Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-13 Info Packet~~~ ~~~ -•~.a~ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET November 13, 2008 NOVEMBER 17 WORK SESSION IP1 Council Meetings and Work Session Agenda IP2 Memos from the City Manager, Director of Planning and Community Development, Director of Public Works, City Attorney, Assistant City Attorney, and Flood Recovery Specialist: Flood Mitigation IP3 Memorandum from the Assistant City Manager: Staff Review of Recommendations from the Taskforce On Violence Against Women IP4 Memorandum from the City Clerk: Budget and Meeting Schedule January -March 2009 DRAFT #2 MISCELLANEOUS IP5 Email from Tim Taffe: Iowa City SEATS Transportation Program IP6 Letter from the Transportation Planner to Mr. David Noerper: All-Way Stop Analysis at River Street/Woolf Avenue, Iowa City IP7 Invitation: Legislative Open House November 18, 2008 DRAFT MINUTES IP8 Youth Advisory Commission: October 7, 2008 IP9 Historic Preservation Commission: November 3, 2008 IP10 Iowa City Airport Commission: October 30, 2008 ~ j _ - -- ~; = "~~.~ IP1 ~`'"'~'®'~~ City Council Meeting Schedule and ~~ CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas November 13, 2008 www.icgov.org • MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17 Cmma J. na~vai nau 6:30p Council Work Session • Planning and Zoning Items "a " • Council Appointments • Agenda Items • Flood Mitigation (ref IP#2] ^ Curbside Recycling for Multi-Family Residential/Co-Mingling Recyclables ^ Commercial Vehicle Congestion Downtown • Violence Against Women Task Force Recommendations (ref IP#3] • Information Packet Discussion (November 6 & 13] • Council Time ^ Schedule of Pending Discussion Items ^ Upcoming Community Events/Council Invitations ^ Discussion of Meeting Schedules (ref IP4] • TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:OOp Special Formal - (Separate Agenda Posted) • Executive Session for Six Month City Manager Evaluation 7:OOp Formal Council Meeting TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE SUBJECT TOE CHANGE • THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 27 Thanksgiving -City Offices Closed • FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 28 Holiday -City Offices Closed MONDAY, DECEMBER 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall 5:30p Meeting with Area Legislators (Separate Agenda Posted) 6:30p Council Work Session TBA Special Formal (Separate Agenda Posted) • Executive Session for Six Month City Manager Evaluation TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2 7:OOp Formal Council Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall • WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10 4:30p Joint Meeting North Liberty :..®~~ ~ _~~~ ~~ "''~'®'~~ City Council Meeting Schedule and ...r~....._ CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas November 13, Zoos www.icgov.org • TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16 5:30p Special Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Formal Council Meeting Continue Special Work Session if necessary City of Iowa City -is-c IP2 MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Michael Lombardo, City Manager Date: November 13, 2008 RE: Flood Recovery Activities The Flood of 2008 continues to have a profound impact on the daily operations and activities of many City departments. The flood recovery process will be lengthy and continue to demand the resources and focus of our staff for the foreseeable future. Outlined below is a brief summary of flood recovery activities that are currently underway. Although work on some of these efforts spans multiple departments, they are organized by the department tasked with the primary responsibility. Planning • Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for Buyouts • Residential Jump Start Programs (Statte and Federal) • Business Jump Start Programs (State and Federal) • Primary contact for flood affected residents and businesses • Development of long range flood mitigation strategies Public Works • Flood Recovery, Cleanup and Repair of Public Facilities o North Wastewater Plant o Well Houses o River Sewer Crossing o Bridges and Roads o Riverbank Erosion Repair o Cleanup of River Corridor • Mitigation Planning for Critical Infrastructure o Protection of Well Fields • FEMA Long Term Recovery Team Coordination for Projects o Dubuque Street Elevation and' Park Road Bridge o Relocation of the North Wasteiwater Operations o Canoe Portage around Iowa River Power Dam • Hazard Mitigation Plan (City Wide, Mwlti-Hazard Plan) o Necessary for Iowa City to be Eligible for Federal Aid • Requesting Corps to evaluate and update flood frequency analysis and reservoir operations plan November 13, 2008 Page 2 Parks • Sediment Removal • Turf Restoration • Tree Replacement • Riverside Stage Restoration • Building Renovations and Repairs: Boys Baseball Clubhouse, Tennis Building, Old Park Shop • Repair of Electrical Service to Lighting • Baseball Fence/Backstop Repairs and Replacements • Parking Lot/Trails/Sidewalk Repairs • Court Repairs (tennis, horseshoe, bocce) • Amusement Ride Repairs Housing and Inspection Services • Building Permits and Inspections for Restoration • Flood Plain Development Permits and Inspections for Restoration • Housing Authority - 608 Eastmoor Property restoration and mitigation Finance • FEMA Reimbursement Process • Process Flood Insurance Claims for City Facilities Police • Animal Facility relocation or restoration • Temporary Animal Facility operations City Attorney • Legal Support for other staff activities ~__--'r,®~r CITY OF IOWA CITY ~ ~~~~~~~ ~w,~~ RA N D U ~ ~EM~ Date: August 6, 2008 To: City Council From: Jeff Davidson, Director of Planning and Community Development _ ~~'"~' I Rick Fosse, Director of Public Works Re: Update on overall Flood Hazard Mitigation Strategy At your October 6 work session, we developed an overall strategy for utilizing the Jumpstart Iowa and supplemental Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding programs to assist flood impacted residences and businesses in our city. We also formally outlined the properties for which we would be requesting FEMA buyout funds through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). We further outlined our overall strategy for the Parkview Terrace and Taft Speedway/Idyllwild neighborhoods. Our strategy is to buyout what we are able to buyout through the HMGP, possibly assist with the buyout of non-HMGP eligible properties through the supplemental CDBG program in order to fulfill an overall flood hazard mitigation strategy, and then implement measures to reduce the flood hazard risk to the remainder of each neighborhood. The goal is to develop flood protection strategies that will allow these neighborhoods to lower their overall flood-hazard risk and remain healthy, vital neighborhoods. We are starting to get questions from persons whose homes are not eligible for HMGP funding, regarding the strategies for providing additional protection to their neighborhoods. Many of these people have referred to the articles in the newspaper where Cedar Rapids has outlined plans to demolish homes, open up the 100-year floodplain, and build permanent flood wall/levy structures to protect the remaining neighborhoods. Our residents have inquired as to why Iowa City does not have similar large-scale plans available for public review and comment. We believe our overall flood protection strategy cannot be more fully developed until we determine the City's position on flood protection for eligible properties that refuse HMGP or CDBG buyout funds. Including these homes in the overall flood protection strategies for the remaining neighborhood will add considerable complexity and expense to any flood control plan. A City Council policy decision is necessary at this time to allow the City to move forward with developing plans and to guide property owners in making an informed decision when considering a buyout offer. As a matter of policy, are we prepared to inform property owners slated for buyout that future mitigation plans will presume their participation in the buyout, and that by not participating in a buyout their property may be located on the "wet" side of a flood protection structure and adversely affected in order to preserve the broader neighborhood? Attached is the current map showing the properties which we anticipate being eligible for HMGP buyout funding as of October 24. We have resolved the issues with the properties that had been shown in blue for which we were not certain if all criteria had been met for HMGP funding. For Parkview Terrace, if all property owners shown in shading are willing to be bought out, it appears that with two or three additional purchases with non-HMGP grant funds, a logical area in the 100-year floodplain can be carved out and added to City Park. November 13, 2008 Page 2 For the north side of the river, there is only one property south of Taft Speedway not eligible for HMGP buyout. Including purchase of this property with non-HMGP funds, as well as purchase of HMGP-eligible property would allow floodplain parkland to be established along Taft Speedway. But to reiterate, we will not know for certain if these areas can be returned to open space and the flood hazard mitigated until we determine which property owners are actually willing to be bought out. The final piece of the puzzle is the flood protection strategies which will be developed for each neighborhood. Attached is an outline of three potential strategies for each neighborhood. These strategies represent a range of options that may be considered and are presented to you as a starting point for discussion. In the meantime, we are attempting to grant housing rehabilitation