Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-12-09 Info Packet I:: 1 !~~~'I: -...;:;:....._"".~ CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET .....,... ... December 9, 2004 CiTY OF IOWA CiTY www.icgov.org I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS I IP1 City Council Meetings and Work Session Agendas IP2 Letter from Mayor Lehman to various cities in Iowa: Community Problems Relating to the Abuse of Alcohol IP3 Memorandum from the Director of Planning and Community Development: Near Southside Redevelopment Plan Update IP4 Memorandum from Director of JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planning: Pedestrian Crossing of Burlington Street IPS Minutes [Final] Deer Task Force: November 17, 2004 I PRELIMINARY DRAFT/MINUTES I IP6 Charter Review Commission: December 1, 2004 IP7 Deer Task Force: December 2, 2004 IPS Planning and Zoning Commission: December 2, 2004 Ipg Housing and Community Development Commission: November 18, 2004 I ~ J em --= -~!t ~~~~!: City Council Meeting Schedule and '""~-=.~ ---- .......... Work Session Agendas December 8, 2004 CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org . TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14 Emma J. Harvat Hall 8:00a-10:00a Special Council Work Session Legislative Priorities I TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS I . MONDAY, DECEMBER 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session Cancelled . TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Formal Council Meeting Cancelled . MONDAY, JANUARY 3 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Regular Work Session . TUESDAY, JANUARY 4 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal . THURSDAY, JANUARY 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 8:30a-5:00p Special Budget Work Session . MONDAY, JANUARY 10 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Budget Work Session Board/Commission/Organization . TUESDAY, JANUARY 11 Emma J. Harvat Hall 12:00p-7:00p Budget Work Session . MONDAY, JANUARY 17 Emma J. Harvat Hall Martin Luther King Jr. Day Holiday - City Offices Closed . TUESDAY, JANUARY 18 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBA Special Work Session 7:00p Regular Formal . TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall Regular Formal . TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15 Emma J. Harvat Hall Regular Formal . TUESDAY, MARCH 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall Regular Formal Meeting dates/timesltopics subject to change FUTURE WORK SESSION ITEMS Regulation of Downtown Dumpsters I ~ J crw ~~~~*I: 'S~ ~"'~ CITY OF IOWA CITY WWW.lcgOY.Org CITY COUNCIL December 8, 2004 Ernest W. Lehman Mayor City of Ames Ross Wilburn Mayor Ted Tedesco PO Box 811 Mayor Pro Tem Ames, IA 50010 Regenia Bailey Connie Cbampion Bob Elliott Dear Mayor Tedesco: .~ike O'Donnell ee Vanderboef As Mayor of a city with a large university, one of our most significant community problems is the abuse of alcohol. Underage drinking, binge drinking, and the related criminal activities that, all to often occur, are issues of a community wide concern. As a Mayor of an Iowa city where a college or university is located, we are anxious to learn of any initiatives to address these issues by other Iowa college communities. For example, we plan a review of our recent initiative, that is prohibiting anyone under the age of 19 after 10:00 p.rn. in liquor establishments. We are also suggesting to our area State legislators an increase in State alcohol fines, in that the current schedule of fines does not appear to act as a deterrent. We would appreciate knowing whether your community has tried any local initiatives and whether you view it as a success or failure. Recognizing that each community will view this issue differently, we are hoping we can glean from other college communities throughout Iowa how they have chosen to address the abuse of alcohol notably by young people. Thank you for taking the time. Please feel free to call or drop me a note with any suggestions. Sincerely, ~ /d. Ernest W. Lehman Mayor council@iowa-city.org 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 mgr/ltrsJalc-initiatives.doc Phone: (319)356-5010 Fax: (319) 356-5009 City of Ames City of Grinnell Mayor Ted Tedesco Mayor Gordan Canfield City of Calmar City of Indianola Mayor Joe McCasland Mayor Jerry Kelley City of Cedar Falls City of Lamoni Mayor Jon Crews Mayor Jim Hammer City of Cedar Rapids City of Marshalltown Mayor Paul Pate Mayor Floyd Harthun City of Clinton City of Mason City Mayor LaMetta Wynn Mayor Jean Marinos City of Council Bluffs City of Mount Vernon Mayor Thomas P. Hanasan Mayor Rick Elliott City of Creston City of Orange City Mayor Mike Tamerius Mayor Daryl Beltman City of Davenport City of Oskaloosa Mayor Charles Brooke Mayor Tom Rielly City of Decorah City of Ottumwa Mayor Vic Fye Mayor Dale Uehling City of Pella City of Des Moines Mayor Darrell Dobernecker Mayor Frank Cownie City of Sheldon Mayor Duane Wahlstrom City of Dubuque Mayor Terry Duggan City of Sioux Center Mayor Denny Walstra City of Estherville Mayor Lyle Hevern City of Sioux City Mayor Dave Ferris City of Fairfield Mayor Ed Malloy City of Storm Lake Mayor Jon Kruse City of Fayette Mayor William Dohrmann City of Waterloo Mayor Timothy Hurley City of Forest City Mayor George Wilson City of Waverly Mayor Ike Ackerman City of Fort Dodge Mayor William Patterson City of West Burlington Mayor Hans Trousil ,! 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY DEW --= -u:, ~~-ai~tt: MEMORANDUM ~~_aa.~ ....,.. ... Date: December 1 , 2004 To: C;ty Manage' and C;ty Coundl ~~ From: Karin Franklin, Director, ~ Re: Near Southside Redevelopment Plan Update After the Council discussion of the Near Souths ide Plan at their October 18th work session, there appeared to be consensus that an update or status report on the Plan was in order but that a complete revisiting of the Plan was not necessary. Please consider the following a response to the request for a status report. Part of the adopted 1992 Plan was an Action Plan, which can be found on pp. 29 and 30 of the Plan document. The action anticipated was three-pronged in its approach: 1) legislation adopting certain requirements of developers; 2) zoning incentives to influence voluntary provision of certain features; and 3) investment in public improvements. These action steps varied according to the area of the Near Souths ide being addressed. North of Court Street . A self-supporting municipal improvement district (SSMID), special assessment district, or tax increment financing district were seen as ways to generate revenue or act as catalysts to certain projects in the area such as a parking facility, streetscape improvements, pedestrian access across Burlington, and improvements to Maiden Lane. The SSMID was rejected at the time and has since proven to be a difficult tool to adopt. The Near Southside Parking Facility Impact Fee District was adopted and revenues raised have been used to fund, in part, the Court Street Transportation Center currently under construction. In 1995 improvements were made to Maiden Lane incorporating a pedestrian bridge over Ralston Creek, improved lighting and organized parking through an assessment project. Adoption of an amended urban renewal district in 2001 enabled use of tax increment financing in this area. . Establish the CB-5 zone to increase the intensity of use of land in this area. The CB-5 zone, allowing five stories of development on a lot, was adopted in 1994. . No on-site parking should be required for commercial or office uses. A limited amount of on- site parking should be permitted. The Zoning Ordinance was amended to remove required parking for commercial uses but permit parking at a ratio of one space per 500 square feet of such use. Parking requirements for residential uses was retained, however the Parking Facility Impact Fee District enabled residential uses to "buyout" their obligation for 50% of the required spaces. The purpose of these combinations of legislative measures was to optimize development of each site and shift the majority of the parking demand generated to public facilities, similar to the policy regarding parking downtown. December 1, 2004 Page 2 . Restrictions should be placed on the street level treatment of buildings with no more than 25% of the street level floor in blank wall. In the adopted CB-5 zone, design provisions are incorporated which include requirements for windows, doors or other fenestration on at least 40% of a street level wall. . Bonuses in height, FAR (floor area ratio), or type of use should be instituted to provide incentives for amenities, such as well-designed passive open spaces or setbacks. A series of bonus provisions were included in the CB-5 zone two of which provide for increases in maximum allowable floor area in exchange for increased setbacks or improved passive open space. South of Court Street . /n the RM-145 zone, a density limit should be adopted and rooming houses permitted. The PRM zone was adopted with a density limit of 49 units per acre and provision for rooming houses . The provision of some dwelling units for low and moderate-income people as defined by HUD should be pursued. An Urban Revitalization Plan that allows for tax abatement for projects incorporating low to moderate-income housing was adopted and recently renewed by the City Council. . Parking requirements should balance the need for adequate parking with the desire for high- density development in this area. The parking facility impact fee ordinance was adopted which requires 50% of the required residential parking on-site and provides for payment in lieu of the remainder of the parking requirement, with the fee to be used for public parking facilities. The Plan calls for an additional public ramp on the Federal lot block. Some property has been acquired in this block with fees collected in anticipation of construction of a ramp in the future. . Design provisions for the street level of buildings should be provided. . Density bonuses should be instituted as incentives for amenities. . Requirements and incentives for the preservation of historic structures should be evaluated. The adopted PRM zone contains provisions for building design and bonus provisions similar to the CB-5 zone. The bonus provisions address landscaping, open space, and the preservation of historic buildings. Tax abatement (above) is not allowed for any project that results in the destruction of an identified historic structure. . A streetscape improvement plan should be engineered and designed for the entire residential neighborhood. The installation of pedestrian crosswalks and other right-of-way improvements can take place at City expense, as redevelopment occurs. The feasibility of an east-west pedestrian corridor to the Iowa River should be explored with the University and the railroad. A design plan was commissioned and completed by Gould Evans Associates in December 1995. Funds were provided in the Capital Improvement Program for a number of years but were then deleted due to lack of use and budget constraints. Redevelopment in the area south of Court Street has been spotty, making public improvements concurrent with