax credits on their returns. Hayek asked how much money comes back to the investors per tax credit dollar. Garrell said when he started five years ago they were at about 72 cents for every dollar. Burns said it was approximately 42 cents on the dollar in the late 1980s, but investors wanted higher returns. Garrett said he is now doing about 92 cents, which is lower than the national average because the company is very conservative. He added it is possible to get over a dollar in some areas. Hayek asked what happens to the property after 15 years. Garrell said the affordability period is at least 15 years. At the end of that period, the property can be sold back to the non-profit organization for the balance of the outstanding debt. At that point they could be put back into the tax credit program. Richman asked if the unit would need to apply for additional dollars for rehab after 15 years. Garrell said it is a possibility. Greazel noted that projects presented to the commission usually have an affordability period of 30 or 40 years. Garrell said the limited partners are only interested in the first 15 years, but there is an option to extend affordability. The investors only get tax credit up through year 10. The syndicate is done after 15 years. Greazel asked who keeps track of affordability after 15 years. Garrell said the Iowa Finance Authority is the agency that awards tax credits. If the property goes back to the non-profit, they would be responsible for keeping up the affordability. Otherwise, the unit can be sold with an easement kept to retain affordability. Richman asked if the city could require a ionger period of affordability. Garrett said yes, but the affordability requirements are already stringent, and they are monitored closely because there is a lot at stake. Garrett said his syndicate has placed $300 million of funding since its beginning. Though that might seem like a lot, there are national companies that have done well over a billion. There is a lot riding on keeping up with the requirements and keeping the books straight. Files are audited every year. Long asked for an expianation of the local commitment. Garrell said the Finance Authority requires a local commitment to indicate the local entity is behind the project, either in the form of a direct placement of money or tax abatement. Then the city also has to give a wrillen resolution and leller of support. The local contribution has to be a certain percentage of the project cost. Long asked if the local monetary support could be from the county if the project is in the city. Burns said the city needs to support the project to get the application points, but the funds can come from the county. Garrell said more projects are funded at four percent credit level because there is so much competition at the nine percent level. Hayek asked what participation is needed at the municipal level other than supporting the project. Garrett said it depends on the entity. Some have given direct contributions or tax abatements. One good thing about moving forward with it at this point is having the opportunity to think through all these decisions rather than when pulling together the materials in August. Applications are due in November. Dennis asked for explanation of what investors want to see in terms of development project numbers for Iowa Finance Authority applications. Garrett said the Iowa Finance Authority is the one charged with overseeing the program and awarding the credits. A certain amount of money should be put aside per unit per year for the reserve. However, his syndicate requires a higher amount to be kept in reserve than the Finance Authority, and the amount depends on the project. The Finance Authority releases reserves after seven years, but the Fund does not. The Fund is very conservative, and the investors expect care to be taken to look for good projects in good markets at good rents. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes Aprii 20, 2006 Page 3 Dennis asked for clarification on individual items on the budget. Garrett said usually 60 percent are hard construction costs, while 40 percent are soft costs such as accounting, attorneys, and reserves. The whole process is very complicated, and a lot is involved. At the same time, in similar projects, 60 percent of the costs are covered by tax credits, which is a wonderful way to assist projects and keep them viable. Greazel asked if 60 percent is paid when the project opens. Garrett said not necessarily. They try to make projects as viable as possible. Greazel asked what average percentage debt is normal. Garrett said there are no average projects because of the wide variability. The Fund requires a certain debt coverage ratio. The Finance Authority requires that debt coverage ratio be met consistently throughout the 15 years. Greazel asked what the acceptable vacancy rate is. Garrett said perhaps five to seven percent. He added that vacancy always depends on price in his opinion. Richman asked whether the Fund participates in scattered site projects, small units, or package deals. Garrett said yes, they are comfortable with that. Shaw asked for clarification where the Fund figures into the tax credit funding operation and how much competition there is among the syndicates. Garrett said the non-profit applies for tax credits, which the Fund then buys. Then the Fund gives the credits to investors. The syndicate does have control over the project, and will assert that if necessary. However, generally the project is left for the organization to run. The Fund has to make sure the project will work because they cannot afford to have a project go bad, so will assert requirements if things are not proceeding weil. There is a huge amount of competition in this area. All the companies are good at what they do, so what it comes down to is what the developer can do and the developer's performance record. Garrett added that they are very concerned with keeping projects within compliance, and they are able to enforce if necessary. Dennis noted that if the project is out of compliance, the investor stands to lose credits for every year of the project, and have to pay back the money. The investor does have a strong interest in keeping the project viable and in compliance. Richman asked if there is a difference in price with scattered site projects. Garrett said no, it depends on the developer. There is a certain economy of scale, but that can be balanced by other costs or savings. There is no difference in their price. Anthony asked who primarily invests with the Fund. Garrett said corporate entities. Hayek asked if anyone with state taxes could invest. Garrett said it is based on federal tax. Both C and S corps could get involved, but there is not much benefit to S corps. Anthony said the tax credit program is the largest producer of affordable housing. It is a huge industry, which increases money for affordable housing. Unfortunately, Iowa City has not received many tax credits in the past. Consideration of a Letter of Succort for the Use of General ObliQation Bonds MOTION: Greazei moved to approve submitting a letter of support and Shaw seconded. Hayek asked what the significance is of using General Obligation Bond (GOB) funding for a project like this; that is, why use the GOB versus some other means. He also asked for clarification of whether the letter of support refers to this project specifically or the concept of using these funds as a whole. Richman said GOBs are supported by a property tax levy on all taxable property in the city. They are authorized by voters, and then the property tax levy pays back the bonds. It is a low risk venture from an investor standpoint, and the money raised can be used for various purposes. Eastman said up to $700K can be issued without voter approval in Iowa City, and the proceeds can be used widely. Shaw asked if $700K could be raised per year. Eastham said per instance. He noted this is not the first time the city has used these funds for affordable housing, and that the Fellowship did not request funding through the bonds. The City Manager suggested this route. Richman asked if the Peninsula loan was through a GOB. Eastham said yes, the same structure was requested for that project as the bond issue. Richman confirmed there was some risk to the city with the Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 4 Peninsula project, whether the rents would be high enough to pay back the loan. Eastham said the city manager was satisfied that the risk was acceptable. Hayek asked if this would be the third project using these types of funds. Dennis said the Peninsula project was a partnership, with the funds issued through a bond that was split between the Housing Fellowship and the City of Iowa City Housing Authority. That was one bond, so this would be the second one. She said the Fellowship did not ask for General Obligation Bond funding. The Fellowship asked for suggestions on how to fund their project apart from using CDBG funds, and Steve Atkins said the GOB was a good way to go. Hayek asked if the Finance Department approved this funding. Long said yes. Hayek noted he aiso wouid like confirmation whether this letter of support is for the general concept of using General Obligation Bonds for this type of project, or if it would support this project in particular. Greazel asked for clarification of what would happen to the funds. Eastham said they would be paid back. Dennis said the bond would be issued to a limited partnership rather than directly to the Fellowship. They would then pay back the bond, private financing, and all of the other hard debt. Debt is repaid from renting those units. This partnership would be for