funds so that people can proceed with flood protection strategies, such as elevating mechanical systems out of basements and possibly elevating entire structures above the 100-year floodplain. All of these strategies will provide an additional level of protection to the neighborhood above what it has currently. We would also like to investigate a strategy of acquiring temporary flood barriers which would be utilized if a flood event is forecast. These are large structures which unfold and are filled with rock or sand and used to quickly mobilize a temporary flood wall. This would reduce the need to mobilize sandbagging teams and presumably allow a more carefully engineered temporary flood wall. We assume that this strategy would fit in between the moderate expense strategies we are now undertaking with the Jumpstart Program, and the large-scale expense flood wall/levy strategies for which funding is uncertain. Please be prepared to discuss at your November 17 work session if you would like to make any alterations in how we are proceeding. With your approval, we would like to commence the process of gathering public input on the alternative strategies. For your discussion at the November 17 meeting, please be prepared to resolve the following questions: 1. Are we prepared to inform property owners who are eligible for buyout funds that if they choose to refuse buyout funds their property may be located on the "wet" side of a flood protection structure in order to protect the larger neighborhood? 2. The large-scale levy/floodwall projects summarized in the attachment are estimated to cost between $20-$27 million. The estimated local share cost of such a project could be in the $5-$6 million range. Do you concur that additional engineering of this strategy which will cost around $500,000 should not occur until special Congressionally Designated Funds are earmarked for our use? 3. Shall we proceed with developing a strategy for use of temporary flood barriers in the Parkview Terrace and Idyllwild neighborhoods? cc: Michael Lombardo Eleanor Dilkes Sue Dulek Ron Knoche Steve Long November 13, 2008 Page 3 Eligibility for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ~ ~o~z4~os ® ~~J ~~ r `O ! ~ 1 " ~~ ~ . ~ ~,~..~ o,. ~ Q a ~; O ^ ~ n w P 71a ~~ 718 __ _ r - ~~ ~ 4 s '~., r~ ~ ~ ~ 1 r 7D1 _ ~~ . . i ' -- ~,~' :701 11- 700 +~els r ~~ !12 ." ,,. C~ ~ ., ~ ~ _ ? _. '' - ~ t , ~.~~ e r r P ,, ~ ~ 615 ezo v ~- r' f ~/l'''~' ~ 618 L~+' ~~ '~ ~o ~ PARK RD ,- -~~` ~~., ~o°~ S ~ ~ I~y~y, SFr - ~~,j t V~~~'1 _ ~~ t~ v ~ ~ 610. - ~~ i e17 ~ f~~i 4 ~' ~~ ~'"~~" s ye79 ~ ~11Y~3 ~~9 ~ `- o L82". ~~~ e1e_'-J_~. ~ ~ C~ 812 ~~~ .'~ ,~eo~ ~ ~ ~ 6t z ~ ~ °~ r W ~~ N HMGP eligible a JUI PL 0 a~ 4e~~~, ~~% ~~~ vNEWLYN CIR"-' >o 115 111E 106, 103 i 121 ~ 1t! -- I P~1 2(le .. 1]t ` 12e 1 River ~ -=~._~ 40~~ FASTER RD 1,~, 'P N November 13, 2008 Page 4 Hazard Mitigation and Flood Protection Strategies Parkview Terrace Neighborhood The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program has identified a number of homes determined to be at the highest risk using the guidelines of the program. If all of the eligible homes are purchased, there would only be four homes remaining in the 100-year floodplain in this neighborhood. From this point, there are a range of strategies to consider: Strategy 1 -Buyout Eligible Homes: • Offer buyout option to all eligible homes • Assist with the cost to elevate the remaining four homes in the 100-year floodplain or offer buyouts from an alternate funding source Do not implement any additional flood mitigation options This would provide at least a 100-year level of protection to all remaining homes in the neighborhood, although access to the area will remain vulnerable during lesser flood events. Remaining home owners outside the 100-year floodplain can reduce their potential for future flood losses in a variety of ways including: • Purchase flood insurance Wet proofing homes by relocating mechanical and electrical systems above potential flood levels • Elevation of structures above potential flood level Strategy 2 -Buyout Eligible Homes -Improve Vehicle Access: • Offer buyout option to all eligible homes • Assist with the cost to elevate the remaining four homes in the 100-year floodplain or offer buyouts from an alternate funding source • Improve the reliability of access to the neighborhood by elevating the most vulnerable areas of the existing road so the remaining homes could be accessed during a 100-year flood event Install backflow valves on the storm sewers with staging for temporary pumps to reduce street flooding This strategy would provide a 100-year level of protection to the remaining homes in the neighborhood, including access, and is roughly equivalent to the protection level of a new subdivision built to today's regulatory requirements. Stanley Consultants estimates the cost to elevate the existing road to be approximately $1.1 million. Remaining home owners outside the 100-year floodplain can reduce their potential for future flood losses in a variety of ways including: • Purchase flood insurance • Wet proofing homes by relocating mechanical and electrical systems above potential flood levels • Elevation of the structures above the potential flood levels Strategy 3 -Buyout Eligible Homes -Provide Additional Flood Mitigation for Neighborhood: • Offer buyout option to all eligible homes • Provide some level of flood protection for the remaining properties through a combination of earthen levees, fixed floodwalls and/or demountable floodwalls November 13, 2008 Page 5 A significant investment in planning and engineering would be necessary to confirm the feasibility and develop the details of this flood mitigation system. If this is an option that the City would like to pursue, it is important to understand a few basic concepts that may influence near- term decisions by both the City and residents: • Land purchased using money from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program is required to be returned to natural floodplain and cannot be used as part of the flood mitigation system or be protected by the flood mitigation system. This means that using Hazard Mitigation Grant Funds to purchase properties on the inland side of Normandy Drive may be counter-productive to flood mitigation strategies for the remaining neighborhood. The City may want to consider a different funding source without similar restrictions for these homes. It is not reasonable to expect that neighborhood flood mitigation measures would include protecting isolated homes remaining in the buyout area. Property owners should be aware of this when considering potential buyout offers. Also, because of this, the City should consider an alternate source of funds for extending buyout offers to the homes on the river side of Normandy that do not qualify for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The cost of a flood control system for this neighborhood would be significant. Preliminary estimates by Stanley Consultants range from $11.8 million to $15.5 million fora 500-year flood level of protection. The availability of outside funding sources is unknown at this time. It should also be noted that there will be annual maintenance expenses necessary for any flood mitigation structures. This is especially true for a demountable floodwall system. No flood mitigation system can guarantee protection from future flood events. Residents need to understand there is still a risk of damage from a future flood event that exceeds the design of the flood mitigation system. There is also a risk that the flood mitigation system could fail in the future. Idyllwild, Taft Speedway, Parkview Church and Peninsula Neighborhood All but one home on the south side of Taft Speedway are eligible for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program buyout. None of the structures in the Idyllwild or Peninsula neighborhoods are eligible. Strategy 1 -Buyout Eligible Homes: • Offer buyout option to the eligible homes south of Taft Speedway • Do not implement any additional flood- mitigation options Remaining residents can reduce their potential for future flood losses in a variety of ways including: • Purchase flood insurance • Elevation of the structure; however, elevation of structures is probably not a feasible option for the Idyllwild condominiums or Parkview Church This option does not protect Foster Road, so loss of access due to water across Foster Road would remain a possibility for these neighborhoods and our peninsula well fields during flood events. November 13, 2008 Page 6 Strategy 2- Buyout Eligible Homes -Improve Vehicle Access: • Offer buyout option to the eligible homes south of Taft Speedway • Elevate Foster Road. The preliminary estimate to elevate Foster Road is $1.4 million Remaining residents can reduce their potential for future flood losses in a variety of ways including: • Purchase flood insurance • Wet proofing homes by relocating mechanical and electrical systems above potential flood levels Elevation of the structure; however, elevation of structures is probably not a feasible option for the Idyllwild condominiums or Parkview Church Strategy 3- Buyout Eligible Homes -Provide Some Flood Mitigation for Neighborhood: Offer buyout option to the eligible homes south of Taft Speedway Implement some level of flood mitigation for Idyllwild, Parkview Church and Foster Road through a combination of earthen levees, elevated roads, fixed floodwalls and/or demountable floodwalls As with the flood mitigation options for the Parkview Terrace neighborhood, a significant investment in planning and engineering would be necessary to confirm the feasibility and develop the details of this flood mitigation system. Again, it is important