redevelopment difficult. December 1 , 2004 Page 3 An east-west pedestrian corridor to the Iowa River has been discussed with the University and was preserved during the street vacation process with the University concerning Front, Prentiss and Harrison streets near the river. . Planning and construction of a public parking facility in the Near Southside should begin immediately. The Court Street Transportation Center is under construction. We have acquired property abutting the federal lot on Harrison and Capitol streets in anticipation of construction of a parking ramp/civic plaza in the block defined by Dubuque, Harrison, Capitol and Prentiss streets at some time in the future. . Permit privately -owned vehicle storage lots in the C/-1 zone abutting the Near Southside. Our current ordinance does not permit such lots. However, in the proposed Code with its use categories, vehicle storage lots could be permitted in the CI-1 zone under the general use category of Warehouse and Freight Movement. This category includes such uses as truck terminals and taxi fleet parking, both of which are analogous in impact to storage lots. . Modification of the parking system, such as metering of on-street parking spaces, manipulation of the fee structure, and relocating permit holders, should be instituted. Management of the parking system as outlined above is on going, responding to the needs of an area and Council direction. Metered spaces were installed on Maiden Lane as part of improvements to that area. Recently in response to input from property owners, parking on S. Linn Street was reconfigured from parallel parking to angle parking and the meters were changed from 5 hours to 2 hours. PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT IN THE AREA The Near Southside Redevelopment Plan's ultimate success relies largely on action and investment on the part of the City's partner in building the community--the private sector. Since adoption of the Plan in 1992, the following major private sector projects have been accomplished: 1992 Town Centre, 307-321 S. Linn 60 units; mixed use $3,441,040 1994-96 The Brewery, 525 S. Gilbert 4 units; mixed use 792,810 1995 Cornerstone, 600 S. Capitol 32 units 2,522,120 1996 Gateway South, 205-225 Burlington 19 units; mixed use 2,472,850 1997 219 Harrison St. 6 units 602,220 1998 Iowa State Bank addtn., 325 Clinton St. comm. 1,075,670 1999 517 S. Linn St. 16 units 1,343,420 1999 Grandview Terrace, 332 S. Linn 48 units; mixed use 6,928,820 2000 522 S. Dubuque St. 5 units 875,260 2000 Security Abstract, 500 S. Dubuque St. comm. 544,970 2004 512 S. Dubuque St. 12 units 1.398.039 Total Assessed Value $20,599,180 ppddir/memos/nssupdate.doc NEAR SOUTH SIDE Redevelopment Sites Updated October 2004 IT.T-- -I-~I--~DIJIIIII~ JIl .TJ' ---I 1~lri' 17 ., Ie- 01. ~~TT'TO. I "' ~~. :='. , 1, i __ ,,' L_L-- ~. v.' . 'C' r~=zj C- " Z i3iJ w VJ 111~1 '-I ' ~ i~____J 25 L__l a [~ill- l__J~, n__u=j ~ l____-1 [3URJ~Gm~ ST ' ------ 1',- ll-I ~--1 SJ~:- .:-',',' 11,~':':':~ ill' ~l'l' --C, 1___ -' : : , " , 'f-' "~I' '! - 1 , f--- iT - , " r-- - VJ I ":21 ' ' \-=i~ '. . 1, 1 I ~>). 2--. ~, ''- 1 ~ ~1;71 1-1L 1 1,1 ~ I' ,- 1711 ~' I J r J:,,~ t-----L ' I_~ [---.--JL~- ,IT i LJ'~ - Ic~L I_IU=, I I COURT SI ,---1 '-----,1-' ~--I 1--1 r~11 in ~ I ,.1 I I ~j! I 1 Countr' I Post I F1. .' ..M I I ,. " I _I 1-1 I I coo~~ \ \ orl,ce I LJ, n ~i 11 k c-=-- I I, HARRISON ST :::1 " I i--ho I -} :--- f- r-~.., 1 c ~l~ L: ~"~ I , ~-1 ~ I 6,~ ~I g:> 7 I ~ _ . .~I~:-:" tnn~:::. -~d Oi! ,'- I [L -:-: ;0;; ',',','. I m ~ , , ,', " ::;:, j,','.'.. f---j t~L"~; ~--'I ~ cd =-1 c t:db ~, jHll1J~ ~ I Il~ I l I' l I-'r" ,I 1fT'1~ R.r l II \ 1 --~[ ~" I .! I ,:~ 1-:--: ,I _ ..-:--: : , I " I_I BOWERY S ~,"':"\'... ,.1 '~', -il' 1 I" ~,~ I~k ,.- .:,' ,01, I 21 . ! ~rTJ .1 :0.' ~~~;\.".I I. '.~' I I I ~ l~1 L~,_.:' ~J__-----j [- j ~_-YLJr 'l1I. c-- ' i \ ",\' I I 1___, L--.J L---...--J L_ I .~ ~ )~ ' 1\';\' ,I _ - - - - , - -~' r_~~cc~ "T=\t l. -. 11 ~~rl- -';;c, L_,+_~ \ ,I I' --d r-- ' I 0: I , i1---J [' LL-I~, L~,' L~.. ~ I -fS/ J' I~ :, ~ LAFAYEn- _ G I. I \, 25 Ji! I' ~~ p=iH) 'f- / /29 I I ~- '\ I I .' - II . I 7 I I ...--,1 . \~\ I~~ II "Irl I"T. i.-I, Ii! /; -j1T I " ~. \,~\~. ~ .~ l"j L-J '----.L.~ U0J-. '--' 1_" iLL~, LJ : _-/-----1'- iF 3EN'ON ST; I ~ ., j" jy 1----'" I-I~,'I rRfTTT1IB . '= '-----jl I'/!, I 1 1 1 . k?~ . ..... _! ~_ LJUiill I 11~-fJll , i KEY c::::: :: I Redevelopment site 1 . 6] Block number J"~~OO" ~ Vacated Streets ~~ !.....~... C I T Y 0 F lOW A C I T Y o;:J ~~~, MEMORANDUM Date: December 7,2004 To: City Council From: Jeff Davidson, Director, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planning ~ Re: Pedestrian crossing of Burlington Street In April you directed the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division to evaluate the safety of pedestrians crossing Burlington Street in the downtown area, This was in response to a request from a group representing persons with disabilities that had expressed concern about the amount of time available for pedestrian crossings, as well as aggressive motorists intimidating pedestrians, This study has been completed as summarized in the attached report. Using the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as a guide, we have concluded that there should be a slight increase in the pedestrian crosswalk interval at intersections between Gilbert Street and Madison Street. We evaluated the impact of doing this on vehicular traffic, and found that with some manipulation of the traffic signal at the Burlington Street/Gilbert Street intersection, vehicular traffic will continue to operate at a reasonable level in the area, As I have pointed out to you before, restricting vehicular traffic to extreme levels in the name of pedestrian safety simply creates a new set of pedestrian safety problems from overly aggressive motorists; a good balance is what is desired. We believe that our slight modification of the pedestrian crosswalk timings along with the signal modifications at BurlingtonlGilbert will result in an effective level of pedestrian safety that is consistent with federal regulations, while allowing vehicular traffic to operate along this major arterial street reasonably well, There continues to be concern about persons not understanding the operation of the WALK/FLASHING DON'T WALK portion of the pedestrian signal. The pedestrian crosswalk phase operates during both of these intervals; in fact, the majority of the crosswalk time is during the FLASHING DON'T WALK. To reinforce this, we recommend installing pedestrian countdown timers similar to the ones on Highway 6 South so that there is better understanding for pedestrians of exactly how long the pedestrian crosswalk interval is. To install pedestrian countdown timers at all six intersections has an estimated expense of $17,600, The JCCOG Transportation Planning Division also recently completed a study of enhanced pedestrian crosswalk strategies, and concluded that there was some effectiveness to the TURNING VEHICLES MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS sign in reinforcing to motorists that they must yield to a pedestrian within a marked crosswalk, We already have these signs up at one intersection in the Burlington Street corridor and we will proceed to install them at the remaining intersections between Gilbert Street and Madison Street. Unless instructed differently by the City Council, we will proceed as indicated above. Let me or JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Anissa Williams know if you have any comments or questions. cc: City Manager Director of Planning and Community Development Director of Public Works City Engineer Police Operations Captain JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Johnson County Coalition for Persons with Disabilities jccogadmlmemlburlington pedXing,doc . ~JCCOG ....,..,.... m e m 0 Date: November 30, 2004 To: Jeff Davidson, JCCOG Executive Director From: Anissa Williams, JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner {)tt' Re: Pedestrian study of Burlington Street between Madison Street and Gilbert Street This memorandum documents the findings of a pedestrian study for intersections along the Burlington Street corridor between Madison Street and Gilbert Street in Iowa City. This study was done to evaluate if the current pedestrian control is appropriate for the corridor with high volumes of pedestrian traffic, including elderly and persons with disabilities, and to clarify if the pedestrian signal gives the appropriate length of time to cross the street. Observations of pedestrian and vehicular traffic were collected in spring 2004 before the close of the spring semester, and additional traffic data was collected in late August after the Burlington StreeURalston Creek bridge reopened. The current pedestrian timings were programmed when the traffic signals were first interconnected in the mid-1990s. Existing Conditions The existing corridor is a five-lane section with two lanes for each direction of travel and a center two-way left turn lane. All intersections are signalized. Burlington Street is posted 25 mph within the study area, The study area is located on the south side of the Central Business District. This section of Burlington Street is also designated Iowa Highway 1. Plan view of the corridor is shown in Figure 1, The Average Daily Traffic count in 2003 was approximately 25,000 vehicles per day (vpd) within the study area. Pedestrian Count Data Pedestrian observations at all six intersections were done from 11 :30 a.m. -12:30 p.m. and 4:30 - 5:30 p.m. in May of 2004. These observations made note of elderly pedestrians and persons with disabilities, as shown on Table 1. The Clinton Street intersection had the highest number of pedestrians as well as elderly pedestrians. Pedestrian Signal Timing Optimization Pedestrian signal timings were evaluated usirig current standards defined in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), The MUTCD specifies a walking speed of 4 ftIsec to be used in calculating crossing times, with a slower walking speed recommended for intersections with high numbers of elderly, persons with disabilities, or children. Although the MUTCD does not specify a slower walking speed, traffic engineers in practice commonly use 3.5 ftIsecond as a standard for pedestrian crossings used by slower moving pedestrians. While our observations showed that pedestrians have adequate time to cross Burlington Street when they begin crossing with the WALK signal, the MUTCD recommends calculating the crossing time from the point at which the flashing DON'T WALK signal begins. By recalculating the pedestrian crossing times according to current MUTCD guidelines, they would increase between two and six seconds per crossing. 1 Figure 1 Plan View Burlington Street Corridor between Madison St. and Gilbert St. October 2004 --.J z =\ It;; 0 0 ~ ~ dl I (j') ~ 0.... 