this project alone. Eastham said there is no bank financing proposed on the project at this point. Hayek asked if there is a reason this sort of project is suited for these funds, rather than supporting new acquisition. Long said funds are dwindling, so this is a way to find alternative funding. Hayek asked if this would be a way to find additional funds for multiple projects every year. Hightshoe said it is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. These units are nearing the end of their periods of affordability, so this is a way to extend their affordability. Garrett said using these funds would be a good way to do the project. State HOME funding is too competitive. Hightshoe said GOBs have been used for various affordable housing projects in the past such as D&K properties (Successful Living) and the peninsula project. Eastham said this is a way to lower rents, and the units also contribute property tax. VOTE: The motion carried on a vote of 6-0, with Richman abstaining. Richman said he did not abstain because of concerns with this particular project, but because he is not fully aware of other projects the city needs to finance that could be covered by General Obligation Bond funding. Review the FY07 Annual Action Plan Long distributed summaries of the allocations approved at the March 23 meeting. Summaries of the projects need to be submitted to HUD. He gave an overview of the parts of the packet, and asked the commission members to review the information. Shaw asked for clarification on what the shaded versus unshaded portions of the map signified. Long noted there was no key. Hightshoe said the areas with the small dots are those areas outside the city's corporate limits. Census tracts do not always follow the city's corporate limits. Niblock asked what the turnaround is with HUD. Long said the application must be submitted to HUD by May 15 and the funding is available July 1. Anthony asked if it would be a line of credit or actual money deposited into the bank. Long said it is a line of credit. The recipient must expend funds, the City reimburses the eligible expense, and then draw downs the funds from HUD. Anthony asked on page 28 under Geographic Distribution of Resources, if having a scattered site policy invalidated one of the statements. Shaw said the entire project is community-wide projects, not just housing, so it qualifies. Long agreed. Long said a recommendation is needed for the council. MOTION: Niblock moved to recommend the Annual Action Plan as summarized. Greazel seconded, and the motion passed on a vote 017-0. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 5 Long noted that some organizations are lobbying the council to receive the funding that was held back during allocation, Discussion of the Communitv Development Celebration Hightshoe said this is an annual event recognizing each organization that will be receiving CDBG/HOME funding in the upcoming fiscal year. It is also an opportunity to highlight prior CDBG/HOME funding in our community. She suggested having the celebration at the new Grant Wood School facility. Hayek agreed that is a good idea. Hightshoe asked for volunteers for a planning committee. The committee members would decide where and when to have it, who to honor, and other details. City staff would then make the arrangements. Anthony, Mellecker, and Shaw volunteered. Discussion of FY07 Potential Aaenda Items Anthony said there are three pieces of information that will probably be discussed at the next meeting. He asked city staff to discuss the design guidelines. Hightshoe said the guidelines have been discussed in the past. The city's interest is to have some reference document to use when discussing requirements for new housing construction. City staff request HCDC approved criteria when reviewing housing plans assisted with CDBG/HOME funds. The document would serve as a simple guideline in hopes that new housing will fit into the neighborhood where it is built. Design guidelines would help to reduce NIMBYism as the resulting house would not be easily recognized as subsidized and may reduce fears about what type of housing will be placed into someone's neighborhood. Long said that all agreements with housing providers require that city staff review building designs. However, there are no criteria established, so changes are difficult to justify. Hightshoe said some guidelines from other communities can be reviewed such as those from the Springfield, MO (included in this month's packet for review). Staffs intent is to develop generalized guidelines so that assisted housing fits into the neighborhood where it is built, with some basic requirements such as each single family home must have access from the street, utility hookups must be on the side or back of the home, etc. Shaw asked for confirmation that staff wouid like to have guidelines and the recommendation would be to give them that guidance. Hightshoe said yes, some established criteria for FY08, since it may be too late for FY07 projects. Staff would like to have some consistency in how projects are reviewed. Anthony said the other items are inclusionary zoning and housing. He asked that the commission members read the enclosed information on inclusionary zoning for the next meeting. Also, hopefully some developers could be invited to give their viewpoints on inclusionary zoning to add to the discussion. Shaw asked whether time should be specified and set aside for each issue ahead of time. Anthony suggested inclusionary zoning should have its own meeting, because there are a lot of people who have opinions about the matter, both pro and con. Richman asked if there are other stakeholders besides affordable housing developers that the commission should hear from. Anthony said private market developers and landowners. Richman suggested also neighborhood groups. Anthony said there is a lot of literature written about inClusionary zoning, both in support and against it. Richman asked how to reach out to the other stakeholders. Hightshoe said invitations can be extended. City staff could work with the commission to determine who to invite. Shaw asked whether the commission should spend time just to have a discussion about items, or if the commission should focus on what types of recommendations should be made to the council and discuss only those. Anthony said the commission should have a discussion about the issues, and if the members agree that a recommendation to the council is needed, then go ahead and make it. Anthony suggested taking up as many of the issues over the summer as is feasible, including members of the community, then making a recommendation to the council if the commission feels it is warranted. Shaw asked for clarification on the timeline to finish the discussion phase and move back into funding. Anthony said the funding cycle starts up in November, reviewing score sheets and application. CITY STEPS needs to be reviewed in late summer/early fall, which does not take too long, so the commission has time to discuss through November. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 6 Hightshoe said it would be good to have all recommendations be made together, so they are consistent. Anthony noted the recommendations should be given to council early enough that they can act upon them before applications are sent out. In that case, discussion should be finished in September or October. Hayek said this is a big undertaking, and time goes quickly. Shaw agreed, saying that is why he would like to consider the time line before starting. Mellecker asked how specific the recommendations on design guidelines would be. Anthony said that would have to be decided during the discussion. Hayek said the commission could discuss and decide that design guidelines are a good idea, and then ask staff to come up with something for the commission to review. However, there are also policy issues that are related that need to be discussed. Anthony agreed that looking at the policy level would allow the discussion to move faster. Greazel said the two things go hand in hand. Hayek said there are peopie who would have a problem with both policies. Shaw said he would like to have some ideas about the scope of the discussion, to help with staying focused. Hightshoe asked what would be placed on the fiscal year 2007 agendas. Anthony asked whether there are any items anticipated besides what the commission was reviewing. Hightshoe said no. Anthony said he would put together agenda information and send it out. Greazel said he would like to have a review of what the commission did for the past few months. Also, there was some discussion of focusing on certain issues. Richman said it would be good to talk about potential priorities for the next funding round. Shaw suggested talking about that first, since those decisions might help guide future discussions. Anthony said the review should happen at the next meeting, and compare to previous years. Discussion of goals could happen at the next meeting or after CITY STEPS Is reviewed in August. Richman said having it later is not ideal. Priorities need to be established, and that should happen sooner rather than later. Anthony said CITY STEPS has not changed very much in recent years. He said that those two items, along with a process discussion about inclusionary zoning, would be on the next meeting agenda. Then the actual discussion about inclusionary zoning would occur in June, which would give time to notify interested parties. Discussion of FY06 Proiects that have not Performed oer the Unsuccessful or Delaved Proiects Policv Hightshoe said council policy states that CDBG projects are encouraged to spend at least 50 percent of their funds