to understand a few basic concepts that may influence near-term decisions by both the City and residents: Land purchased using money from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program is required to be returned to natural floodplain and cannot be used as part of the flood mitigation system or be protected by the flood mitigation system. It is not reasonable to expect that neighborhood flood mitigation measures would include protecting isolated homes that remain on the south side of Taft Speedway. Property owners should be aware of this when considering potential buyout offers. Also, because of this, the City should consider an alternate source of funds to extend a buyout offer to the home on the south side of Taft Speedway that did not qualify for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The cost of a flood mitigation system for this neighborhood would be significant. Preliminary estimates by Stanley Consultants range from $8.7 million to $12 million for a 500-year flood level of protection. The availability of outside funding sources is unknown at this time. It should also be noted that there will be annual maintenance expenses necessary for any flood mitigation structures. This is especially true for a demountable floodwall system. • No flood mitigation system can guarantee protection from future flood events. Residents need to understand there is still a risk of damage from a future flood event that exceeds the design of the flood mitigation system. There is also a risk that the flood mitigation system could fail in the future. ppddir/mem/mitigationupdate.doc ~.___-'r,®~ CITY (~F (UWA G1TY ,~®,~~ A ~ D U ~ E~~R DATE: 11 /13/2008 TO: CITY COUNCIL ~~~~`~ FROM: ELEANOR M. DILKES, CITY ATTORNEY u SUSAN DULEK, ASST. CITY ATTORN RE: FLOOD UPDATE Introduction This is to update Council on the Iowa Jumpstart Housing Assistance Program, Iowa Jumpstart Small Business Assistance Program, the first round of supplemental Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) application. Iowa Jumpstart Housing Assistance Program The City has received $686,196.58 in Iowa Jumpstart Housing Assistance Program funds for home repair/rehabilitation, interim mortgage assistance, and down payment assistance for flood victims. The City received 126 applications for assistance. As directed by Council, City staff has ranked the applications based on the CDBG weighting criteria with the exception of income. Although the Jumpstart Iowa program is open to everyone regardless of income, the state did approve the City using income to break a tie. Excluding income, the City's CDBG weighting criteria are: elderly (age 62 or over), disabled, large family (5 or more people), medium family (3 or 4 people), and single parent household. If an applicant for Jumpstart met any of those criteria, the applicant received a certain number of points. If, after adding up those points, there was a tie, then income was used. For example, if three households all had 55 points, then the household with the lowest median income would be ranked first and the household with the highest income would be ranked last. To date, the City has committed interim mortgage assistance to two households and repair/ rehabilitation assistance to eight households for a total of $429,000. The reason that more households have not received assistance yet is because the State has not finalized the program rules for the CDBG program, which is discussed more fully below. Iowa Jumpstart Small Business Assistance Program The City has received $1,479,632.00 in Iowa Jumpstart Business Assistance Program funds. To date, the City has received 35 applications and has approved 23 of them for a total of $515,589, of which $172, 406 has already been distributed. Of the remaining 12 applications, 2 applicants are not eligible, and 10 are still being reviewed. Community Development Block Grant The City was awarded a grant of $1,200,844.00 in supplemental CDBG funds for housing assistance, but has not received any of the funds yet. The State is referring to this program as "Jumpstart federal." Although the State has decided that the funds must be used for the same three categories as Jumpstart Iowa (home repair/rehabilitation, interim mortgage assistance, and down payment assistance), there are four, and possibly five, major differences between the Jumpstart Iowa and the CDBG program First, the State required the City to have a short application period for Jumpstart Iowa funds, and the City set a deadline of October 14. All applications filed before October 14 were considered for both Jumpstart and CDBG assistance so that home owners did not have to submit two applications. The City will continue to accept applications for CDBG until the funds run out. Second, in order to be eligible for CDBG assistance, the household must have income under the area median income set by HUD. The median income for a household of 1 is $50,800, a household of 2 is $58,000, a household of 3 is $65,300, a household of 4 is $72,600, and so on. Third, there is approximately twice as much funding available in CDBG assistance compared to Jumpstart Iowa funds. Fourth, the State Department of Economic Development Department has not finalized the rules for the CDBG program and has not wired any funds to Iowa City. As a result, the City has not been able to disburse any CDBG funds. A fifth possible difference is that the CDBG program presently requires that the home be brought up to Code. For example, if the household accepts CDBG funds to repair flood damage, the roof, which was not damaged in the flood, must be brought up to Code. In Parkview Terrace, this is particularly problematic because all homes constructed before 1978 will have to be lead safe or abated. Not only is this quite expensive, there are no lead certified abatement contractors in the Iowa City area. If the household is unable to afford to bring the home up to Code for less than $60,000 (the maximum amount available), the household either has to pay for the remaining costs or turn down the CDBG assistance. Because this requirement substantially limits the usefulness of this program, City staff has been in contact with State officials and elected officials about this issue. A group of three from the Iowa Department of Economic Development, which administers the CDBG program, will be coming to Iowa City to discuss this matter on Friday, November 14. It is my understanding that the Mayor and local legislators will be attending the meeting as well. Furthermore, the lack of rules is preventing the City from disbursing the remaining approximate $235,000 in Jumpstart Iowa funds. As I said above, all applicants have been ranked based on the weighting criteria. Because the City has more CDBG funds than Jumpstart Iowa and because CDBG has an income requirement, the top person on the list preferably would receive CDBG funds rather than Jumpstart Iowa if the household is under the median area income as a way to stretch the Jumpstart Iowa funds. However, if the household for some reason is not be able to use the funds under the final CDBG rules, then the household will get Jumpstart Iowa funds. As a result, the City has gone down the list only so far and does not want to commit the remaining Jumpstart Iowa funds until it is notified of the final rules. HUD has announced a second round of supplemental CDBG funding. Because the public could comment on the proposal until November 9, the amount of funds that Iowa City will receive and the activities eligible for funding have not been finalized. City staff will update Council when HUD issues its action plan with respect to the second round of funding. 2 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program The application is due January 31, 2008, and staff would like to present it to Council for approval at the first meeting in January. The State of Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division will begin reviewing the application as soon as it is received. The State will be working with City staff before the application is submitted to insure that all the necessary information is provided. After the State reviews it, the application will be forwarded to FEMA. The State continues to tell City staff that it will take two to three months from submission before FEMA will make a decision. City staff has still not determined whether the property in Showers Addition will be eligible for HMGP funding. The packet contains a memo from David Purdy with additional information on the HMGP. New Staff The City has hired two full-time temporary staff to work exclusively on flood-related matters, Nasseem Moradi who has been working since October 15 and David Purdy who has been on staff since October 23. City Website The City has a link on its web site with helpful flood-related information, including this Memorandum. The web site address is www icgov.org/recovery. On the home page, click on "Flood Recovery Resource Center, including Buyout Process Updates." Copy to: Michael A. Lombardo, City Manager Dale E. Helling, Asst. City Manager Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Jeff Davidson, Director of Planning and Coummunity Development Wendy Ford, Economic Development Coordinator Rick Fosse, Director of Public Works Steve Long, Community Development Coordinator Ron Knoche, City Engineer Tracy Hightshoe, Planner Nasseem Moradi, Flood Recovery David Purdy, Flood Recovery 3 r ~_ CITY OF 101NA CITY :r.m~1ir. M Date: November 12, 2008 To: City Council From: David Purdy, Flood Recovery Re: HMGP Buyout Application update At your October 6 work session, you identified the properties you wanted to be included in the application to the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) for buyout assistance. We have