0::: <( Z W U ~ z m --.J --I <...? N BURLINGTON 5T 5T ~ (j') w :::> a :::> CD :::> 0 ~ ~.:~~ JCCOG r._ t: 3: 0 0 c !: G') s: OJ "'0 -I III III c: ::::J ~ c: (t) )> ~ CD UI ::J Co ::E CD ::J 'E. ~ CD UI :J ::::J ::E CD UI :J cr ::E CD UI :J ::::J ::E CD UI :J cr S" - !II 0 0 iii' CD !II 0 - !II 0 0 0 CD !II 0 0 ~ CD !II 0 0 CII CD !II 0 0 CD CD f\).., Q, OJ c: ;:I. ;:I. 2- c: ;:I. c: ;:I. c: ;:I. c: ;:I. ~ UI UI - 0 UI UI UI UI - ::::J UI UI :T UI UI - - UI UI - ... g =: CD - - ::T ::T ::::J - - ::T - 6' ::T ::T - - ::T c: - - ::T ::T ~ 6' - ::T ::T CII UI r- 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" CII 0" 0" 0" CII 0" 0" 0" 0" CD 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" 0" CD .j>.::S tn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 CII 0 - 0 0 - 0 0 CII 0 0 CD 0 0 ~ $l m c: c: c: c: - c: c: c: ~ c: c: c: c: .. c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: - c: c: c: c: (Q .... :J :J ~ :J :J :J :J CD :J :J - :J :J :J :J CD (5' ~. :J :J :J CD :J :J CD :J :J ~ :J :J :J :J .... a. a. a. a. a. a. a. - a. a. a. a. - a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. - :J 0 ...:0. CD CD Q) - - ::s ::s i enn .... 0 f\) w ...... w ...... w .j>. CJ'1 CD W .j>. ...... w f\) w f\) ...... ...... f\) f\) ...... ...... w CiJ s::: .j>. .j>. CJ'1 .j>. CJ'1 W .j>. 0 CD CD CJ'1 -..j W .j>. 0 -..j f\) ...... CD -..j -..j CJ'1 ... ::s ... (t) w .... .... 0 -. tn III ::s ! 3 .... , (t) .j>. ...... -..j CJ'1 .j>. .j>. ... U1 '" w (t) 0 n c 'C .... 3 -. (jj' 0 N f\) !II f\) 0 f\) f\) 0" m ::s CD >< tn a. iii' !:!: C" ::J (t) 0 i 0 i ::J Co CD ;::;: CD .f>. CJ'1 W .f>. .f>. .f>. CJ'1 ...... (X) -..j ...... .f>. ...... .f>. f\) CJ'1 W .f>. W W ...... .f>. o' ::s OJ CJ'1 0 OJ 0 W f\) (X) 0 w CJ'1 w (X) CJ1 .f>. VJ W 0 CJ'1 CJ1 CD f\) -..j ::::J CJ1 en 3: .f>. W Q) 0 Q, ! 'C -. 3 tn w f\) .j>. f\) f\) ...... . 0 UI ::s w 0 en 'C .... 3 . c (jj' Q) ...... 0 f\) ...... ...... 0 !II ::s 0" CD Q, a. G') -. - "'\ C" CD i :::1- en ~l .... . l... n n 0 G) . We recommend using the slower walking speed of 3.5 ft. per second at the Linn Street, Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and Madison Street intersections with Burlington Street; we recommend using the four feet per second standard at the Capitol Street and Gilbert Street intersections. The Capitol. Street location has few elderly/disabled users. The Gilbert Street intersection has the most severe vehicular traffic issues, particularly left turn movements. Assessment of Pedestrian Crossing Times In order to optimize the pedestrian crossing time and determine the overall effect on traffic, the recalculated pedestrian times were entered into traffic simulation software called Synchro. This was able to simulate existing traffic conditions and the effects of increasing the pedestrian crossing time on traffic flow. It is important for improvements made in the name of pedestrian safety to not introduce extreme levels of vehicle delay on Burlington Street, as this will create frustrated, overly aggressive motorists who will further compromise pedestrian safety. Left turn movements at Gilbert Street experience the largest increase in delay with the proposed pedestrian crossing timings. These movements are degraded to Level of Service (LOS) E and F. (Level of Service is a scale which describes traffic conditions; LOS A = no vehicular delay, LOS F = extreme congestion). The Level of Service at the Gilbert Street/Burlington Street intersection can be improved by allowing permissive left turns, which changes the LOS to Band D (good to acceptable). Permissive left turns allow left turning traffic to proceed through the intersection if there is an available gap in the oncoming traffic stream. The other five intersections in the study area already allow protected/permissive left turns. Allowing permissive left turns will decrease delay for the intersection and significantly improve left turn movements at the Gilbert Street/Burlington Street intersection. Table 2 shows the increase in vehicular delay at each intersection in the study area, based on our proposed pedestrian signal timings. Increasing the pedestrian crossing interval will result in more delay and a decrease in Level of Service for traffic along Burlington Street, but we estimate it will remain at an acceptable level. Countdown Pedestrian Timers We have determined that for some pedestrians there continues to be confusion as to the meaning of the WALK symbol and the flashing DON'T WALK symbol. The WALK symbol gives the initial time to begin crossing the street, between four and seven seconds. The majority of time to cross the street is during the flashing DON'T WALK symbol. The flashing DON'T WALK interval varies based on the walking speed and the distance to cross the street. When the flashing DON'T WALK is lit, a pedestrian should not begin to cross the street. However, based on feedback we have received, many pedestrians become confused by the flashing DON'T WALK and either rush to finish crossing the street, or think they cannot cross in time and return to their starting point. A relatively new option for pedestrian crossing signals approved in the MUTCD is the countdown pedestrian timer. These pedestrian signals will flash the remaining time in seconds to cross the street when the flashing DON'T WALK symbol is on. These have been implemented in Iowa City on Highway 6 and have had favorable response. Pedestrians are able to better judge the remaining time it takes to cross the street, which increases their comfort level. We are recommending the countdown pedestrian signals be used on multi-lane or higher speed corridors as opportunities arise. 4 ....!...... ~ 90JJr~~ sUJn} ijal a^!ss!UJJad/papa}oJd O} a6uBlj:> sawnssv . a:Wuas JO la^a1 - SOl :3.l0N 8 In:~ 8 !n;~ }aaJ}S uos!pew V l'9 V n: }aaJ}S IO}!de::> 8 n~ V Irs }aaJ}S UO}U!I::> l!) V g's V o'g }alu}s anbnqno 8 6'f:~ V 9'6 }aaJ}S UU!l .::> f:'9l ::> f:'6l }aaJ}S J.laql!~ SOl (lja^l:>as) ^Blaa SOl (lja^l:>as) Mlaa uo!pasJa}UI JnoH >lead 'W"d JnoH >lead 'W'd SUO!}!puo::> pasodoJd SUO!}!puo::> 6unS!X3 vOOl Jaqopo "JS Jjaql!9 pue "JS uoslpew UaaMJaq SUOIJ:>aSJaJuI JaaJJS uOJ6U!lJn8 a:>IJUas ~O laAa1 Z 318"1. · . "TURNING TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS" Signs Another ongoing pedestrian complaint is motorists not yielding to them when the WALK or flashing DON'T WALK symbol is lit. A high visibility crosswalk study was completed by JCCOG in summer 2004. TURNING TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS signs were installed at the Burlington Street and Clinton Street intersections as part of this study. These signs were shown to have some positive effect on pedestrian safety by reminding drivers to yield to pedestrians when they are making a turning movement. We have already planned to erect these signs at the remaining five intersections along Burlington Street downtown. These signs are allowed by the MUTCD. Conclusions and Recommendations After evaluation of the current pedestrian control, I recommend the following actions: 1. Increase the pedestrian crossing signal timings to the 3.5 ft/sec standard at the Linn Street, Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and Madison Street intersections with Burlington Street. 2. Increase the pedestrian crossing signal timings to the 4.0 ft/sec standard at the Gilbert Street and Capitol Street intersections with Burlington Street. 3. Install pedestrian countdown timers at all six intersections in the study area. The estimated cost for equipment and installation is $17,600. 4. Erect TURNING VEHICLES MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS signs at all six intersections in the study area (the Burlington Street/Clinton Street intersections already have these signs). Let me know how you would like to proceed. jccogtp/mem/ped study-burtdoc 6 ~ MINUTES APPROVED DEER TASK FORCE MEETING November 17, 2004 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM--CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Farrant, Alan Nagel, Harold Goff, Pete Sidwell, Marty Jones, Linda Dykstra MEMBERS ABSENT: Jan Ashman, Peter Jochimsen STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Kathi Johansen OTHERS: Tim Thompson (IDNR), Greg Harris (IDNR), Vanessa Miller (Press Citizen), Drew Kerr (Daily Iowan) CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Farrant called the meeting to order at 5:40 pm RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL . Affinn the Long-Tenn Deer Management Plan . Adopt the 2004-2005 Deer Management Plan APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of October 27,2004 approved with minor editing changes. MEMBERSHIP A vacancy remains open for the position of biologist/scientist. Task Force members were encouraged to continue to seek applicants for this position. DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN Farrant opened discussion to affinn the Long- Tenn Deer Management Plan and the 2004- 2005 Deer Management Plan. Farrant also updated the Task Force on the results of the Natural Resource Commission's meeting of November 10, 2004. The NRC agreed to support Iowa City's proposed deer kill with the stipulation that sharpshooting must occur after January 10, to avoid Iowa's December shotgun season, and only antlerless deer can be taken. Harris commented that it doesn't look like sharpshooting is working very well and bow hunting should be considered. Harris continued to say the system is broken and he receives many phone calls from Iowa City residents complaining about deer. Thompson added that last week University Heights passed an ordinance to allow bow and arrow hunting. Jones also suggested looking at other alternatives to sharpshooting. He expressed concern with the inability of the current system to control population. Jones added that 1 the deer population in west Iowa City has not been reduced by sharpshootings. Also a concern is the cost effectiveness of the program. Jones suggested exploring other methods such as bow and arrow hunting but noted he is not in favor of allowing this as a sport. Jones asked if bow and arrow hunting could be allowed at a reduced level or as a pilot program. Nagel asked if the Task Force can move forward with approving the plan and hire White Buffalo, Inc. but not close discussion for bow hunting this year. Goff added that bow and arrow hunting could not be done under the current city code. Farrant mentioned if bow hunting was going to be considered for this winter the city ordinance would need to be changed. If we are going to deviate from sharpshooting the Long- Tenn Plan would need to be revisited since the only method that currently meets the criteria established in the plan is sharpshooting. The current plan reads any method can be considered as long as it meets the following criteria: 1) public safety, 2) community acceptance, 3) effectiveness in maintaining the desired number of deer. Farrant added this is a very complicated issue and if changes for bow and arrow hunting is to be considered it should be opened up to the community for discussion. Farrant expressed concern about taking steps back to the very beginning and losing 7 years of extremely hard work. Farrant distributed a handout to the Task Force to help relay what has taken an enonnous amount of effort and time to get us where we are today. A goal of the deer management plan was to arrive at a consensus about killing methods. Issues considered were cost, legality, risk to humans and humaneness. To pennit meaningful, productive discussion, it was the original consensus of the 1997-98 committee that the definition of a humane death is one that is instantaneous and painless. Farrant continued that she doesn't feel community acceptance has changed and suggested opening discussion up to listening sessions which is what was done in the past. Dykstra inquired ifthere is enough time to allow bow and arrow hunting for this winter. Sidwell added to go through the process of community acceptance would take a good deal of time and there may not be enough time to consider bow and arrow hunting for this winter. Sidwell continued that given the timing, sharpshooting is the logical thing to do this year and suggested continuing with the recommendation to hire White Buffalo, Inc. for this year but also review other options. Goff commented he feels the Long- Tenn Plan is a working document but mentioned there are different opinions on some of the interpretations of it. Goff mentioned the deer reflector system is something that should be reviewed. Farrant suggested expanding the system and has noted there is infonnation available from the Regional University Transportation Center Deer/Vehic1e Crash Infonnation Clearing House that might be helpful in expanding what we currently have in place. 