by March 15. CDBG is evaluated based on timeliness, so the city would like CDBG recipients to complete their projects by the end of the fiscal year. All of the agencies on the list have been contacted for updates. Noah said she is with Planned Parenthood, and director of securing facilities. She reported they are on track per their original request to start paving the parking lot, but they are trying to find the best bid. After the paving is complete, then the entrance will be moved and the other interior improvements will be done. She said they are confident that this will start by May 1 and be done by June 30. Shaw asked whether a recommendation should be made before Noah leaves. Hightshoe asked whether anyone would like to make a recommendation to recapture funding from Planned Parenthood. No recommendations were made by the commission members. Long said Goodwill recently completed their paperwork, so a check went out today. Hightshoe said sometimes there is a difference between the project being completed and the request for reimbursement being submitted. Hightshoe said Old Brick spent half their funds. The restoration contractor expects to be done by May 15. Hightshoe said the fire suppression system for Free Lunch was being installed today. That should be done tomorrow. The flooring asbestos contractor came in, and the floor should be done this week. Free Lunch is being held at other churches this week, so the floor needs to be done quickly. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 7 Greazel asked why the fire suppression system took so many months to do. Long said the whole lunch program needed to be moved to another site, so they were timing it with Free Medical Clinic's move and the floor replacement so they could get it all done at the same time. Long said Hillel's project will start Monday. They had planned to be done by Passover, but hit a snag so they held off so the door would not be out of commission during the holiday. Hightshoe said staff is withholding funds to Compeer until a monitoring visit is completed. Staffs needs to ensure Compeer is meeting the mandatory income reporting requirements. They are spending the money, but they have to keep adequate time records and have to get client intake information. The client can refuse to give income information, but that has to be documented. Due to the nature of the clientele served, staff doesn't have a concern that the clienteie served does not qualify as low-to-moderate income, just that they must meet all accounting and client intake requirements. Hightshoe said Extend the Dream says money has been spent and will submit a reimbursement shortiy. Monitorina Reoorts Hayek said his information on Hillel is as Long reported. They did not want to tie things up during Passover, and they expect to be done by May 1. The project involved a power door in the rear of the building and upgrades to the bathrooms. Hayek said Extend the Dream says the money has been spent. They hired a work-study for 15 hours a week iast year, and the salary was paid in part with this funding. That person coordinated e-commerce training programs at the new facilities. Aiso, all is well with the rental housing. Long noted one person runs every1hing with the organization, and he is swamped. Hightshoe added they have spent their money based on a call to their Director, but they had not sent in a request for reimbursement until today. Staff has not reviewed it yet. Long said the Iowa City Down Payment Assistance has not spent any money. Hills Bank is the lender in charge of this project, and they say most lenders will now do 100 percent financing through two mortgages, with the down payment essentially a second mortgage on the house. Greazel asked if they anticipate not needing the money. Richman said it does not seem the program is being marketed. Richman asked what happens if the money is not spent by June 30. Hightshoe said that is the question for the commission. Long said that no projects are overspending, so contingency funds are not needed. The commission could give it until June 30 and ask them to step up marketing or the city could recapture the funds for another project(s). Richman said if there is no need for it in the community, there are probably other projects that could use the money and the funds should be recaptured. Long said if there is a national declaration of a disaster area, this is one pot of money that could be reallocated. He added that the bank said increasing the award amount to $1 OK might make it more attractive. Shaw asked if there is a reason that lenders would stop financing 100 percent in the next few months. Richman said the advent of 100 percent financing is recent. Greazel said he has also seen more repossessions by financial institutions in the past year than in the previous 20 years. Previously, if someone was having financial problems, they would sell the house themselves and take what equity they could get before it was repossessed. Now, people are so far behind that they are not bothering. The lenders are being very aggressive, even though the market is very loose right now. Richman suggested considering whether to recapture the funds at a later meeting. MOTION: Richman moved to extend the compliance period for all projects to June 1 and reconsider recapturing funds from the Iowa City Down Payment Assistance program at the June meeting. Hayek seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes April 20, 2006 Page 8 Richman reported all work on the Neighborhood Centers has been completed. They installed countertop style desks with cabinets in the offices, which has really helped with their office space a lot. All money is expended. Adiournment MOTION: Hayek moved to adjourn. Mellecker seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 7-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. s:/pcdlminuteslHCDCI2006104-20-06.dOC Housing & Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2006 Term Name Expires 01/19 02/16 03/09 03/23 03/29 04/20 Brian Richman 09/01/07 X X X X X X Jerrv Anthony 09/01/08 X X X X X X Kelly Mellecker 09/01/08 OlE X X X X X I Lori Bears 09/01/07 X OlE X -- -- -- -- -- -- Matthew Hayek 09/01/07 OlE X X X OlE X I Michael Shaw 09/01/06 X X X X X X I Thomas Niblock 09/01/08 X X X OlE OlE X I William Greazel 09/01/06 OlE X X X X X I Yolanda Spears 09/01/06 -- -- X .- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Key: X = Present 0 = Absent I OlE = AbsentlExcused , NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member n':: MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL JULY 6, 2006 APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Dean Shannon, Charlie Eastham MEMBERS EXCUSED: Beth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Terry Smith STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Drew Westberg, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Ballard, Bob Burns, Pat Hartin, Jack Tank, Tracy McWane, Liz Maas, Ryan Maas RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), REZ06-00001, a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Melrose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public with a Low Density Multi-Family Zone overlay (P-1/RM12) provided the following conditions are met: . Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across the Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as illustrated on the Site Plan. . Submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs to be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), REZ06-00016, a rezoning of 2.32-acres of properly located at 2401 Scott Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) with an overlay of Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), an amendment to Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E-8C, Nonconforming Signs, to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Recommended approval, by a vote of 4-0 (Koppes, Plahutnik, Smith absent), that the City Council forward a ietter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending that a conditional use permit be approved, subject to: . County requiring the implementation of the Wetland Mitigation Plan created by Red-Tail Restoration . County required improvements are made to the entrance onto Izaak Walton League Road from Oak Crest Hill Road. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. REZONING ITEMS: REZ06-00001, discussion of an application submitted by Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing LP for a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Melrose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public/Low Density Multi-Family Residential (P-1/RM-12) zone. Charlie Eastham informed the Commission that he is the president of the Iowa City Greater Housing Fellowship which in the past had applied for rezoning applications with Robert Burns who is a party to this Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 2 application. The Housing Fellowship and Mr. Burns are partners in two limited partnerships which own affordable rental housing. The Housing Fellowship was not a party to this application nor did they have any interest in it or the subsequent development that would occur if the application succeeded. Eastham said he felt there would be no confiict of interest, he'd consulted the City Attorney and she had agreed. Miklo said this property had been on the Commission's agenda several months ago and had been deferred while an issue regarding an access to Melrose Avenue could be explored and/or worked out. The property, located at the intersection of Melrose Avenue and the interchange with Hwy 218, was zoned Public because it was owned by a public agency. The Zoning Code required that all land owned by a public agency be zoned Public. If the publicly owned land will be used for a private use, an overlay zone is required to accommodate the use and the use must comply with the requirements of the overlay zone. The original proposal had proposed a driveway entering onto Melrose Avenue at a place where a median curb cut would be required. That particular area was a place of transition where there were entrance ramps to Interstate 218 and a narrowing of the pavement from 4-lanes to 2-lanes. Given those concerns and after exploring the options, Staff had made the determination that the best location would be to use one of the existing driveways for Chatham Oaks, an existing development located on County property. The applicant's proposed redesign provided for a driveway intersecting with Melrose Avenue; the existing Chatham Oaks driveway would have a new frontage driveway built to the subject property where the two proposed buildings would be built. The removal of several mature trees wouid be required. The actual details of the driveway would need to be approved by the City's Building Department when the site pian for the building was reviewed. Staff had previously recommended the requirement of the submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen to be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218; Staff continued to recommend that condition. A Phase 1 Archaeological Survey had been completed and a release from the State received so that condition had been removed from Staff's recommendation. Miklo said Staff recommended approval of REZ06-00001 , subject to a conditional zoning agreement with the following conditions: . Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as Illustrated on the site plan . Submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that included a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs be established along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Public discussion was opened. Steve Ballard, 222 S. Linn Street, attorney, present on behalf of the Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing Limited Partnership with Bob Burns and Tracy Falcomatta. Ballard said he was there for the limited purpose to say that they felt that the application and proposed use of the land did not require any sort of an overlay zone. In March, when the application had initially been before the Commission, Burns had indicated that he didn't feel that they needed to be before the Commission. Ballard had been in contact with the City Attorney's Office and had conversed with Mitch Behr previously, they disagreed about the issue. He had also written a letter to Behr which he wished entered into the record. Ballard said the applicant's position was: given the use and that the land was owned by a governmental entity and would continue to be owned by a governmental entity, there didn't need to be any sort of a rezoning. Bob Burns, 319 E. Washington. He and his associate, Tracy Falcomatta, were under contract with Johnson County Permanent Supported Housing Limited Partnership to develop the project which was independent housing with supportive services targeted for the chronically and mentally ill. A large number of persons had been working on the project for approximately 14-years. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors had agreed to lease the land to the Limited Partnership for the housing project. All funding was in place for the project, but the funding was contingent upon being able to get under construction yet this year. The solution that was before the Commission was not the applicant's preferreq solution, it was one that they hoped to be able to make work. Their preferred solution was the direct access onto Melrose Avenue with a median curb cut. They'd run out of time and were hoping to get a building permit to be able to move forward. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 3 Behr said the two offices had communicated and they did disagree. The City Attorney's office had indicated its opinion that a rezoning was necessary; the Commission did not need to make a determination on that issue. If the application was recommended for approvai by the Commission and approved at the Council level, the issue would resolve itseif. Pat Hartin, Program Coordinator at Chatham Oaks, said she was there to support the proposal. They'd been working on this project for a long time and there would be a lot of persons who would really benefit from the proposed new type of living environment. Her only concern was with the entryway; if that was the only place they could have it then she'd rather see the building be constructed and hopefully before the last trees were dug up they could find a compromise. Her concern was with safety and the location of the proposed driveway being so close to the existing residentiai buiiding. Public discussion was closed. Brooks asked if IDOT had been approached regarding the appiicant's proposed initial location for the driveway. Miklo said IDOT had been, the applicant's proposal did not meet their standards or the City's standards. It would have resulted in an unsafe traffic situation. An alternative option expiored and recommended by staff was to use the far drive way and come around the rear of the existing building. It would have entailed some additional expense for the applicant who had rejected that proposal. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve REZ06-00001, a rezoning of 2.83-acres of property located at 4435/4455 Meirose Avenue from Neighborhood Public (P-1) zone to Neighborhood Public with a Low Density Multi-Family Zone overlay (P-1/RM12) provided the following conditions are met: o Vehicular access to the property must be provided by way of a private drive extending across the Chatham Oakes property utilizing the existing access point to Melrose Avenue as illustrated on the Site Plan. o Submission and approval of a landscaping plan for a vegetative buffer/screen that includes a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs to be estabiished along the property boundary adjacent to Highway 218. Eastham seconded the motion. Freerks said she felt this was a good project, it had been in the works for a long time. This would be a much safer way to get people into and out of the proposed housing site. It was a good compromise. Shannon said he'd supported the previous application which had contained the curb cut when it had been before the Commission. He would like to see the project get moving forward. Brooks said he felt this was a very worthy project and would iike to see the applicant "get shoveis in the ground" yet this year. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. REZ06-00016, discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning of 2.32-acres of property located at 2401 Scoll Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public /Intensive Commercial (P-1/CI-1) zone. Drew Westberg, Planning Intern, presented the staff report. The City had recently acquired the property at 2401 Scoll Boulevard. City code required that all public property be zoned either P-1 or P-2. Property owned by the City or by the County or by the School District was zoned Neighborhood Public (P-1). This parcel of land was currently zoned 1-1, General Industrial. The City intended to lease portions of the building to non- profit organizations whose use would not be appropriate for an 1-1 zone, which would also require an overiay zone appropriate for the uses that would occupy the building. Staff feit that a CI-1 Intensive Commercial overiay zone would be the appropriate overlay zone. The Habitat ReStore and the Salvage Barn, the proposed non-profit recycling-type uses of the building fit the CI-1 zone. The surrounding uses in the BDI Industrial Research Park were also CI-1 type uses. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 4 Brooks requested additional information regarding the limitations on exterior storage and/or placement of materials outside the building as both uses were salvage-recycling oriented uses. Miklo said the basic requirement was that they be screened fully with a wall or evergreen hedge. Much of the property was currently well screened. There was a row of evergreen trees along most of Scott Blvd; arborvitae trees provided screening on the north and south side; there were no trees in the front of the building as the prior use had been office oriented. The City would be responsible for maintenance of the screening. If there would be any outdoor storage areas, those would have to be further screened. Eastham asked if screening requirements could be imposed at a later time if it became necessary. Miklo said they would be imposed whenever the use went into effect. City Code required compliance with the S-3 Standard which specified the height and type of plant materials. Brooks asked which department or agency wouid be charged with managing the rental of the building since the City would be acting in a landlord capacity. Miklo said the Public Works Department would maintain it and have some uses associated with the City's recycling operation on this site. There would also be some private non-profit entities which had a role in recycling involved. The intent of the Salvage Barn was to recycle historic building materials so that they did not end up in the land-fill. The Habitat ReStore received surplus newer building materials that were donated by a homeowner or contractor. The materials would be reused/resold. The City would also have some composting drop boxes located there for recycling materials not normally picked up at curbside. Shannon asked if the City would be in competition with City Carton? Miklo said most