started working on several aspects of the buyout application. One of the first steps is to contact the homeowners to see if they are still interested in being included in the buyout application. As Jeff Davidson indicated at the meeting on October 6, there are a few homeowners who may have changed their minds since the initial questionnaire was sent to them in July. Their participation is voluntary. We will be sending the homeowners a letter this week to verify their interest in participation in the buyout. A requirement of the HMGP application is that the applicant have a FEMA approved Hazard Mitigation Plan. Since Iowa City's Hazard Mitigation Plan will not be completed at the time of application, the City will be seeking a waiver to file the full plan at a later date. The City, as well as Johnson County and Coralville, hired ECICOG to complete the Hazard Mitigation Plan. ECICOG will complete the waiver on behalf of the City. We are proceeding with other parts of the application including obtaining full legal descriptions, collecting environmental and historic preservation information, establishing a budget, etc. These items should be more fully completed in the next few weeks. City staff has met with the Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management office several times and they will be assisting us in reviewing the application before it is submitted to the FEMA regional office. Please let me know if you need further information. I can be contacted at David-PurdyCa~iowa- cit .or or by calling 356-5489. Cc: Michael Lombardo, City Manager Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Jeff Davidson, Director of Planning & Community Development Marian Karr, City Clerk PpdcdbglmemoslbuyoutApp-uplate.doc ~~~.®r~1 .:III~~~ ,~®,.-~ CITY OF IOWA CITY Mpg MEMORANDUM Date: November 12, 2008 To: City Council From: Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Re: Staff Review of Recommendations from the T On Violence Against Women Attached please find a copy of the recommendations from the Taskforce On Violence Against Women which includes, in italics, information and comments by a staff committee that included Human Services Planning Coordinator Linda Severson, Neighborhood Services Planner Marcia Bollinger, Transportation Services Director Chris O'Brien, Police Chief Sam Hargadine, Transportation Planner John Yapp, Traffic Engineering Planner Darian Nagle-Gamm, and myself. We have reviewed the taskforce's recommendations and attempted to advise you as to the status of current activities or initiatives being undertaken, as well as initiatives that might be pursued by the City to further address these issues. Hopefully, this information will assist you in determining what should be the City's role in pursuing any or all of the recommended initiatives. The attached document was previously included in your information packet of October 30, 2008. cc. Linda Severson Marcia Bollinger Chris O'Brien Sam Hargadine John Yapp Darian Nagle-Gamm Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 1 of 7 Recommendations from Taskforce on Violence Against Women - Staff Review ONGOING -These are things that the City is currently involved with Public safety and Social Service agencies to make an increased effort to reach students with information about services available (for example, increased Web access to the Domestic Violence Intervention Program Tool Kit). • City of Iowa City to review its website for links to resources for victims of stalking, dating violence, domestic violence, and sexual assault. STAFF COMMENT.' The ICPD websife does provide links to some service agencies. We can work with local agencies to expand on this, both with links from the ICPD site as well as links on the agencies' respective sites. The Police Chief and the Human Services Planning Coordinator will follow up. • City of Iowa City to create a process for receiving regular input from UI students on transportation issues/needs (for example, utilize UISG liaison to the Council). STAFF COMMENT: The City could have anon-voting representative to the UI Parking & Transportation Committee, currently made up of University staff, faculty and students. This would provide a conduit for regular feedback from not only students but also staff on student transportation issues and needs. The Transportation Services Director and the Transportation Planner will follow up. • City of Iowa City and UI to provide additional bicycle parking, including that which is well-lit, clean, and covered. STAFF COMMENT: City staff survey downtown bike racks annually for usage and our goal is to provide additional parking where demand is the greatest. Bike racks are placed in the public right-of--way in well lit, highly visible areas. We have placed nine additional bike racks in the downtown area this year. Bike racks Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 2 of 7 in the Capitol Street parking garage have not been popular. Bicyclists, like motorists, desire to park as close as possible to their destination. Covered bike racks require more space and can range in cost from $10, 000 to $20, 000. City of Iowa City to partner with UISG Women's Safety Forum. STAFF COMMENT: We remain willing to participate. The Human Services Planning Coordinator will coordinate with the Ul. • City of Iowa City to actively promote its "E-subscription" program to encourage organizations and individuals to receive press releases from ICPD that can then be shared on their respective websites, list serves, and/or forwarded to their members. STAFF COMMENT.' This is a service that is currently available, but it was agreed that it might be better promoted. This will be a function of the Crime Prevention Bureau that is proposed to be reinstated in the Police Department. The Human Services Planning Coordinator will notify local agencies That this service is available. POSSIBLE INITIATIVES -these are things that staff believes can be initiated. • City of Iowa City Police Department to provide customer safety training and/or informational brochure to cab drivers. STAFF COMMENT: The more desirable alternative would be to develop some sort of brochure that could be distributed on a regular basis to the cab companies and to each driver as they obtain their license. A brochure will be developed by the proposed Crime Prevention Bureau staff in conjunction with UI Public Safety. The means for distribution are in place through the office of the City Clerk. • The City of Iowa City to work with UI and others to have an ad campaign about non-violence. Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 3 of 7 The City of Iowa City to fund male-based prevention programs using research- based practice. The City of Iowa City to encourage UI student leaders to provide education on gender violence. • Iowa City City Council to convene a group of community leaders, especially men in positions of influence, to participate in a training program for serving as allies in ending violence in women's lives. • The City of Iowa City and Iowa City Community School District to collaborate on UI Respect campaign. STAFF COMMENT.• The above recommendations are related measures that could be undertaken and would require the participation and cooperation of various other agencies, including the University of Iowa and various human service agencies. There is currently in existence the University of Iowa Men's Anti-Violence Council and men from the community at-large are welcome to participate. The City can inform staff and encourage their participation, and we can provide a link to that organization's website. • Iowa City City Council members and City employees, especially department heads, to attend training with gender violence national speakers (i.e., Jackson Katz). STAFF COMMENT: This can be encouraged at the staff level. Initiatives likely to require allocation of significant additional funding. • City Council and University of Iowa to increase local funding support for victim service agencies, for example, to consider on-campus advocates to work with victims of dating violence. Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 4 of 7 STAFF COMMENT. Although it is unclear what additional funding would be needed, it would appear that those initiatives directed toward University students would be primarily initiated by the University, while those applied in the community at-large would be the responsibility of the City. Joint grant applications might be an option. The primary question to be addressed is whether the goal is to add quality to the services now offered or to expand on those services throughout the community. • City of Iowa City to expand hours of IC Transit, including adding Sunday service, as well as increasing hours and expanding route of IC Transit Free Shuttle. STAFF COMMENT: This is something that is continually under review. The Transit Division is in the process of comprehensively reviewing its entire route structure and service level throughout the community. • City of Iowa City and University of Iowa to work together to adequately fund the UI "Nite Ride" program. STAFF COMMENT: It might be desirable for the City to consider jointly funding this program in lieu of some recommendations that may come from the comprehensive review of the Transit system. • City of Iowa City to re-establish and fund a Neighborhood Watch Officer/Program. • City of Iowa City Neighborhood Services Department and ICPD Community Services Officer for Crime Prevention will actively recruit in the downtown and near-downtown neighborhoods to establish "Watch" programs in those neighborhoods. STAFF COMMENT: A neighborhood watch program could be an integral part of a reinstated Crime Prevention Bureau in the Police Department. With the addition