2 Discussion continued regarding affinning the two plans. Goff expressed concern that on page 3 and 4 of the 2004-2005 Deer Management Plan should state 282 antlerless deer. The Task Force agreed this change should be made. Marty Jones made a motion to approve the Long-Tenn Plan and the 2004-2005 Deer Management Plan. Nagel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Jones asked if the Task Force could meet again to discuss other alternatives. Nagel also suggested meeting before December 6 to get organized and discuss other options. It was agreed to meet again prior to the City Council's December 6 Work Session. It was further agreed that the sharpshooting inquiry from Gary Brown be deferred to the next meeting along with discussion of the handouts. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. OTHER None. NEXT MEETING Thursday, December 2,2004 at 5:30 pm Lobby Conference Room ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Minutes submitted by Kathi Johansen 3 7 Q) <:J .. c ~"C ~ .. '" C ~ <:J E-- Q) ....~ =Q)"'" Q)<:JO 8=0 Q)~~ ~"C ~ = = Q) ~.... ~< '" - .. '" Q) ,.., Q) ~ t- ~ ~ ,.., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - 4: 4: ,.., ,.., "0 <1) '" t- " 00 u <=i '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :< ,- - ~v 0 ,.., ~...... ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ::E 11) U) tn 0 '" P:::<:<z ,.., ~~ ~ ~~ ~ - II II II 0 II ,.., b f::!::E ~~~~z <=i Q,I <=i '" .... e '" .... <=i ",- e r;; ~'= Q,I Q,I ~ :c <=i ~ .c::E. .... 0 0"0 u <~ ':u '" 0 ... .- z .'" ... ...;,j ~= ~~ < ~ ~ MINUTES DRAFT CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION - COMMUNITY DISCUSSION WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1,2004 - 5:30PM ROOM A, lOW A CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY Members Present: Kevin Werner, Andy Chappell, Karen Kubby, Nate Green, Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing, Lynn Rowat, and William Sueppel, Chair Members Absent: Penny Davidsen Staff Present: Marian Karr, Eleanor Dilkes OPENING REMARKS BY CHAIR: Chair Sueppel welcomed everyone to this evening's Community Discussion. He briefly explained that they would be breaking into smaller groups, with a facilitator and a scribe (both being Commission members) leading each group. He stated that each facilitator will open the discussion with dialog concerning the respective issues that the Commission has noted, but he further stated that this is everyone's meeting, and he welcomed public comment. The Charter Review Commission at a glance: · have been meeting since May 2004; · have held 19 meetings, with approximately 50 hours of discussion; · have reviewed the Charter in full three times. INTRODUCTION OF CHARTER MEMBERS: Sueppel then introduced the members of the Commission: Andy Chappell, Johnson County Assistant Attorney; Penny Davidsen, not present this evening, but keeps in touch through telephone conference; Naomi Novick, former Mayor ofIowa City and long-time activist; Nate Green, first year law student at U ofI, former President of the Student Government; Vicki Lensing, State Representative with interest in community affairs; Lynn Rowat, President of West Bank; Karen Kubby, long-time City Council Member and active in municipal affairs; Kevin Werner, Iowa State Bank; and Bill Sueppel, Chair of the Charter Review Commission. BREAK OUT INTO SMALL GROUPS: Sueppel noted that everyone's nametag has a number on it. After a head count of approximately thirty attendees, Sueppel had everyone break into four smaller groups by number. Issues to be covered by facilitators: · election of mayor at-large by the voters, versus by the Council members; · change the make-up of the Council; i.e.: (4) district seats and (3) at-large; · should voters within each district select their candidates at the primary election, and also their representative, at the City election. (TAPE OFF) Charter Review Commission December 1, 2004 Page 2 REPORTS OF SMALL GROUPS Novick started the discussion, stating that she and Chappell had an excellent discussion group. Their group discussed the election of the mayor issue. The main points noted were: · responsibilities, i.e.: does the mayor vote or not; · mayor should be someone with Council experience; · whether or not the role of the mayor should be "passed around among Council members"; · should the mayor have term limits; · if elected for a 2-year term, should the mayor be allowed a second 2-year term; · group agreed that two 2-year terms should be the limit for a mayor as a Council member. Chappell added that the consensus among their group was that the mayoral position should remain selected by the seven City Council members, as it currently stands. He noted that there were concerns about having this position be a directly elected one, namely with concerns over the power this position would have. Werner next discussed the group that he and Green led (Attachment # 1). He stated that one of their group participants, in regards to the mayor being directly elected, asked why they would change this process if the duties or powers of the mayor will not change. Some main issues in this group: · more democratic to have a directly-elected mayor; · citizens at-large would have their say as to who the mayor should be; · name recognition - does that make for a "strong" mayor; · experience needed; · leadership; · expectations when elected by citizens at-large, with no change in duties; · directly-electing mayor is more connection with citizens; · representation; · money spent on elections - running for mayor vs. a council seat. Next, Rowat and Lensing (Attachment # 2) reported on their group's discussion. Lensing noted that their main issues were: · role of the mayor - ceremonial vs. strong mayor; · consensus was: if duties of mayor remain the same, then so should the system; · options the group discussed: do nothing; entertain the idea of term limits; or look at changing the role and responsibilities of the mayor, which would then open the possibility of also changing the way the mayor is elected; The final group to report was Kubby and Sueppel. Sueppel stated that they also had a good discussion, and that their points were: · why have an election at-large if powers do not change; · strong mayor form of government discussed at length; · city manager role with a strong mayor; Charter Review Commission December I, 2004 Page 3 · cooperative city council vs. a political contentious council; · "with a weak mayor, a general election makes no sense"; "voter turnout would increase if we had an election of a mayor"; "it works, why change it"; "we wouldn't have had an Eric Shaw issue if we had elected a mayor at-large, rather than someone who would have given a different turn on the issue than the city did at the time"; · qualifications and experience. The second issue, of districts, was discussed next. Novick started this discussion with their group's main points: · nominations from districts vs. at-large; · when elected at-large, does a representative feel they are representing their district; · is a district representative more aware of district issues, and more apt to bring them to the council; · neighborhood associations - role in community; · (4) districts vs. (3) - not a majority consensus to change; · district representatives be elected by district voters only. Werner noted that their group's points on this were: · to be able to care about your district, as well as the entire community; · when candidates run in their districts, they run for a third ofthe town, but then have to run in the entire community in the general election, and the ensuing confusion this causes; · getting more information to the voters on who they are voting for; · size of districts - redistrict after the census; · shape of districts - how does this effect the community; · qualified and good leadership in council - help or hurt with change in districts. Green added that there was a consensus in their groups that the four districts, versus three districts, did not matter either way. Lensing noted that their group also spent a lot of time talking about the confusion of the current system, as well as: · desire for effective leadership; · how the city has changed in the last 30 years - population growth and change; · consensus of group: more districts are needed, with a (4) district and (3) at-large seats; · discussed making the council larger, but after discussion, seven is a better number; · being elected by districts vs. at-large; · disenfranchising voters by not allowing them to vote for everyone. Sueppel noted that their group consensus appears to be the opposite. Their issues were: Charter Review Commission December 1,2004 Page 4 · consensus of group was to stay with (3) districts and (4) at-large, but they want the district people to be elected by the voters within each district; · confusion of not knowing district representatives; · cheaper to run for district vs. all at-large; · discussed having as many districts as possible, but not more than (7); however, as the discussion continued, people were more concerned about electing the people from within their district vs. the number elected. Sueppel then asked if anyone on the Commission had any issues they wished to raise. He then asked the Commission members to write up the notes they took during their group discussions, and to bring them to the next Commission meeting. LARGE DISCUSSION OF CHARTER: Sueppel opened up the floor to the public, asking that anyone who wishes to address the Commission needs to come forward to the microphone. Don Anciaux, 2119 Russell Drive, thanked the Commission for their work on the Charter Review. He feels the Council representation would be better served being at-large 1, at- large 2, at-large 3, and at-large 4. Sueppel asked for clarification on this system. Caroline Dieterle rose next, and stated that she is particularly interested in Section 2.08 Appointments made by Council, and Sections 4.04, Duties of the City Manager. She stated that three summers ago she helped to circulate a