of the recycling material was already contracted to City Carton so this material would probably be fed to them as well. Freerks asked if the current building was of sufficient size to house the intended uses. Miklo said there very likely would be additional public use building built on the site. Brooks said Knutson Construction Services had done an outstanding job of creating an attractive streetscape appearance to their building that was an asset to that major through-fare. He hoped that the City, as the landlord, would be equally attentive to the appearance and visual quality of the property along Scott. Both were outstanding programs but he did not wish to see any degradation of the area. Miklo said the previous occupant of the property had been a solid waste collection company. When they had occupied the building they had been required to plant a heavy screening around the site. Behr said when a property was purchased, there were covenants and restrictions which applied to the property that had to do with screening and storage. Those private covenants and restrictions had been put in to place quite some time ago when the subdivision had occurred and the City would be subject to adherence of those covenants/restrictions. Public discussion was opened. Jack Tank, 624 St. Thomas Court, said he'd purchased the two properties to the south of this one eleven years ago knowing that they were zoned 1-1. He'd tried to do a number of things and to work with the City on a number of options regarding use of the properties and had requested a rezoning. He'd be adamantly told that the City would not rezone an 1-1 property. A development group had owned the 7-acre 'weird' shaped lot to the south and had been denied access to Scott Boulevard by the City. The City had refused to make any curb cut where the existing curb cut was now; had informed them that they would have to sue the City to get any curb cuts; and would not allow any curb cuts for the weird shaped lot. He'd then purchased the weird shaped lot, had had the opportunity to sell the lots and felt it had been necessary to sell them because of the 1-1 zoning and the lack of cooperation from the City it had been impossible to develop the iots. Tank said now 10 years later the lots have been rezoned and developed. A review of several of the adjacent lots had indicated the same type of history for the lots. Tank said he felt it was ironic that the City purchased lots, rezoned them and was now developing the lots. That was just plain wrong. The City was taking properties off the tax roles to develop for their use. The ReStore and Salvage Barn were wonderful uses; he felt the properties should have been rezoned and allowed to develop 30 or 40 years ago. Tank said he wanted to provide some historical background as to what the status of the lots had been, the lack of cooperation from the City and the mishandling of the properties for Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 5 nearly 50 years. Lots of persons including former owners of those lots had a lot of anguish about the properties; comments would not be heard from other people because it was not worth it to get tagged by the City, especially if a person wanted to initiate developments in other areas. The City would rubberstamp its preferred uses. Public opinion was closed. Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve REZ06-00016, a rezoning of 2.32-acres of property located at 2401 Scott Boulevard from General Industrial (1-1) zone to Neighborhood Public (P-1) with an overlay of Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone. Freerks seconded the motion. Freerks thanked Tank for taking time to present before the Commission but noted that the current Commission was not invoived in the history he presented. She felt it was a good use for the land and would fit well with the adjacent uses. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. ZONING CODE ITEM: Discussion of an amendment to Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E-8C, Nonconforming Signs, to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Miklo said the Dairy Oueen [DO] formerly located on South Riverside Drive had been destroyed by the April tornado. Associated with the DO was a sign that had been on the building since 1961 and had been located on the previous DO building since approximately 1954. The sign didn't qualify as a landmark or historic sign, but was very close. Staff felt that the intent of the historic provision of the non-conforming sign regulation pertained to situations such as this one. Under the current Zoning Code this sign could not be reproduced. Staff had looked at a number of signage options but the sign could not meet them for various reasons. The sign was a roof sign, many communities including Iowa City discouraged roof signs due to safety concerns. The sign was larger than normally permitted. Staff felt given the community interest in this particular sign and the nostalgia associated with it, Staff felt it would be appropriate to amend the sign regulations pertaining to historic nonconforming signs to make allowances for signs such as this. Language regarding safety had also been included and that the Board of Adjustment would review such applications as special exceptions. Miklo said in the interest of preserving a community landmark, Staff recommended that the historic non- conforming sign provision be amended to allow signs that didn't technically meet the definition of historic signs to be recreated subject to Board of Adjustment approval. Brooks asked if the ability to reproduce such historic/significant signs was tied in any way to the reconstruction of a structure in a historic or representative fashion. Miklo said that would be subject to Board of Adjustment approval on a case-by-case basis. There might be some cases where it would not be important that the building be a historic landmark and other cases where it would be important. Eastham said the way the proposed revision to the Zoning Code was written, it did not make it clear that obtaining a certification from the Historic Preservation Commission or Certificate of Appropriateness needed to occur before the application went before the Board of Adjustment. He felt that the sequence / wording in Section C was much clearer. Miklo said Staffs intent had been that if it was not a designated landmark the application would not be required to go to the Historic Preservation Commission, only to the Board of Adjustment. Behr said the wording in the opening paragraph clarified all the criteria which needed to be met. Miklo said when an applicant applied for their sign permit at the Building Department, Staff would know to look for both Boards approval if required. Eastham asked if the City Council had the authority to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness even if the Historic Preservation Commission did not issue one. Miklo said if a Certificate of Appropriateness was denied it could be appealed to Council. The criteria were fairly tight; Council would have to find that the Commission had acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner and had not followed their guidelines. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 6 Public discussion was opened. Tracv McWane, 60 Regal Lane, said she and her husband were the third generation to run McWane Dairy Queen. After the tornado, the outpouring of concern had been immense. Almost everyone they'd visited with had said, "Don't change anything." They didn't wish to change anything. When their contractor had requested the building permit, they'd assumed that it had included the sign. The roof had been 'beefed-up' and made sign-ready. They'd tried twice to no avail to have divers locate the original sign in the Iowa River. It had made national news. They had researched it and theirs was the only sign like it in the worid, other signs fit side-ways on the buildings. They were trying to do whatever they couid to have the building reconstructed and opened. They'd considered having the sign mounted on poles to meet City Code, but if they had used that option they would have had to remove their cone signs because a limited number of pole sings are allowed per property. They felt that the cone signs were historic as well since they'd made it through the tornado. The McWanes did not wish to have to take them down now. They paid royalties, were not a corporation and had no other way to advertise to persons driving by their location that they were a DQ. McWane said they'd done everything they could to stay just the way they were as a locally owned small business. If they sold out to a corporation they could make more money because the property was worth more than the business. McWane said she hoped that they could work together to work out a solution. They wished to be an Iowa City business. Freerks asked with the proposed amendment to the Code, could the exact same sign with the required safety enhancements be reconstructed? Miklo said that was correct. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve amending Title 14, City of Iowa City Zoning Code, Subsection 4E- 8C, Nonconforming Signs, to allow for the reconstruction of a nonconforming sign by special exception in cases where the sign is generally recognized and associated with a longstanding business or institution and makes a significant artistic, cultural or nostalgic contribution to the community or neighborhood. Eastham seconded. Freerks and Brooks said they very much appreciated the McWane's efforts to bring this nostalgic business back to the city. This situation showed the need for flexibility and something good had come from it. It would provide a guideline should a similar situation arise in the future Shannon said he remembered eating ice cream cones at the other store on the corner; it had been the same sign. He'd been glad when the McWane family had moved the sign to the current location; it had been very unfortunate that the original building had been forced out by the highway. The A&W root beer mug had not survived the highway construction. He supported the project 100%, what ever it took. He was glad to see the McWanes rebuilding rather than selling out for the money. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB06-00011, discussion of an application submitted by ST Enterprises LC for a final plat of Hollywood Manor Part 9, a 12-iot, 4.84 acre residential subdivision located west of Russell Drive and south of Burns Avenue. Miklo said the Commission had reviewed the preliminary plat a number of weeks ago and it had been approved by City Council. The applicant was now seeking final plat approval. The final plat was in conformance with the preliminary plat except for the location of the offsite easement to provide for drainage to the property to the south. Staff had expected that information earlier in the day but it had not arrived. The Commission would have the option of deferring this application until the information was received or they could consider approving it subject to resolution of the location of the offsite easement and approval of legal papers and construction drawings prior to consideration by Council. Public discussion was opened. There was none. Publlc discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to defer SUB06-00011. Shannon seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 7 The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Discussion of an application submitted by S&G Materials for a conditional use penmit to allow the expansion of a sand and gravel mining operation south of Izaak Walton League Road. Westberg said in 2000, S&G Materiais had been granted a conditional use permit for sand mining operations in the area immediately south of Izaak Walton League Road. Upon further research, it was found that more sand was available for mining so they were seeking an additional conditional use permit and requesting to expand the existing basins. The City had the right to review this application and make a recommendation to the County because the Conditional Use Permit was located within the City's fringe area. Two areas of concern were that all mining activity had to be outside of a 1,000-foot buffer from any property zoned residential unless approved by a super-majority of the County Board of Adjustment. Basin 1 was within that buffer. The applicant had provided a signed petition from property owners within that 1,000-foot buffer area signifying their support for the requested permit. The second concern was that in some areas the mining came relatively close to the river, but it met the DNR's requirement to maintain a 100-foot buffer area. The entrance onto Izaak Walton League road had become damaged and deteriorated to the point of needing improvements from heavy truck traffic. Staff recommended that S&G make those improvements. The applicant had notified the City that they understood that County plans required paving portions of Izaak Walton League Road and they intended to comply with that stipulation. Freerks asked if there were more specific requirement(s) along the river in tenms of buffer or vegetation. Was it marked clearly in detail in some plans that the Commission had not received? Westburg said the extensions of the new basins would affect a greater area of the wetlands than had been previously affected; the applicant was required to provide a new wetland mitigation plan. The only requirement was that they meet the 100-foot requirement because they would not be excavating within 50-feet of the river. Eastham asked what the Commission's role with this application was. Westberg said because this operation was located within the City's Fringe Area, the City's SAO would not apply and the fringe area policy did not speak directly to mining operations. Miklo said if for some reason the Commission felt it was an inappropriate land use for that area given its proximity to the city, or concerns about traffic generation, the Commission could make a recommendation to the Council that they did not recommend approval. If the Council agreed with the Commission's recommendation not to approve, they could make a recommendation as such and it would take an extra-ordinary majority of the County Board of Adjustment to approve it [4 out of 5 votes]. The City had a near veto power in a situation like this. Based on Staffs current review of the situation and their previous review, the greatest concern was the environmental concerns. The applicant had put together a very good mitigation plan of the mining operation. The greatest effect would be the heavy truck traffic associated with the operation. Historically the applicant had done a fairly reasonable job of keeping the Izaak Walton League entrance road in good shape. Eastham asked for further information regarding the restoration mitigation plan. Westburg said the Army Corps of Engineers would monitor for 5-years. Miklo said another concern would be, because this was located in the City's fringe area, once it was mined out if the City grew to encompass this area how would it affect future land uses. Staff believed that the mitigation plan set up the potential for open space in that area that would not be easily developable but given its location to the river that might be a good thing. Public discussion was opened. Liz Maas, Wetlands Specialist Consultant for S&G Mining. Maas said she'd crafted the mitigation plan for the Army Corps of Engineers and Iowa DNR. Maas said an integral component to the plan was that there was a conservation easement on the property; for each phase 5-years of monitoring was required so there could potentially be monitoring for up to 30-years. The Corps of Engineers would have a very active role in the monitoring. Part of the penmit required an annual inspection by the Corps; commonly they just received reports but did not make an actual inspection of the property. This was different in that it would be a unique opportunity to study what could happen when mitigation occurred over a long period of time, especially for Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 8 such a large parcel that was being put to this type of use. The Corps had a high level of interest in the development of how the area would change over time, they intended to use what happened at this site for assessment of locations all over the county. The majority of the property was located in the flood way. As the City grew to the south, there would not be a lot of property amenable to development of any type. The conservation easement left this area as a green space and nicely developed Wetlands Park for that part of the county. Trees would be planted along the river. As time went by, if there was anything that the Corps of Engineers felt did not meet the plan, they could and would request alterations to the plan so the goal of the mitigation would be met. The permit holder had to meet those goals or they would lose their permit and could not operate. Brooks asked how the plan met safety for each basin, especially if in the long term it became public land or open for use. Would shelves be built into the shoreline? Maas said the mitigation would occur in basins 1, 2, and 3. The greatest depth would probably be in the center of the basins, not higher than 17 -feet. The mitigation would be constructed along the fringes of the basins, they'd attempted to create the most surface area development possible to gain as many acres of wetland mitigation as possible. Basin 4 would remain as an open water basin, which would be desirable and provide a diversity of environments - it would provide a pond. Any abandoned mine pit had to meet State requirements and have the banks sloped appropriately so they would not be a danger. Eastham asked if the mitigation plan involved refilling basins 1, 2 and 3 and where would that material come from. Maas said the Corps of Engineers preferred mitigation on site, the overburden material that would be removed to access the sand and materials the applicant wished to extract would be put aside and used to refill the basins. It ultimately would result in reproducing on the site a more natural feature along the river than what would have occurred naturally 150-years ago using the materials that had been naturally deposited there since the last glacial period. In order to get things to grow, black dirt would be required to be placed on the overburden material so seeds would grow. Rvan Maas, 620 Ronalds Street, founder and initiator of the non-profit, River Bend Foundation, which had been constituted to hold the conservation easement for this project. The conservation easement had been a requirement of the Corps of Engineers. Once the mitigation practices had been implemented they needed to remain in that state and not be impacted by development, filling, etc. to make sure that the wetlands stayed in place to preserve them in perpetuity. S&G Materials could not hold its own easement, a third party was needed. Conservation partners had been solicited through a process, various entities had been contacted and a new organization focused on restoring these areas was ultimately born. The hope was to replicate this type of project elsewhere across the state to restore the natural occurring bottom land areas. The conservation easement had already been recorded in the County Recorder's office. As the project developed, it was expected that academic researchers would be interested in studying the restoration practices; as previously stated the Corps of Engineers was also interested in the practices and their outcomes. Citizen based types of activities such as bird watching, horseback riding, canoeing, photography, kayaking could occur in areas where active mining operations were not occurring. River Bend Foundation had been designated as the controlling entity for non-mining activities. They hoped to develop a presence in the community as a go-to for those types of restoration processes. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to recommend that the City Council fOlWard a letter to the Johnson County Board of Adjustment recommending that a conditional use permit be approved for S&G Materials, subject to: . County requiring the implementation of the Wetland Mitigation Plan created by Red-Tail Restoration . County required improvements are made to the entrance onto Izaak Walton League Road from Oak Crest Hill Road. Eastham seconded the motion. Freerks & Brooks said they were glad to see the collaborative effort and that there was a vision for the future. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes July 6, 2006 Page 9 OTHER ITEMS: There were none. CONSIDERATION OF 6/1/06 and 6/15/06 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Eastham made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Freerks seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Eastham made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 pm. Freerks seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 4-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s/pcdlminutesfp&z12006107 -06-06. doc , , Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2006 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Exoires 1/5 1/19 2/2 2/16 3/2 4/6 4/20 5/18 6/1 6/15 7/6 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X OlE X X 0 -- -- -- -- B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X X X X X X OlE X C. Eastham 05/11 -- -- -- -- -- --- -- X X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X X OlE X X X OlE X E. Konnes 05/07 OlE X X X X X X X X X OlE W Plahutnik 05/10 X OlE X X X X X X X X OlE D. Shannon 05/08 X X X OlE X X OlE X X X X T. Smith 05/06 X X OlE X X X X X X OlE OlE INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Exoires 2/13 2/27 4/17 5/15 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X 0 -- B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X C. Eastham 05/11 -- -- -- X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X E. Konoes 05/07 X X X X W Plahutnik 05/10 X X X X D.Shannon 05/08 OlE 0 OlE X T. Smith 05/06 X X X OlE Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused I I i I , ! MINUTES lOW A CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MONDAY, MAY 22, 2006--5:30 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY FlNn:r MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Hagen, Saul Mekies, John Weatherson, MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Christians, James Ehrmann STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Mike Brau, Bob Hardy, Dale Helling OTHERS PRESENT: Beth Fisher, Lee Grassley, Craig O'Brien RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL None at this time. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Grassley reported that federal legislation that would put franchising authority at the national level, rather than the city level, passed out of the House Commerce Committee. Issues regarding city control of cable providers, access fund and net neutrality are covered in the proposed bill. Net neutrality would prohibit Internet Service Providers from charging tiered rates. Those who would pay more in this scenario include content providers and those needing more bandwidth. This practice is considered radically different from the original concept of the Internet-which was built with taxpayer money. There are substantial differences with the companion bill in the Senate. Mediacom opposes national franchising and Net Neutrality provisions. Grassley said there are only 42 debate days remaining in the Senate so passage this session may not occur. Grassley reported that Mediacom will playback the Cable TV Division's Video Voter DVD on a regular schedule on their local channel across the state, reaching 500,000 subscribers. In addition, Mediacom will offer the program on their free Video on Demand service. PSAs will be produced to promote the program. Hagen said that as more mandated broadcasters are placed on the basic tier that it could produce pressure to push offthe access channels. The City should be looking to expand the number of channels on the basic tier now rather than face that situation in the future. Hardy reported that the City Channel has been working on many election- related productions among which is the Video Voter Project and many candidate forums. Live election . results will be cablecast on the June 6 primary. Shaffer reported that there has been a lot oflegislative activity at the federal level. Under the House bill, the COPE Act, (or Barton bill) the City could lose 18-20% of their franchise fee revenue. PATV could lose as much as one-half of their funding. The Senate Commerce Committee has been holding hearings on the Stevens bill. Municipalities have provided lots of input to the Senate and Stevens recently acknowledged that the bill might be too hard on cities. More hearings are planned. There are significant differences between the two bills. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Hagen moved and Weatherson seconded a motion to approve the amended April 24, 2006 minutes. The minutes were approved unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF COMMISSIONERS Mekies welcomed Kirkwood Community College representative Craig O'Brien to the meeting. SHORT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS None. CONSUMER ISSUES Shaffer referred to the complaint report in the meeting packet. There were a total of eight complaints. Shaffer said that he left several messages with the complainants in the two unresolved complaints and has received no response, which usually indicates that the complaint has been resolved. MEDIACOM REPORT Grassley reported that federal legislation that would put franchising authority at the national level passed out of the House Commerce Committee. An amendment that would prohibit Internet Service Providers from providing preferential treatment with regards to bandwidth to those who either pay more or provide content the ISP controls, commonly called "Net Neutrality", will likely be offered from the floor. There are substantial differences with the companion bill in the Senate. Mediacom opposes national franchising and Net Neutrality provisions. Grassley said there are only 42 debate days remaining in the Senate so passage this session may not occur. Grassley reported that Mediacom will playback the Cable TV Division's Video Voter DVD on a regular schedule on their local channel across the state, reaching 500,000 subscribers. In addition, Mediacom will offer the program on their free Video on Demand service. PSAs will be produced to promote the program. Weatherson said that with regards to federal legislation that the net neutrality provisions are intend to prevent ISPs, such as Mediacom, from charging additional fees from content providers for larger bandwidth. Weatherson noted that subscribers already bear the maintenance and overhead costs ofthe Internet service through their fees. Shaffer said that the cost ofthe Internet infrastructure originated in the Department of Defense and that it was taxpayer money that made the Internet possible. Hagen said that as more mandated broadcasters are placed on the basic tier that it could produce pressure to push off the access channels. The City should be looking to expand the number of channels on the basic tier now rather than face that situation in the future. Grassley said Mediacom has tried to address the issue of programming contracts with the Federal Communications Commission. The bundled programming contracts with some program providers requires cable companies to put one oftheir channels on the basic tier. Mekies asked if Mediacom would consult with the Commission on what channel to replace it on put the basic tier in the event that a broadcaster on the basic tier were to stop broadcasting. Grassley said that Mediacom would consult with the Commission. UNIVERSITY OF lOW A REPORT McBride was unable to attend but provided a quarterly report. PATV REPORT No representative was present. SENIOR CENTER REPORT Rogusky was unable to attend. IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT Hoyland was unable to attend but asked Shaffer to inform the Commission that they received several programs from the City of Coralville and the City of North Liberty for playback on channel 21. LffiRARYREPORT Fisher reported that a part-time paid intern was hired to assist with productions. The Summer Reading Program will begin the first week of June and many of the events will be carried on the library channel. KIRKWOOD REPORT O'Brien said that the former Commission representative from Kirkwood thought he had informed O'Brien of the Commission meetings and assumed that the meeting packet sent to him was an extra copy. In the past there had been more distant learning courses on the channel but more distant learning classes are now on the Internet. Kirkwood has no dedicated staff for their cable TV operations. Play back is currently by 5 SVHS decks, but a video server will be installed in the near future. Shaffer asked what courses for credit are played on the channel. O'Brien said Kirkwood offers a class in GPS for Farmers, Math for Decision Making, and Encounter in Humanities. Shaffer asked how many students use the cable TV classes. O'Brien said he will get that information. CITY MEDIA UNIT REPORT Hardy reported that the City Channel has been working on many election-related productions among which is the Video Voter Project and many candidate forums. Live election results will be cablecast on the June 6 primary. Hardy said he has been working on revising the programming strategy. The Community Television Group is not ready to provide a report on alternative uses for the pass through fund CTG allocation. The CTG will need to meet to finalize their report. CABLE ADMINISTRATOR REPORT Shaffer reported that Mediacom recently submitted their annual rate filing. There was no proposed increase in the basic tier arid an $0.11 increase in the maximum permitted rate. Shaffer has been talking with Jon Koebrick of Mediacom and the police department to facilitate local activation of the emergency alert system. A program on state and congressional movements that would affect cable TV in Iowa City will be shot tomorrow. July 12 is the deadline for applications to be submitted for the open seat on the Commission. 