of the newly-approved officers in the Police Department, the Crime Prevention Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 5 of 7 Bureau could be restored and activities directed toward the downtown and surrounding area would certainly be a focus of that initiative. City of Iowa City and UI to follow established best practices for personnel levels for public safety departments. STAFF COMMENT. The staffing level in the Police Department is an ongoing consideration and a policy matter that Council continues to address with the preparation of its annual budget and three-year financial plan. • The City of Iowa City and UI to develop multi-year funding strategies to stabilize crime prevention efforts such as UI Nite Ride, UI RAD, and City of Iowa City Neighborhood Watch. Iowa City and UI to collaborate to assist with stabilized funding for crime prevention efforts. STAFF COMMENT: This type of united effort with the University would be coordinated through fhe Crime Prevention Bureau. An ongoing commitment of funding would be needed along with strategic planning and coordination of the various program services. • City of Iowa City to make neighborhoods aware of the ability to have more street lights (for example, through Neighborhood Association newsletters and inserts in City of Iowa City water bills). STAFF COMMENT: We can look at enhancing our communication efforts. Programs currently in place involve the ability of neighbors to request security lighting which is connected to a private meter of the requesting party. We encourage residents to work directly with MidAmerican Energy and we facilitate these discussions as necessary. Street lights are provided at intersections, and at the midpoint of longer blocks. Additional street lights may be requested for the public right-of--way but are only installed if there is unanimous support from affected residents, and if there is a volunteer to whose household the light is metered. Situations where this has Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 6 of 7 occurred usually involve residents who desire a streetlight at the .end of their driveway. Streetlights are placed for vehicular traffic circulation and are not meant to provide sidewalk lighting. Placement of streetlight over traffic lanes, the height of these light fuxtures, and the tree canopy make additional streetlights a poor solution fo sidewalk lighting problems. Many residents object to adding streetlights in residential areas due to glare and light pollution concerns. • The City of Iowa City and others (for example, the University of Iowa, MidAmerican Energy, etc.) to encourage landlords, sororities, fraternities, churches, public entities, etc. to assess for adequate outdoor lighting on buildings and surrounding private property to increase lighting spill-over into pedestrian walkways. • City of Iowa City to identify a source for technical assistance on addressing recommendations listed above (candle strength, positioning, etc.). City of Iowa City to create a pedestrian lighting program (similar to traffic calming and sidewalk infill program), • The greater community to contribute to increasing pedestrian lighting, for example, to keep porch lights on, install landscaping lights, address landscaping that inhibits safe sidewalks, and the City of Iowa City to assist with outreach efforts through Neighborhood Associations, advertising, etc. • The City of Iowa City to review Code requirements for lighting to address pedestrian lighting needs. STAFF COMMENT: The above recommendations touch on many issues that would be addressed as part of a comprehensive pedestrian lighting program. If funding for a comprehensive program is not available, outreach efforts can still be continued and, perhaps, structured to better address these specific recommendations. It is important to keep in mind the cumulative maintenance and electricity costs when considering any program of enhanced public lighting. Recommendations -Violence Against Women Staff Review Page 7 of 7 The City of Iowa City to encourage UI student leaders to provide education on gender violence. STAFF COMMENT.• This would appear to be primarily a University of Iowa initiative. The City would be able to share information with the University and with student leaders. mgr/asstlrecommendations9-11-08.doc ~,! r _~ CtTY OF 101lVA CITY 1P4 ®,~~ RA N D L[ M MEMO ..~_..__ DATE: November 12, 2008 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~~~ RE: Budget and Meeting Schedule January-March 2009 -DRAFT #2 As a result of discussion of the draft schedule for January, February, and March on November 3Ta anew schedule has been prepared. Please review your personal schedules and bring your calendars to a meeting before finalizing. DRAFT 2009 January 1, Thursday -New Year's Day, offices closed January 5, Monday -Work Session January 6, Tuesday -Formal January 10, Saturday Special Work Session, BUDGET, 8AM - 3PM January 12, Monday Special Work Session, BUDGET, 6:30PM January 15, Thursday Special Work Session, BUDGET (CIF's-Televised), 1:30 - 8:OOPM January 19, Monday -Martin Luther King, holiday, offices closed January 28, Wednesday Special Work Session, BUDGET (Boards/Commissions/Community Events), 6:30 PM January 29, Thursday Special Work Session, BUDGET (if needed), 6:30 PM February 2, Monday - DC Lobbying Trip February 3, Tuesday - DC Lobbying Trip February 4, Wednesday - DC Lobbying Trip February 9, Monday -Special Work Session February 10, Tuesday -Special Formal (SET PUBLIC HEARING) February 16 -President's Day Holiday, offices closed February 23, Monday -Special Work Session February 24, Tuesday -Special Formal (HOLD PUBLIC HEARING) March 10, Tuesday -Combined Special Work Session and Special Formal (APPROVE BUDGET) March 23, Monday -Special Work Session March 24, Tuesday -Special Formal Next regularly scheduled meeting Apri16/7. In the past City Council has utilized a subcommittee for Aid to Agencies recommendations and that timeline is not reflected in the above schedule. U:2009budgetschedule.doc IP5 Marian Karr From: TIMTAFCO@aol.com Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:49 AM To: tbrase@co.johnson.ia.us Cc: Council Subject: The Iowa City Seats Transportation Program is Totally Inept. Mr. Brase: While I have found all of your Seats drivers courteous and helpful, the contrary is the commentary on your office staff. The Seats Office Reservations Staff is consistently argumentative, unhelpful, un-resourceful, too busy to be of assistance and have a perpetual "status quo, I only work here" attitude. Of particular disdain are: 1. You close over the lunch hour 2. Your office closes at 4pm, and only operates a few hours on week ends. 3. Your individual telephone line system is medieval 4. Unwillingness to call clients back, but insisting clients keep calling back 5. Inability to make phone reservations 6. Inability to use a IT based reservation system 7. Having only three vehicles in service on weekends 8. Difficulties in making reservations. It is not me alone. I have spoken with many older people who also report the same, many of whom have given up on your service. And the word is supposed to be Public Service. Whereas your employees act as if they are performing a favor, and will maybe do so only if it suits them. My experiences include running nationwide distribution systems and what you are doing is not exactly rocket science. It is my observation that the entire organization and management of Seats needs to be totally investigated and redressed inasmuch as it is clearly not performing at a level for maximum utilization and public availability. I am sending a copy of this letter to Iowa City Mayor and Council, since I have grown tired of your continual harangue. All of the excuses and explanations I have been given are not acceptable Tim Taffe 726 Iowa Avenue AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search__Now. 11 /7/2008 Johnson County Council of Governments 410 E Washington St. Iowa Cary Iowa 52240 r~~ November 6, 2008 Mr. David Noerper 209 Richards Street Iowa City, IA 52246 Re: All-Way Stop Analysis at River Street/Woolf Avenue, Iowa City Dear Mr. Noerper: IP6 The attached study documents an all-way stop analysis for the intersection of River StreetNVoolf Avenue in Iowa City, conducted by the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division. This evaluation was triggered by a neighborhood request in the form of a petition submitted by you. Traffic counts and traffic speed data were collected September 16 - 19, 2008. Peak traffic and pedestrian counts were collected during the third week of October, 2008. The intersection was observed several times at different times of the day during the months of September and October 2008. There are specific criteria (warrants) for an all-way stop to be justified. These warrants are based on traffic volumes, collision history, pedestrian volumes, and traffic speed. Installing stop signs in locations where they are not warranted results in a greater chance of rear-end collisions, motorists rolling through stop signs, and higher speeds downstream of the stop signs. Our analysis has concluded that an all-way stop is not warranted at this intersection. Traffic volumes are not high enough to justify an all-way stop. Stopping the east and west legs of the intersection (River Street) is appropriate, given the off-set geometry of the intersection, which effectively functions as two adjacent T intersections with River Street teeing into Woolf Avenue. There were two recorded collisions at this intersection in the years 2005 through 2007, one of which is the result of stop sign running (the chance of stop sign running will increase with an all-way stop), and one is the result of a vehicle hitting a fixed