petition, asking for amendments to the Charter, and that one of these amendments being asked for was to have the City Council appoint the Chief of Police. She would like to see this inserted in Section 2.08. She said they had at least 1,600 signatures on this petition, and there was widespread support for this. Under the Duties of City Manager, she noted that point 3, under 4.04, "appoint the Chief of the Police Department and the Chief of the Fire Department with the approval of the City Council." She asked why this was underlined in the new version of the Charter, to which Sueppel noted that this is new. Kubby noted that this is a clarification in the current process. Dieterle stated that she feels the Council should appoint the Chief of Police, not the City Manager. Her other concern is the remark made at the beginning ofthis meeting, in reference to Section 8.01, Item C. She asked about this section, and if the number of signatures has changed. Sueppel noted that this is the Iowa Code, and not a change by the Commission. Her next concern centered around the "right to petition" issue. Sueppel asked Dilkes for clarification on this issue. Dilkes stated that the State Code provides that objections can be filed to a petition to amend the Charter, and that those objections will be reviewed by a committee, made up ofthe mayor, the clerk, and another council member, to hear those objections. Those provisions come from Section 362.4. Dieterle stated that she feels the Commission should make some representation to the State that this deludes the redress that the citizens have, as it means it is much easier for the city government to keep something from being voted on that has been petitioned for validly. One of the main points of these petitions was that the citizens wanted the Chief of Police to be appointed by the Council. Charter Review Commission December 1, 2004 Page 5 Tom Carsner stated that he wanted to echo some of the issues they discussed in his group, as well as to offer an apology to anyone ifhe steps on toes. He stated that the election of the mayor does have a direct impact on the powers of the mayor. He feels we need to change the Charter to a "strong mayor" form of government. (TAPE ENDS) He feels that the low salaries paid to the City Council members eliminates many people from considering these positions, due to the time commitment. He feels the counselors should receive a part-time salary, somewhere in the range of $20,000-$30,000, in order to allow these people to give more of their time. He does not like the City Manager position being relied upon so heavily. He feels citizens would give more input if the council members were responding more directly to them. Sueppel asked him what he considers a strong mayor form of government. Carsner stated that it would be one where that person is elected directly by the citizens, and that powers which currently reside with the city manager would come to this position, as well. Dean Thornberry stated that he disagrees with the previous speaker. He thinks the current form of government is fine. Jay Honohan, 1510 Somerset Lane, stated that under 7.01 B Limitations, the new item, K, being added, he suggested the words "capital improvements" rather than "public improvements". He stated that he is also strongly in favor of the current form of government, and that it works well in this community. He also noted that the language, concerning the Chief of Police and Chief of the Fire Department, is excellent, and he agrees with this. He further noted that the City Council has always been a part of this process, and the language now shows that. He finished with thanking the Commission for their hard work. John Balmer, 10 Princeton Court, next addressed the Commission. He thanked the Commission for a very thorough discussion on the Charter. He stated that he would also endorse the current form of government. He does strongly encourage term limitations for the mayoral position. Kubby asked ifhe had any specific ideas on limits, to which Balmer replied that he feels two terms should be it. Under Section 7.03, Eligibility, he asked if the Commission has discussed "raising this bar" or not, as he feels this number should be higher as it is too easy to obtain signatures. Sueppel stated that they have had discussion on this, and two issues were raised. One is that on an initiative and referendum petition, you must be a qualified voter, versus an eligible voter; and that this is a limitation. Secondly, 25% is a fairly substantial number, and Kubby noted that the average would have been around 2,200, so the 2,500 is actually above this. Sueppel noted again that these have to be qualified voters at the courthouse, or they do not count. John Neff from Iowa City stated that he would like to reemphasize that the city has doubled in size in the last 30 years, and there is a much wider range of incomes now. He feels they may need to make some adjustments because of this. One would be to increase the number of districts, and he feels that four should be the minimum. He would also like to see the council playa much more active role. He states that the power has shifted from the council to the city manager way too far, and there needs to be a balance. Charter Review Commission December I, 2004 Page 6 Garry Klein next spoke to the Commission. He thanked the Commission, and noted that the small groups concept was a good idea. He stated that he agrees with John earlier, that each district should vote for the representative in their district. He noted that this would simplify the voting process, in his opinion. Some clarification was made on how this process is currently. Dieterle stated that she had a question concerning Section 7.01, D. She asked the Commission if they could give her an example of what subject would be appropriate for an initiative and referendum. Kubby stated that one example she can think of is a pesticide ordinance. She noted that this would be an issue-oriented ordinance, if it were not preempted, for instance. The First Avenue project was used as an example. Dieterle then asked which boards and commissions are mandated by the State. She noted that under this Section, it states the Council. Sueppel noted that Planning and Zoning, Board of Adjustment, Civil Service, and Library would be examples. Dieterle questioned the Commission on whether or not it would be possible, under Boards and Commissions, that the City would have to have a board of Police Review, and give it some real power. Sueppel stated that he believes this could be done. Dieterle requested that the Commission consider adding this to the Charter. Sueppel stated that they would have to defer to the City Attorney, and the Commission will find out about a Police Review Board. Carrie Watson stated that she would agree with Tom Carsner, who spoke earlier. She feels there needs to be more responsiveness to the electorate in Iowa City, and her question for the Commission is how seriously are they looking at changing the actual structure of the City to a strong mayor. Chappell noted that their small group focused on the issue as it was written - the idea of having a mayor elected by the council versus a weaker mayor, elected by the electorate. Dale Shultz spoke next, and stated that he supports the idea of electing district council members, only from those who live in those districts. He feels this is a good idea as it makes the election smaller, and more accessible, especially for new candidates. Ann Bovbjerg, Iowa City, asked the Commission if they have received anything from the citizens in Iowa City, or from the City government or its different division, that has suggested any specific changes that are desired. Chappell stated that some of the changes in the latest "red lined" version of the Charter are reflective of comments they have heard from the public. He noted that staff has only brought up issues needing clarification. Kubby noted that this is mainly in the initiative and referendum section, in order to make it more clear for people. Sueppel noted that there have not been any major issues brought up. Dale Shultz spoke again and asked about Section 7.01 B - Limitation on initiatives and referendums. He asked about the statement "or notice to bidders" and asked for clarification. Sueppel noted that they were coming up with two different cut-off points. Discussion continued on the process with bidding and letting of contracts. Kubby Charter Review Commission December 1, 2004 Page 7 followed up with telling the attendees that the Commission will be reviewing all of tonight's information, suggestions, comments, etc., and that those who signed up this evening will be getting a personal invitation to the next public hearing. Sueppel noted that meetings are scheduled for December 8, from 7-9:30 AM; December 13, from 7-9:30 AM; and then tentatively there will be another public hearing on January 20 at 7:00 PM at City Hall. ATTACHMENT # 1 (page 1 of 2) (Flipchart for Werner/Green group) Mayor No change in duties- why have the Mayor elected separately? This would create confusion with voters. Directly elected Mayor would be more democratic. A candidate may have name recognition with our citizens; however, this person may not be best qualified to be Mayor. Experience and leadership were discussed. Separate election creates expectations for the Mayor. With no changes in duties this would create voter confusion. Directly elected Mayor would have more connection to citizens. More money spent on elections. May eliminate some candidates due to financial resource limitations. Since the Mayor represents the City, citizens should elect. Selection behind the scenes. Want the process more public. Try with a sunset clause. Trust people to vote, take part in elections and elect the Mayor. ATTACHMENT # 1 (page 2 of 2) (Flipchart for Werner/Green group) District Seats Care about districts as well as entire community. Current system is best of both worlds. What is the most important issue facing our community? Depending where voters live the answer will vary. Need district representation. Candidates run primary campaign in 1/3rd of City. General election candidates need to reach entire community. Not fair to voters who need education on the candidate as they are expected to vote. Confusion for voters. Confusion - I can't vote for you because you are not in my district. Size of districts. Redistrict after census. 