15 dignitaries from the Middle East and Africa were recently given a tour of the City Cable TV Office. CITY CABLE TV DIVISION ANNUAL REPORT Shaffer said that the City Cable TV Division annual report was included in the meeting packet for Commissioner's review. ACCESS CHANNEL OUESTIONAIRE Shaffer said a summary of the access channel questionnaires was included in the meeting packet. Mekies said that the summary was helpful and what the Commission needed to help better understand local access operations. COMMUNITY TELEVISION GROUP PROPOSAL This item was deferred to the next meeting. VIDEO VOTER PROJECT Shaffer reported that taping of candidate statements had just been concluded. There was good participation and the candidates appreciated the service. Candidate statements will be on the City Channel's web site, played back on numerous public, educational, and government access channels across the state, played back by Mediacom on their local channel across the state (typically channel 22), and made available on Mediacom's free video on demand service. LEGISLA nON UPDATE Shaffer reported that there has been a lot of legislative activity at the federalleveJ. Under the House bill, the COPE Act, (or Barton bill) the City could lose 18-20% of their franchise fee revenue. PATV could lose as much as one-half of their funding. The Senate Commerce Committee has been holding hearings on the Stevens bill. Municipalities have provided lots of input to the Senate and Stevens recently acknowledged that the bill might be too hard on cities. More hearings are planned. There are significant differences between the two bills. WIFI Shaffer referred to the articles on WiFi included in the meeting packet. Shaffer said there are lots of scenarios each with pros and cons that cities will need to take into account when examining the issue. Mekies said he would like to continue to track private operations offering public access WiFi. Weatherson said the largest entity to consider when looking at how to promote WiFi systems is the University ofIowa. Mekies said he would like to consider web cams in the downtown area. ADJOURNMENT Hagen moved and Weatherson seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 6:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Drew Shaffer Cable TV Administrator TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 12 MONTH ATTENDANCE RECORD 01/01/03 to CURRENT Meeting Kimberly Saul MeikeS Brett Castillo Terrv Smith Jim Pusaek Date Thrower 6/2/03 x x x x x 7/28/03 x x x x x 8/25/03 x x x x ole 9/22/03 x x x x ole 10/27/03 x x x x ole 11/24/03 x x ole x x 12/15/03 ole ole x x x 1/2/04 x ole x x x 1/26/04 x x x x x 2/23/04 x ole x ole x 3/22/04 x x x x x 4/ 26/04 x x x x OIC 5/24/04 x x OIC x x 6/28/04 x x x ole x 7/26/04 ole x x x x 8/26/04 did not meet did not meet did not meet did not meet did not meet 9/27104 X X X X X 10/25/04 X X 11/04 Did not meet Did not meet Did not meet Did not Did not meet meet X X X X X 12/20/04 1/24/05 X X X X X 2/28/05 X X X X Garv Haven 3/8/05 X X X X X 3/25/05 X 0 X X X 4/25/05 x ole X X X 5/23/05 X 0 x vaeanev X James X K Bebe x Ehrmann Balantvne 6/27/05 X x X X X X Michael Chritians 7/25/05 0 X X X X 9/26/05 0 X X 0 X 10/31/05 X X ole X X 11/28/05 X X X X X 1/23/06 ole X X 0 X 2.27/06 X X X 0 X 3/27/06 ole X X John X Weaterson X 4/24/06 X X X X x 5/22/06 0 x x/a 0 X 6/26/06 0 X Vacant 0 X Nick Parker 7/24/06 x x x x (X) = Present (0) = Absent (O/C) = Absent/Called (Excused) MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TUESDAY, June 27, 2006 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL FINAL c:L Members Present: Lisa Beckmann, Beverly Witwer, Sara Baird, Kate Karacay, Paul Retish. Members Absent: Martha Lubaroff, GeoffWilming, Scott King, Sehee Foss. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Call to Order Beckmann called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Consideration of the Minutes of the Aori125. 2006 Meetin. Minutes MOTION: Witwer moved to accept the minutes as submitted, and Karacay seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Reconunendations to Council There was no discussion. Listenin. Posts Baird suggested the Commission hold montWy outings around the conununity in places like the Neighborhood Centers and the Public Library. The goal of the meetings would be to educate the public on the Commission. Beckmann thought it may be better to piggyback on other events the Commission holds to get information out about the Commission. Retish mentioned it may be a good idea to work with City Cable in producing a film with actors to show the various functions of the Human Rights Office. Witwer would like meeting dates of the Human Rights Commission printed in the local papers. Human Ri.hts Breakfast Award Bowers said she would be sending out "save the date" postcards later in the week and nomination forms would be sent out in mid-July. Karacay said she would make contact with Pak Nurack to get a theme for his speech. Bowers agreed to send Commissioners nomination forms for them to distribute and said tickets will go on sell in July. A sub-committee was formed-Beckmann, Witwer, Karacayand Lubaroff to evaluate the nominations as they come into the Office. Movies Series Bowers was pleased to announce that Stephen Trefz of the Conununity Mental Health Center for Mid-Eastem Iowa has agreed to be on a panel after the showing ofthe film I'm Still Here: The Truth about Schizophrenia. Bowers will send an email out to Commissioners to see who would be available on the 19th to attend the event at the Iowa City Public Library. Hate Crimes will be shown October 25th at the Iowa City Public Library. Calendar Bowers showed the Commission a sample magnet that listed the interfaith calendar web site and reported that approximately 500 magnets would be produced to distribute throughout the conununity. Relational Al!llfeSsion Witwer has been in contact with Jane Balvanz and Blair Wagner who cannot wait to do a program about Relational Aggression. Witwer said a time in October or November would be best to kick start the program. Bowers agreed to look into some possible dates at the Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room A. Handouts for International Non-Native Sneakers This item was deferred due to King's absence from the meeting. Youth Awards Beckmann reported on the huge success of the Youth Awards. Retish is very glad that the numbers keep rising and thinks the Commission may need to rent out Hancher next year. Pride Festival Baird said the turn out for this year's Pride Festival was great and that both her and King thought the day went well. Read Cases Commissioners read four cases where no probable cause was found. ReDorts of Commissioners Karacay mentioned an event the United Nations Association is sponsoring called "Eat Out to Wipe Out Hunger." Oasis, Hamburg Inn and Devotay will donate 10% of their proceeds on August 22 to help fight world hunger. Witwer reported on her concern about immigration, which she feels is a huge issue and she hopes the Commission can help in some way. Witwer also attended a meeting for the building ofa bigger Shelter House and hopes a location is found soon. Baird spoke of the disparities in the two Iowa City High Schools and wants the Commission to hold a Town Hall meeting with the community to address the issue. Baird also was recently appointed to the University of Iowa Library Diversity Committee. Retish thought it would be good to work together with the school system to help address some issues like the observance of religious holidays and the disparities among the schools. Beckmann discussed a recent article in the Des Moines Register where a gubernatorial candidate made disparaging remarks concerning Same Sex Marriage. Status of Cases Bowers updated Commissioners on the status of cases. Adiournment There being no further business before the Commission, Beckmann moved to adjourn. Retish seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.m. 2 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 9/26 10/24 11/28 12/26 12/27 Lisa Beckmann 1/1/07 X X X X NMN X Q Paul Relish 1/1/07 OlE X X OlE NMN X Q GeoffWilming 1/1/07 X X X X NMN OlE Q Sara Baird 1/1/08 X X X X NMN X Q Bev Witwer 1/1/08 X X X X NMN X Q Scott King 1/1/08 X X X X NMN OlE Q Martha 1/1/09 X X X X NMN OlE Lubaroff Q Sehee Foss 1/1/09 X X X OlE NMN OlE Q Kate Karacay 1/1/09 X X X OlE NMN X Q KEY: x = Present o = Ahsent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member NMNQ - No meeting, no quorum 3