object, unrelated to stop sign control. There are some things which can be implemented to clarify how the intersection functions. There is currently a high-visibility crosswalk on the north side of the intersection for elementary school age pedestrians; adding another marked crosswalk on the south side of the intersection is appropriate given the school-aged pedestrians using the crossing. Adding CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP signs to the River Street stop signs will remind motorists that Woolf Avenue traffic does not stop, which may be helpful given the off-set geometry of the intersection. We will implement these modifications as time and weather permit. Finally, I understand you inquired about a crossing guard being stationed at this intersection. Crossing guards are typically reserved for arterial street crossings which carry higher volumes of traffic. We will forward Safe Routes to Schools educational materials to Lincoln School; it is appropriate for this type of training to occur through the school. Please call me at 356-5252 if you have any questions. Sincerely, John Yapp Transportation Planner cc: w/o attachments*: City Council Principal, Lincoln Elementary Kent Ralston Darian Nagle-Gamm Matt Johnson John Sobaski Ron Knoche *copies of the River Street/Woolf Avenue All-Way Stop Analysis available upon request. jccogadm/Itrs/ncerperll-4.doc IP7 oralville City 1512 7th StrF CONTACT INFORMA'PION East Central Iowa Council of Governm 700 16th Street NE, Suite 301 Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 Phone: 319.365.9941 Email: gina.petersC~ecicog.org Time to meet with legislators informally and enjoy refreshments is provided from 4:00 to 4:30. A formal program follows, which allows legislators the opportunity to give their views on the upcoming session and includes time for questions and answers. City and county officials and members of the general public are encouraged to attend. Please feel free to forward this invitation to others. This event is cosponsored by ECICOG, the Iowa League of Cities, the Iowa State Association of Counties, and the City of Coralville. 2006 Legislative Open House MINUTES Youth Advisory Commission October ~, 2008 Lobby Conference Room, City Hall, 7:35 PM Members Present: Diamitani, Malatek, Han, Nelson Members Absent: Green Others Present: City Council Liaison Wilburn, City Clerk Karr, Brett Vining Recommendations to Council: Call to Order: Motioned by Nelson, seconded by Han. Approved 4-0. DRAFT IP8 Annrove minutes: Nelson moved to approve the minutes. Malatek seconded. The minutes were approved 4-0. Goals and Planning for 2008• Youth Input and Involvement: There was further discussion on the Youth Input sessions and related items. Malatek suggested that it would be a good idea to have a youth survey. Han added that it might be a good idea also to include whether they would be interested in attending a Youth Input session on the survey. Wilburn offered to facilitate the discussion. Malatek voiced that it also might be a good idea to run a textbook donation, similar to the computer and software donations already present. Han added that schools often sell back older textbooks but also included that she might be able to talk to some librarians to find out. Diamitani brought up a new idea of doing a high school student senates-YAC sponsored winter dance before winter break. He included preliminary information about some possible events and themes. Karr added that if there would be raffling there may need be State forms to file. Location was also one of the questions Nelson put forth. Vining, who was also present, voiced that the West High BPA club was also planning a similar event. Han and Diamitani volunteered to form a subcommittee for further discussion and planning. Citing a similar venue at West High school, Diamitani suggested a community wide "heroes" project where youth could nominate each other. Nelson suggested that they could utilize the YAC website to facilitate the nomination and selection process. Malatek suggested that it might be added incentive if there was a scholarship prize and a certificate of recognition. Han, Diamitani and Malatek volunteered for a subcommittee for further discuss. Uudate on website: None Youth Empowerment Grant: Because the winter break suggestion made in the previous section (Goals and planning for 2008) would possibly utilize the grant through the individual high school student senates, there was limited discussion. Vining asked for more information about the grant and Diamitani gave a brief summary of the premise behind it. 2oo8-oA Subcommittee Reports: Other than the formation of two new committees and mentioned above, there was no further discussion. DRAFT Public Discussion: Karr asked Vining if there was anything he would like to add. Student Citizenship Awards: Nelson mentioned that he would not be able to make it to the October list presentation of the award to Weber Elementary school. Diamitani confirmed that he would be able to be present at the presentation. Others verified that the information given in the agenda was correct. Staff update: Karr asked whether Vining would like to take an application to the YAC as he was present. Announcements/Invitations/Events/Opportunities: As these items were already covered extensively, they were not discussed again. Meeting Schedule: Malatek suggested that Sundays might be a better day for meetings as the week is a very busy time for many. Nelson agreed. Karr and Wilburn both said that they would be willing to arrange such a meeting schedule and all other members said that a Sunday date would work. It was decided that the next meeting date would be on Sunday, November 2°a. i 7 O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ C~ C "~K l~D ~+ d~ ~d r , d z~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S. o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~: N N N N N N N ~~ W W W W w W ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i I~ I~ ~ ~ J F~ M~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 • l O I~ AI I~ ~I I, ~ ~ AI I'j Ar, I`j Q ~/Q M Q M' ] W M"~ d d 1~1 y.~ ~ l J ~ ^~ O l , ~/~.O 7 V HI O v IP9 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2008 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL PRELIMINARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, William Downing, Lindsay Bunting Eubanks, Pam Michaud, Jim Ponto, Ginalie Swaim, Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner, MEMBERS ABSENT: none STAFF PRESENT: Christina Kuecker OTHERS PRESENT: Mary Ann Hendrickson, David Lacina, Mark Smith, Sonja Zeithamel CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Bunting Eubanks called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 524 North Johnson Street. Kuecker said this application is to replace the standing seam metal roof on this building with a synthetic wood shingle roof. She said the property is on the National Register and is also a local landmark. Kuecker said that the building is the Czechoslovakian Protective Society's Meeting Hall and has been very important to the history of the Goosetown Neighborhood and its Czech immigrants. Kuecker stated that approximately ten years ago the applicant replaced the standing seam metal roof with a new standing seam metal roof. She said the applicant has had problems ever since. Kuecker said that approximately one to two years after the roof was installed it was leaking. She said the owners put a protective coating on the roof, but another one to two years later it started leaking again. Kuecker said that another protective coating was put on, but at the present time, a couple of years later, the roof is leaking again. She said that the original contractor has gone out of business, and the new contractors that have been contacted are not confident in another sort of sealant working. Kuecker said the applicant has therefore looked at other solutions. She said that the owner said that when the original metal roof was removed, there was a wood, shake shingle roof underneath it. Kuecker said this and historic photographs have led the owner to consider using a synthetic wood shake style shingle to replace the metal roof. Kuecker said that she contacted Jack Porter of the State Historic Preservation Office and Marlys Svendsen to get some historic preservationists' views on this. Kuecker said the consultants told her that based on the two historic photographs, it is hard to tell that it was a wood shingle roof, but it is obvious that it was not a standing seam metal roof. She said Porter stated that it was probably wood or possibly a metal shingle roof, and he would recommend a wood, slate, or high quality asphalt shingle. Kuecker said Svendsen noted that the previous standing seam metal roof had become a historic alteration that has become acharacter-defining feature of the building, as it had been on the building, prior to its replacement, for approximately 80 years. Kuecker said at the time she spoke with Svendsen, she did not yet have the information about there being a wood roof underneath. Kuecker said Svendsen stated that without knowing the previous material choice, she would recommend the metal roof. Kuecker said the Commission needs to determine if the standing seam metal roof is a historic alteration that is worth preserving or if it would be appropriate to return it to the appearance of a wood shingled roof. Kuecker showed some photographs of the interior damage.. She said there is significant damage in the auditorium, which is a significant part of the history of the building. Kuecker pointed out that a decision must be made so that work can be done before further damage occurs. She showed a photograph of a Historic Preservation Commission November 3, 