2.02 Make this a requirement. Current system is hard to understand. Shape of districts. Don't want districts to override City. Keeping the best interest of our community in mind. Difficulty in recruiting good City Council candidates to run. Voting systems. Vote for too may candidates. Election by district only to avoid confusion. How are the districts drawn? ATTACHMENT # 2 (page 1 of 2) (Flipchart for RowaULensing group) Election of Mayor More costly campaigns Disadvantage to those who cannot raise contributions More conflict - power perspective Directly elected by people - more democratic If duties stay the same, keep current process Term limits for mayoral position Opportunity for all Council Members What is role of Mayor? Ceremonial - equal among Council OR More power/responsibilities Stronger role for Mayor - change election process Roles of Council/Mayor/City Manager Council elected Mayor - not necessarily best person Directly elected Mayor - not necessarily best person Is there community sentiment for a strong mayor? Philosophical vs. pragmatic Concern is lack of effective leadership Currently - Council Time spent reacting vs. being proactive Choices: - do nothing - keep with term limits - change rolelresponsibilities and way of electing ATTACHMENT # 2 (page 2 of 2) (Flipchart for RowaULensing group) District Structure Current mix works - current city size supports Citywide voting for all seats Minimum of 4 districts All districts (w/strong Mayor) Disenfranchised voter if not allowed to vote for all seats Geographic districts have specific issues Within special districts Social interests Economic interests District issues vs. City-wide issues More districts needed - forces one to know your district Overall viewing of city vs. district viewpoint Full time job @ part-time pay More districts needed (4 districts/3 at large) Vote by entire community not just district Election confusion - more time spent on educating public than discussing issues Population increases economic/income differences More districts would help District-wide election More representative of district Less $, less signs Smaller population base to represent Council size of 7 - probably appropriate District issues or geographic distribution Cc:CharterReviewCommission/communityattachment rnJ MINUTES DRAFT DEER TASK FORCE MEETING December 2, 2004 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM--CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Farrant, Alan Nagel, Harold Goff, Pete Sidwell, Marty Jones, Jan Ashman, Peter Jochimsen MEMBERS ABSENT: Linda Dykstra STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Kathi Johansen OTHERS: Tim Thompson (IDNR) CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Farrant called the meeting to order at 5:37 pm RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL . None APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and passed unanimously to approve the minutes of the November 17, 2004 meeting with an editing change on page 2. MEMBERSHIP A vacancy remains open for the position of biologist/scientist. Task Force members were encouraged to continue to seek applicants for this position. MEETING PROCESS AND PROTOCOL Chairperson Farrant called the meeting to order at 5:37 p.m. A review of meeting process and protocol was presented by Farrant. Task Force members were reminded to keep individual floor time to a reasonable limit and to respect one another's right to be heard. Task Force members along with City staff will be seated at the table. Anyone else in attendance will be seated in the chairs placed along the wall or in the "audience". There is an opportunity for community comment later in the meeting and these individuals will be addressed at that time. Nagel suggested placing a time slot to each agenda item which will be considered for future discussion. It was further agreed the Task Force would try to maintain their meetings to an hour and a half in length with meetings commencing at 5:45 p.m. and ending at 7:15 p.m. (Sue Dulek will review time specification). Farrant thanked Dulek for her memo to the Task Force dated 11/23/2004 containing information on past resolutions and additional background information regarding the authority and duties of the Deer Task Force. 1 DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN Farrant stated the Council is set to consider the 2004-2005 Plan as submitted. Nagel commented that information within the 2004-2005 report needs to be reviewed. For example, Nagel asked if the City is continuing to provide information to the community regarding deer management. Farrant and Ashman both mentioned information obtained in the early years of the Task Force was made available to the public but now there is even more information available and agreed research will need to be done so this is provided to the community as well. Sidwell suggested following up on the production of the video regarding deer-traffic issues. Farrant agreed the report should be reviewed and tightened up. Task Force members wish to convey to the City Council that the work of the Task Force this year has been compressed into a relatively short timeframe and currently Task Force members are actively engaged in reviewing the 2004-2005 Deer Management Report and will thoroughly consider all population management options. At this time it was agreed there will be no amendments to the Long-Term Plan or the 2004-2005 Deer Management Plan. SHARPSHOOTING The inquiry received from Gary Brown was discussed. Nagel asked what criteria was used and what information was requested from White Buffalo. Farrant said three sharpshooting companies gave presentations to the Task Force. Descriptive materials, background training and references were provided. Ashman said she recalls White Buffalo, Inc. as being the obvious choice. Nagel asked about insurance requirements and it was stated that a certificate of insurance is required. The Task Force asked Johansen to contact Mr. Brown and request further documentation. OTHER METHODS OF DEER KILL Farrant asked for discussion of other methods of deer kill. Jochimsen commented that nothing is as successful as shooting. Goff suggested gathering more material. See what is going on in other communities and around the country. What controls are being used? Goff continued that he would like to see Council rewrite the City Code to include bow and arrow hunting much like they did with sharpshooting. Ashman said one of the things the Task Force needs to consider is how they want these animals to die. Jones commented he considered it inhumane for an animal to be hit and killed by a car. Ashman replied if given the choice between getting hit by a car and sharpshooting she would choose sharpshooting. Jones said certain areas of Iowa City you cannot sharpshoot but you can bow and arrow hunt. Ashman questioned why deer should have to die differently just because they live in different areas. Nagel suggested discussing bow hunting in detail and discussing data. Each preference and opinion is different. We need to think practicality. Sharpshooting is expensive. Perhaps we can supplement sharpshooting. 2 Discussion continued on the subject of humaneness and how it was derived. Sidwell commented that humaneness IS part of what we are doing. Sharpshooting is most humane. We need to determine if bow and arrow hunting is a part of that. We need to have a clear idea of what we mean by humane. Farrant explained there was an enormous amount of discussion about humaneness and it was a reasonable consensus that the killing must be humane. Farrant suggested that community perception mayor may not have changed. Perhaps it's time to open it up to the public again. Nagel said after 7 years maybe it is time to do it again. Maybe attitudes have changed. Sidwell added that the majority of the community understood something needed to be done they just needed to determine what was the best way to do it. Goff asked what the basis is from years past that seems a large part of the community considers bow hunting inhumane? Farrant said they had to come to some kind of agreement about how they were going to reduce the deer herd and that sharpshooting would be a quicker method of killing than with an arrow thus making it more humane. Jochimsen commented that currently there are no professional bow hunters out there and effectively reducing the herd is limited. That means we would open this up to the public and take the risk of having arrows sprayed all over. Nagel said he spoke with the City of Coralville and they had a half a dozen complaints and they were all resolved. Nagel asked that we obtain complaints issued to the Police departments of other cities for review. Farrant stated when reviewing any reports received we need to always consider the source. In the beginning favorable reports on bow hunting were funded by archery industry interests. Discussion continued with what the requirements are for bow hunters and Goff suggested everyone gather data to distribute and discuss at the next meeting. It was agreed the conversation on bow hunting and the consideration of other methods of deer management will be suspended until the next meeting. DISCUSSION OF HANDOUTS The October newsletter from White Buffalo, Inc. was reviewed along with information on solar powered deer reflectors. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM - LARRY STONE Johansen reported the education program by Larry Stone, Whitetail Deer: Treasure, Trophy or Trouble?, can be held on March 21 or 28, 2005. The Task Force agreed March 28, 2005 would be the best date to avoid Spring Break. This has been tentatively scheduled at Parkview Church located at 15 Foster Road, Iowa City. The program is expected to begin at 7:00 p.m. and will be approx. one hour in length. This is dependent upon confirmation with Larry Stone. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 3 OTHER Nagel recommended updating the 2004-2005 Report at the next meeting. Goff suggested reducing the report to 8-10 pages and including much of the history in an appendix. Farrant suggested dividing the report up among Task Force members for review. This will be done at the next Task Force meeting. Jochimsen provided an article regarding deer spreading disease and destroying forests and an article from the Gazette regarding highway hazards resulting from animal collisions. Nagel also provided a handout pertaining to the City of Coralville Deer Hunt and additional handouts were given to Johansen to be included in the next Task Force agenda packet. Johansen mentioned Misha Goodman would be a good resource to evaluate the deer reflector system the City currently has in place. Goodman previously expressed interest in attending a Task Force meeting to discuss the operation and maintenance of the reflectors. Task Force members agreed it would be helpful to have Goodman attend a meeting in the future to provide information on the care and maintenance of the system. Johansen will contact Goodman to make the arrangement. Goff asked Dulek for clarification on her memo regarding special hunts, special meetings and the discharge of firearms. Goff's concerns were addressed and clarifications were made. NEXT MEETING Tuesday, January 18, 2005 at 5:45 pm Lobby Conference Room ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn was made by Nagel and seconded by Jochimsen. Meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Minutes submitted by Kathi Johansen 4 on Q) (J ... 0 LL"C ~ .... I1J 0 1'0 U 1-(1) _0:::: 1::(I)"'I:t Q)UO Ec:o Q)CUN 00 .... tn"C - .... 1'0 c: I:: (I) 1'0- :E<C ..... ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ~ ... .... Q) Q) C r- ~ ~ .... :>< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ .... .... ." " '" r- " Of) u >= ..... ~:>< ~~ ~~ ~:>< >< ,~ - ~'iJ = --.....-(1) .... 5 5 'E :::s ~ tf:I ~ 0 ..... P::<:<z .... ~:>< ~~ ~~ - II II II = II .... ;,:, ~~ ~~<~ = ... >= '" .... S '" .... = ",- S ~ f:t:: ... ... ~ :E = ~ -=~ .... = ="0 '" OJ <~ ~'" ..., .