2008 Page 2 house with the same roofing material that is proposed and a photograph of a National Register property with the same type of roofing material. Smith, representing Smith and Wood Construction, said that he was contacted to submit a proposal to replace the roof. He said he had two products available, one of which is the synthetic material shown in the photograph of the National Register property. Smith said that it is a simulated wood shake that is basically a plastic property with a UV protection and a 50-year warranty. He said he has used the product before. Smith said he also submitted a proposal using a couple of different asphalt products. He showed the presidential series that has a 50-year warranty and said it is used frequently in applications such as this. Smith said it is the heaviest asphalt shingle that has a simulated wood look. He showed another asphalt product that is the same quality and weight of shingle and is also used quite often in this type of application. Smith said that one has more of a slate look and is the type of shingle that is on Saint Wenceslaus Church and Saint Mary's Church. Bunting Eubanks said the application refers to the flashing being of high quality to make sure there are not future problems. Kuecker said that both Porter and Svendsen stated, and she agreed, that in order to ensure along-lasting roof, a high quality flashing material should be used. Kuecker said that oftentimes the flashing is the component that fails first. Smith commented that there is not a lot of flashing on this roof; there isn't any sidewall flash to speak of; it is just a big hip roof. He said that at the base where the parapet roofs are, he proposed to use TPO, a synthetic project used on commercial properties that is probably the best product for that application. Baldridge asked about the cost variations of the products. Smith said the two asphalt products have the same cost. Kuecker said the DaVinci shakes and the standing seam costs are in the packet but the asphalt products are not. Smith said that the DaVinci shingles would be $83,480, and the asphalt shingles would be $55,200. Bunting Eubanks asked if the applicant has a preference about the material to be used. Hendrickson replied that the Board of Trustees was running toward the DaVinci/shake look. She said that they did not discuss the asphalt shingles. Hendrickson said the asphalt shingles have a 50-year guarantee, and it is a good quality asphalt. Zeithamel said that ten years ago when the standing seam roof was put on, it was installed incorrectly. She said that was a huge expense for anon-profit organization. Zeithamel said they cannot do that again, that they need to have the roof installed correctly. Wagner said the presence of shingle roof could be found if one crawls into the crawl space, remnants of the original roof will be found. He said the question then is not that originally it was a shingled roof. Wagner said that as far as whether the roof is the DaVinci shingle or the asphalt it depends on what the durability of the asphalt shingles versus the DaVinci, if there is a big hailstorm for example. He said that it is guaranteed for 50 years, but if there is a big hailstorm one might actually weather a little bit better than the other. Smith stated that in his opinion, the DaVinci roof would hold up better through a hailstorm by virtue of his having worked with the materials before. Michaud said that a windstorm is a little more common, and it seems like that would be a little easier to blow off. Smith said they are warranted up to 90 miles an hour, and he puts them on with stainless steel rim shank nails. Wagner said the proposal says that with the metal roof, it is proposed to put on OSB sheeting, whereas Smith has plywood CVX. Wagner said that that the CVX would be more durable and would be better for the school in the long run. Swaim asked where else Smith used the DaVinci roof. Smith said he only used the DaVinci shingles once, up on Prairie du Chien Road. He said it is a fairly new product. Swaim said that up close, the sample material looks very rubber like. She said that the appearance is important as well as the durability. Smith said he has heard that they are molded from actual wooden shingles. Historic Preservation Commission November 3, 2008 Page 3 Ponto said Smith mentioned that the product has a UV protectant. He said one concern would be how well the shingles would truly hold up for 50 years. Ponto said that plastics do tend to become brittle and break. He said that he would like to have more information about longer-term durability, even though it is not yet available for this fairly new product. Michaud said that she would be concerned about uneven fade. She said there are four sides showing so that one easily sees two sides at a time. Michaud said the material seems brittle. Smith said it is a rigid plastic. He said it does not have any recycled rubber. Downing asked when the original standing seam roof was put on over the shingles. Kuecker said she believes it was done around 1914. Downing asked if the owner had considered a membrane roof, which has battens on it to simulate the standing seam ridges. He said it is a vinyl, single-ply membrane roof with vinyl battens glued on it to give the appearance of a standing seam roof. Smith said he was not familiar with that type of roof. Swaim asked Kuecker if she could explain Svendsen's point about historic alteration and if it means that we're recognizing the historic integrity of the change. Kuecker said that is correct. She said there is the original, and then there was an alteration to the building that has achieved a historic significance, meaning that it is greater than the 50-year time frame and is also from the era when this building was significant. Swaim and Bunting Eubanks said that makes this kind of a tossup. Baldridge said that the second roof has a very poor track record. Downing said that the first metal roof lasted 70 to 80 years, but the replacement did not last. He said that probably the shake roof flashing into the vertical parapets on the corners didn't work. Downing said that now there is better flashing to handle that situation. Michaud said she has two concerns, one of which is that this scuffs readily. She said she can see fine abrasions on it diagonally, and it is easy to scratch. Michaud said she does not believe the material is in the Secretary of the Interior Standards for approved materials. Kuecker said that it is such a new material that it has not been incorporated or even considered. Michaud said that since it is such a big question mark, she did not know why someone would want to spend $30,000 more on it. Bunting Eubanks agreed that the asphalt shingles are significantly cheaper. Kuecker pointed out that the asphalt shingles are an approved Secretary of the Interior medium. She stated that Porter did make a recommendation for asphalt shingles. Bunting Eubanks asked Hendrickson if the Board of Trustees would be okay with using the less expensive, asphalt material. Hendrickson confirmed this. Baker said that in the past, when considering a new material, the Commission has spent some time doing research on it. She said she was not certain that there was enough information to use the new product, but there is not the luxury of time to do the research, because there is damage being done at this time. Smith said that he would really like to propose the DaVinci shingles, because he has used them before and thought it was a good product that would hold up well. He said, however, that 90% of the work he does is with asphalt shingles, and he has no problem with that. Baldridge asked Hendrickson if she has heard from the Board as to which of the materials it wants to use. Hendrickson said that when the Board met, it discussed bids for the standing seam metal roof and the DaVinci roof. She said just that day, Smith was asked about the asphalt shingles and the bid was developed. Hendrickson said the Board discussed it and came up with the DaVinci as its first choice, and the second choice was the asphalt. She stated that the Board really did not want to go with the metal roof. Baldridge asked if it is incumbent upon the Commission to approve a specific material. Bunting Eubanks responded that if the Commission finds either material acceptable, the choice can be left to the applicant. She said if one of the choices is not acceptable, the Commission can specify. Historic Preservation Commission November 3, 2008 Page 4 Michaud said there is a huge difference between the materials. She said she had no confidence in a decision to suddenly approve a PVC type product. Michaud said that it might seem more authentic, but it is very regular, and cedar shakes were not regular or uniformly cut. She said there are other shingles that look less jagged than that one that simulates cedar shakes. Smith said that the shingles are shown in a straight line, but in installation, they can be staggered. He said that would get rid of some of the uniformity of it. Smith said he proposed to install them with a slight stagger. Bunting Eubanks said that the issue with the metal roof seems not to be the roofing but the way it was put on the building. She asked if there is a higher likelihood that the asphalt would be put on correctly because of having more experience with the product. Smith stated that they go on the same as a wood roof, which he has done a lot of. Michaud asked if there are holes pre-drilled in the material for the nails so that there is no chance of it splitting. Smith said there are not. He said he has been out in sub-zero weather with these trying to get them to split, and they stay flexible in the cold weather. Smith said he has not had any trouble with nails splitting the shingle. He said that there are designated spots on the shingles where they are supposed to be nailed. Swaim mentioned the Pueblo courthouse used as an example for the DaVinci product. Kuecker said the building is on the National Register, but she did not know when that roof was installed. Swaim added that the climate there is probably very different from Iowa's. Ponto said there is some precedence though that the material was accepted for use on a National Register building. Bunting Eubanks asked if anyone had an objection to either material. Hendrickson said the Board felt that either product would work well but did not want to use the metal. She said the Board felt the new, shake product looked more like the original than the standing seam. Hendrickson said the Board was trying to find something the Commission would agree to. She said that the Board could save $30,000 by using the asphalt. Hendrickson said the Board did not start with the asphalt, because it felt the two questions would be between the standing seam and the DaVinci shingle. Wagner said that one thing to keep in mind with the shake is what is the guarantee, particularly if the roofer goes out of business, will the guarantee carry over. He suggested the Board consider exactly what the guarantee would cover. Smith said that both products have very specific warranties. He said he didn't think fading was covered under either product. Smith said that it is mostly just blow off that is covered. He said that DaVinci is a little bit better in that the guarantee covers material and labor, but the asphalt shingle warranty covers just prorated material only. Smith said both products have transferable warranties whether his company is in business or not. Baldridge said he felt the Commission should approve both roofing materials and let the Preucil Board make its own decision. Kuecker said the question is whether the new material meets the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Baker said that when faced with a new material in the past, the Commission has spent a month or more researching the material. Michaud said the fact that the product has been used once in the area and once in the Southwest is not a very broad sample. Bunting Eubanks asked if the Board would go for the asphalt if given a choice. Hendrickson said she thought the Board would agree to that. Bunting Eubanks said she did not think it would necessarily cause a conflict if the Commission only approved asphalt. Baldridge said the only thing is if the Preucil Board is enamored of the shake appearance over the asphalt. Hendrickson said that she is not worried about installation, because Smith has done good work on the building before. Hendrickson said that it is probably down to which product will hold up the best, and she is sure that if the Commission doesn't agree on the shakes, the asphalt will be fine, because that was the second alternative. Historic Preservation Commission November 3, 2008 Page 5 Swaim said that since the Commission's job is to protect the building for the long-term and since the record of the DaVinci material is unknown, she was inclined to think the asphalt is the best choice. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an asphalt wood shake- style shingle roof with a high quality flashing material for the roof for 524 North Johnson Street. Ponto seconded the motion. Downing said he is a little surprised that the Commission is throwing over a standing seam roof so easily. He said the Commission and School should consider this alternative. Hendrickson said the problem with that is that it would go way into next spring again. She said the building is incurring so much damage right now. Michaud said that since the first layer was cedar shakes, it seems quite legitimate to go back to that. Wagner said that there is no telling that maybe over the cedar shakes there was some asphalt shingle before the metal was put on. Michaud asked if there would be any insulation added in the ceiling. Smith said that would not be part of this project, as this is a ventilated attic space. Wagner said the important thing in the bid is that one is putting the CVX, which is plywood, over the one by six, which adds strength. He said that sometimes they pull out the one by and put the plywood down and it become wavy. Wagner said that for a heavy shingle like that you need that extra support. Smith said that the majority of the nails would be going through the plywood into the one by, which gives good nail holding power. Wagner said that the other thing that is important for this is the ice guard along the edge. Smith said that he plans to cover the entire roof with it. Wagner said that would be even better. Ponto said that the DaVinci material seems promising, but he did not feel the Commission has quite enough information yet to approve it. He said he is not necessarily skeptical, but he is just not confident, given the available information. Swaim asked if the little points up on the ends will be in place. Smith said he did not intend to. He said he planned to just use the regular hidden ridge shingles, which would have been part of the original wood roof. Michaud said that she walked around the building and noticed the flare around the edge. She said that flare would need to be maintained. Smith said that the flare would be maintained. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:56 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s/pcd/mins/hpG2008/hpc 11-3-08.doc C 0 .N ~_ E .a O v U c ~ 0 00 a~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ G1 'C fp C L y~i a Q `o N X X X X X X X X X ; rn o ~ X ~ X X X ~ X O ~ X X X X ~ p X X X ~ 0 ~ X X X ~ X X X O X O O X ' ; x X X X X X x o X N X X ~ X X X ~ X Q X n ; ; ; X X o o X X X O X N X X w X X X w w X w ; ~ O O O O X X X X O X O O X X °° o X X X O X X x X X ° X W o ; W 0 X X X W 0 W 0 X X ' M X o X X X O X ; X X X ~ N ~ ; X w o X X X X w O ; w o` w o ; X X X X O X X x ! X X ; o .- ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ o H W N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M N M ~ ~ ~ C = • Y 'C ~ ~. y L C ~ ~ y ~c ~ c 3 ~ ~ t O c ~ !. ~ ~ o d E ~ • m m y m` o° w' o ~ a °O a i i= ~ i= 3 y ~ '~ N N 7 U X W ~. c c ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ N ~ II 11 W YXOO IP10 MINUTES DRAFT Iowa City Airport Commission October 30, 2008 Iowa City Airport Terminal - 5:45 PM Members Present: Greg Farris; Randy Hartwig; Janelle Rettig; John Staley, Members Absent: Howard Horan Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Others Present: Phillip Woolford, Harrel Timmons, Tim Busch, Randy Hartman, Dan Yeager, John Ockenfels DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 5:50 P.M. by Chairperson Farris. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: Airport Traffic Pattern -Proposed Right Traffic Patterns Listening Post -Farris opened the meeting and asked for public input regarding the change of traffic pattern proposals. Ockenfels asked for a summary of events that initiated a review of the patterns. Rettig responded that this was originally a request generated by pilots using the University of Iowa helipad during a previous discussion about the operations of the crop-dusters. Ockenfels related areas of concern for the future development of areas west and southwest of the airport where the new patterns would concentrate traffic operations. Yeager expressed concerned regarding the information distribution of the traffic pattern changes expressing concern for making sure that charts and directories are appropriately updated. Staley arrived at 5:57pm Rettig asked for a description of what a segmented circle was and associated costs. Discussions continued regarding procedures for distributing information about the change of traffic patterns. Yeager asked the commission regarding using the automated weather equipment to record a message regarding traffic and preferred operations. Tharp and Ockenfels acknowledged that the current equipment does not have a method of recording that type of communication. Timmons comment that operationally, a change in traffic patterns would not have an impact. Members then discussed ways to get information out to the public regarding the changes. Ockenfels asked about comments from the FAA. Tharp related that he had sought comments from state and federal officials but had only received a comment from state officials. Rettig asked about the email comments. Tharp responded that he does have some comments and that a summary would be given to the airport commission as these discussions progress. Farris asked for any other public comments, hearing none closed the listening post. Rettig motioned to adjourn, seconded by Hartwig. Motion passed 4-0 Iowa City Airport Commission October 30, 2008 Page 2 of 3 ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 6:18 P.M. CHAIRPERSON DATE Iowa City Airport Commission October 30, 2008 Page 3 of 3 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2008 (Meetinu Datesl NAME TERM EXP. 1/10 2/14 3/6 3/13 4/10 4/28 5/8 5/22 6/9 6/13 7/10 7/24 Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X X X X X O/E X X Meeting cancelled Greg Farris 3/1/13 X X X X X X X X X X X Meeting cancelled John Staley 3/1/10 X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X Meeting cancelled Howard Horan 3/1/14 X X --- X X X X X X X X Meeting cancelled Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 X X X X X X X O/E X X X Meeting cancelled ~coNT.~ TERM. EXP. 8/14 9/11 10/1 10/30 Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X X Greg Farris 3/1/13 O/E X X X John Staley 3/1/10 X X X X Howard Horan 3/1/14 X X X O/E Janelle Rettig 3/1/12 X X X X KEY: X =Present O =Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member