~ z = .00 ..., ...;J ~= ~~ -<i ~ MINUTES DRAF~ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 2, 2004 IP8 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Don Anciaux, Benjamin Chait, Jerry Hansen MEMBERS EXCUSED: Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Mitch Behr, Steve Nasby RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-0, the amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan, as proposed. CALL TO ORDER: Anciaux called the meeting to order at 7:32 pm. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None URBAN RENEWAL ITEM: Discussion of the proposed amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan. Miklo said that Steve Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator was present to discuss this matter. Nasby said the Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Area was originally adopted by the City Council in 1999 and noted that "Urban Renewal" is essentially a TIF district. He said that Southgate Development owns land north of Northgate Drive and requested that the City consider adding it to the existing Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Area. Nasby noted that staff and the Council Economic Development Committee looked at this amendment as a proactive approach by getting an economic development tool in place to facilitate the continued development of the Northgate Corporate Park Area. Nasby said that the proposed additions to the Urban Renewal Project Area would include the Weiler parcel (approximately 12 acres), the Jones/Southgate Development Company Parcel (approximately 34 acres) and the Fuhrmeister Parcel (approximately 2 acres). The intent of the Council Economic Development Committee and supported by staff was to extend the area from the Southgate parcel to Highway 1 as there had been conversations with Weiler about development. Nasby also said that in the long-term future of the area Oakdale Boulevard was expected to eventually clip the northeast corner of the Southgate parcel. Freerks asked if staff had had several discussions with the property owners. Nasby said that Southgate had made the request to add their property, but no discussions with the other two property owners had taken place yet. Staff would make the appropriate notifications to the property owners and because two of the parcels were currently used for agricultural purposes, the City would need the owners to sign agreements for including land that is currently in agricultural use. Hansen asked about the current zoning. Miklo said that the parcels were currently zoned Interim Development. Hansen asked why rezoning did not come before the TIF. Nasby indicated that the owner was considering requesting CO-1 of ORDP zoning for the property. Either were compatible with the TIF. Hansen asked what was the Commission's preview for this type of mandated review and comment. Miklo said to decide if the proposed lands in the Urban Renewal Plan met the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Behr read the charge to the Planning and Zoning Commission from the State Code. Hansen asked how much of the City was in a TIF district. Nasby said it is about 1.13%. He said Coralville is 33%. Tiffin is 54% and the County is about 12%. Anciaux opened public discussion. There was none. Public discussion was closed. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve the amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan, as proposed. Koppes seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes December 2, 2004 Page 2 Freerks said she felt the proposed amended Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal Plan met the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as outlined in the Introduction section on page 3 of the amended Plan. She said that the City may need to use tools such as this to be competitive with other communities. Koppes agreed. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. OTHER ITEMS: Hansen brought in an article regarding Portland, OR. Miklo will make copies of the article and this item will be discussed at the next Commission meeting. CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 4.2004 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Brooks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Hansen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:50 pm. Chait seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:lpcd/mi nutes/p&zl2004/2004-12...o2-04 .doc '" :><~ ~x :><:>< :><:>< - 0 ... ~x :><:>< :><:>< :><:>< - ax :>< :><:>< :><:><~ <:0 0 - ,.... ~~ :><:>< :><:>< :><:>< - ~ ~x :>< :><:>< :><:><:>< <:0 '" '" ~x :>< :>< 0 0:><:>< <:0 = ... '" c ;;ax :>< 0 :>< 0 :><:>< .... <:0 '" '" .... .,., == ~ :><:>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< co == <:0 C U .,., ~ "C ~ ~x :>< 0 :>< :>< :><:>< Z ~ 10. Z <:0 .... = c E-< C.I .... .... E-< - ~ co = Q,I ~ ~ :>< :>< 0 :>< '" :><:>< - :><~ 0:>< :>< :><~ ~ 0 ~ - 0 ,.... - 0 0 N ~ <:0 ~ - Q,I ~ ~ ~ C.I 0 ,.... ~ - = <:) ~ - ~ :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< ~ :><~ :><:>< :>< :><:>< ~~ M ;<; 0 - 0 <:0 ~ - ="C ~ .... = ... co = Q,I ~ :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< 0 - :><:>< 0:>< :>< :><~ = - - 0 ~ <:0 0 ~ - <:0 .... - - < .... z ~ <:0 .... ... ~:>< '" '" :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< <:0 0 :>< :><:>< ~ it; 0 0 0 - <:0 - .... u ~ '" ~ ~ :>< :>< 0 :>< :>< :><:>< ~ :><:>< 0:>< :>< :><:>< .,., ~ <:0 <:0 0 co .... .,., :><~ '" '" ~ :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< '" :><:>< 0 :><:>< ... 0 ;<; 0 0 <:0 <:0 - ... '" ~ :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< ~ :><:>< 0 :>< :><:>< ... ~ 0 <:0 <:0 ... '" ,.... '" ~ :>< :>< :>< 0 :>< :><:>< - :><:>< :>< 0 :>< :><:>< ... on <:0 <:0 ~ '" - '" - :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< ~ :><:>< 0 :>< :><:>< N 0 ... 0 <:0 <:0 on '" :><~ S :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :><:>< ~ :>< :>< :>< :><:>< - 0 <:0 <:0 00 '" '" '" co '" ,.... co q "'''' '" 00 '" t- 00 E ~ " '9 S2 0 S2 S2 S2 ~~ S2S2 S2 0 S2 S2!2 '0 '" ;:r; '" '" '" '" '" ~ '" '" '" '" ;:r; '" '" '" " f-- '" 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 00 ;g ~ '" '" ~ ~'E ~ .p tU ~......~~:::E '" " '" ~ " EE5:E~ " ~ ~ " ~ 0 ;~ " ~ 0 ~$$oo " ~ ... '" ~ ~ ~ ... '" ~ ~ '" 0 .; '" a .- 0 .; '" ~ 6:<<ZZ f '" " 0 '" " " " .c ... " ~~ ~ " ... .c ... " ~~ .. II II II II II ~ < 0= U ... = <0= U ... = ~ ~~ 1 Z ~ = = ..: ...; o.J~ z ~= = ..: ...; o.J~ ~:><ooz: MINUTES PRELIMINARY ~ HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION NOVEMBER 18, 2004 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Lori Bears, William Greazel, Matthew Hayek, Brian Richman, Jerry Anthony, Jayne Sandler Members Absent: Erin Barnes, Mark Edwards, Rita Marcus Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Public Present: Charlotte Walker, Dave Dolan, Sandy Pickup Recommendation to Council MOTION: Greazel moved to recommend the CITY STEPS document, with the changes voted on, correct any typographical/minor errors, and forward to Council as written. Sandler seconded the motion. Motion carries: 6-0, CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 6:35 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 21.2004 Bears said that there is a mistake on the second page, second paragraph from bottom, instead of Bloomington Garden it should be Blooming Garden, Motion: Anthony moved to approve the October 21, 2004 minutes. Greazel seconded. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Hightshoe handed out a letter from the Chairperson of the Iowa City Charter Review Commission. The letter requests input on such issues as the election of mayor and district representation. Hightshoe stated all City commissions will be provided this letter in an effort to solicit greater public input. The meetings are open to the public. Hightshoe added that the Iowa City Community School District entered a CDBG agreement with the City regarding the Family Resource Center. SCATTERED SITE POLICY UPDATE Hayek said that the scattered site policy task force has been meeting on a biweekly basis for more than six months. He added that they took a lot of information from various groups and City staff, He mentioned that they are at the point of deliberating information. He said that they boiled down the task to four steps, First, he said they have to define concentrated assisted housing, Second, based on the definition they would have to determine if there are any concentrations in Iowa City. Third, if there are concentrations, are the effects good or bad. The last step would be, if the impacts were bad what are some possible solutions that the City should consider. He mentioned that at this point, they are still at step one. Hayek said that they hope to wrap up soon and present some findings to City Council. Sandler asked how would that impact the deliberation for the allocation process, Hayek answered that at best the task force will forward recommendations to the City in late January, and the Council will have to deliberate and decide what they want to do, He mentioned that he doesn't believe that there will be any new policy that will affect the next round, Richman asked if there is no policy in place, can it still be in the application materials, Hayek mentioned that that is an issue that will be discussed under a separate, upcoming agenda item, PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED 2006-2010 CONSOLIDATED PLAN- RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Walker asked what impact the commission has on the writing of CITY STEPS. Hayek answered that every five years a Consolidated Plan is required, (The City calls the Consolidated Plan, CITY STEPS.) He said that most of the commission members are appointed for three-year terms, For many, this is their Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 2 first experience with the process. He said the commission reviews the plan, drafted by staff, listens and solicits public input and recommends changes/revisions to Council. Walker said that her first point is that someone has overlooked communicating with senior citizens, who are a target group in CITY STEPS, She said that senior citizens are mentioned all through CITY STEPS, but although 250 invitations went out to the community, their senior group did not hear a thing, She said invitations should be sent directly to various senior organizations, Walker said that one thing that could be handled easily is transportation for senior citizens. She said that in Cedar Rapids, there is a program that provides a weekly grocery trip to senior citizens. She added that as people get older, they get weaker. They just cannot go on the bus and carry groceries by themselves. She said that in Cedar Rapids, there is a weekly bus that takes senior citizens to a grocery store, allows a certain amount of time, and then the bus returns them and helps them to unload their groceries. She added that if Cedar Rapids can do it, why can't Iowa City? She said that she brought up this issue for the past four years to various departments and organizations, but no action has been taken. Walker said that in Iowa City there is a five dollar charge to order groceries and a five dollar delivery fee to have a store do the shopping for you. This is very expensive for low-income seniors, She said that the situation is insensitive, and could be easily solved, Walker said that there are older, but ineligible seniors (60 to 62 years old) who do not qualify for subsidized housing because of their age, Some have a hard time surviving, She said that there are several vacancies at elderly subsidized housing complexes, These vacancies could be used to help the persons that need help, but they are ineligible. She also added that people with mental disabilities are not accepted in the housing facility unless they are in a wheelchair. She said that there are many persons that could use the housing, but can't get in even though there are vacancies. Walker mentioned that the City should allow the placement of mobile homes because several low-income persons could be served. She said that so few are served when building hundred thousand dollar houses. She added that we are only serving higher income households because low-income persons cannot afford a house even if given free because of the utilities, maintenance, insurance and taxes. She said that there is a two-year waiting list, and most can not wait that long. She added that we could help our low-income people by providing them a starting point, a place to live, a mobile home, or some type of affordable housing. Greazel asked if there would be people in homes that would need assistance with grocery shopping. Walker answered that the reason for her stating that there should be a bus providing grocery rides to persons living in the apartment complexes is because the service has to start somewhere, She added that people would want to go shopping in all days of the week, but by having a bus, you would determine a day and time for the trip, and all interested persons would sign-up, Dave Dolan said usually that's the argument used. If we give it to you, then we will have to provide trips to everyone. This provides an excuse to not do it at all. He added that another situation is that if the City doesn't determine that a situation is 100% workable, they will not work with a situation that is 60 or 70% workable. He said that when busses are mentioned, if you are not disabled or have a signed paper from your doctor, you can not ride the SEATS bus, He said that even though you are old, and the service is for elderly and persons with disabilities, old persons can only ride the SEATS bus if they can prove that they are disabled, Dolan said that old people are not only having trouble riding the bus, but it is also hard for most of them to carry their groceries back to their homes. Hayek said that some of the recommendations refer directly to CITY STEPS, while others should be subject to an application so that the appropriate City department would look at it. Hightshoe said that transportation is a high priority within CITY STEPS; however, for CDBG funds it is typical that a group representing elderly would have to submit an application for this particular service (senior transportation for grocery shopping). Dave said that he is confused as he thought the Housing and Community Development Commission should be an interested group. Hayek said that the commission is an interested group regarding senior citizens, as well as in other groups, Hayek mentioned that they fund money to the elderly every year, but are constrained because of the low amount of money available. Hayek added that CITY STEPS refers to the problems mentioned (transportation) as a high priority, He Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 3 added that CITY STEPS does not mention this type of program specifically, but this is an example that should be specifically brought up to certain City departments or in terms of an application to the commission, Walker said that low-income people would have no opportunity for making a grant proposal because they do not know how to write a grant or have the funds or required items to apply, She said that SEATS could pull in for four trips a month, one day a week, She said that busses come to her complex to take only one person when they could have a much higher number on the bus. She added that there are very old people that are still driving, even though they shouldn't but have no other way to get groceries, as they can't ride SEATS. Hayek said that these are important issues and staff should get in contact with Walker and determine what is the best way to address this situation. Sandy Pickup said that we can't have a healthy community without all the things coming together. Pickup said that even if you have a home, and do not have food, you will not be self sufficient, or if you have a home and do not have heat, you will still not be self-sufficient. Hayek asked if Pickup considers that there should be a greater emphasis on job training and living wage issues in CITY STEPS. Pickup said that there are a number of job committing organizations that try to get their clients minimum wage jobs, and she wonders what their success in doing that is, She questioned if providing job training should be for better paying jobs that are readily available and needed in the community, Hayek asked if there are any policies on wages that need to be paid to employees of applicants to whom the commission awards money, Hightshoe said that there is no federal policy, and each community can set its own rules, Hightshoe said that the State has a program called the Community Economic Betterment Account. Businesses apply competitively for these funds which can be in the form of low interest loans or grants. To be eligible for these State funds, the applicant must provide jobs that pay over a certain amount. Hightshoe thought the per hour minimum rate was approximately $12,59. Anthony said that the commission should look to the affordable housing needs in the City compared to the amount of federal funds that will be received. He suggested more progressive policies. He mentioned that other cities have used creative methods to increase funding for affordable housing such as a 1 % food and beverage tax implemented in Miami. Anthony said that when looking at the issues, and looking at the need, the amount of money needed to address the issues is high regarding to the low amount actually received. Anthony said that there are many things that can be done, For example, he said that many cities have a linked deposit program. For example, the City will invest their funds with local banks that do well with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), He said that the City needs to look at demand versus the supply of affordable housing, He said that the City has to be more proactive, Greazel said that people are in need of housing, and that the City should open their policies to manufactured housing. He said that we could have more people living in decent homes if we were to allow the placement of manufactured homes, Anthony said that it is very good quality housing, Greazel said that it is safe, affordable, and energy efficient. Anthony mentioned that in many cases the structure of manufactured houses is stronger that the regular built ones, He added that in Florida, after the hurricane, most of the houses left in place were actually manufactured houses. Long asked if by manufactured housing they refer to mobile homes. Anthony said that he does not refer to mobile homes, Anthony said that this might not be the right time to discuss the issue, but they could send a message to the City saying that this is a long standing issue, and there are alternatives out there, and there are many other cities that have taken progressive steps to solve the issue. Sandler said that they should incorporate manufactured/modular homes into CITY STEPS so that organizations will see it as an option. She said that a clear definition should be provided for manufactured and mobile homes, and if one is acceptable, and one is not, then it has to be shown why, and make it clear. Sandler said that manufactured homes are starting to be expensive. Greazel said that people do not use manufactured housing because they want to save money, but because they can have a house in a shorter time. MOTION: Sandler made a motion that under Public Service needs, senior services be elevated to a high priority need level. Bears seconded the motion. Motion passed 6:0, Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 4 Commission asked what were some of the major issues identified from the public meetings. Hightshoe mentioned that she heard several comments about daycare, transportation and vocational training. She said there were comments that it is important to locate child care facilities by educational and/or employment centers to allow persons to make only one trip to both work/school and daycare such as at or near the Iowa City Kirkwood campus, MOTION: Greazel made a motion that Commercial-Industrial Rehabilitation to go from medium to low. Sandler seconded the motion. Motion passed 6:0. MOTION: Anthony made a motion to move childcare centers under public facilities needs from medium to high. Greazel seconded the motion. Motion passed 6:0. Sandler asked why fair housing was moved to high, Hightshoe answered that she was not certain, however the last fair housing study was done in the early 1990s and will most likely need to be updated in the near future. Sandler asked if regardless of how it is rated, if the study would still be done, Hightshoe answered that she thought it would, Anthony asked who would do the study. Hightshoe answered that the City would hire a consulting firm to do so with the help of the human rights department. Hightshoe stated that fair housing may include more than just a fair housing study, it could include projects that address NIMBYism in our community and other such matters, Referring to the last graphic from the FY06 Applicant Guide, Richman asked if the staff could present the percentages from the existing CITY STEPS. Long said that tenant based rent assistance was 2,2% and in the draft it would now be 9.33%, the Acq/Rehab and/or new construction rental housing was 18.5%, and the draft reduces it to 11.67%. Homeownership assistance was 2%, and it is now raised to 18.67%, owner occupied housing rehabilitation was 19%, and now it is 5.33%, public facilities was 14,8%, and it was raised to 21.33%, public services was 9%, and now it is 8%, economic development was 8,7%, and now it is 8%, and administration was 15,3%, and now it is 15.37%. Richman said that there were a couple of categories that had dramatic changes. He said that homeownership went from 2% to 18,67%, and owner occupied housing rehabilitation went from 19% to 5.33%, Richman asked what was the assessment that caused such dramatic changes. Hightshoe said that the City allocates $200,000 a year for owner-occupied housing rehabilitation. She added that $200,000 each year for five years is quite a bit more than $400,000, She believes that this might be an error, Hayek asked if the percentages are drawn from past spending, or past goals, Long answered that the percentages that he presented are from goals, Sandler said that there is a possibility that the numbers referring to homeownership assistance and those for owner-occupied housing were reversed mistakenly. Sandler said that if the numbers are reversed, owner-occupied housing was $1,491,000 going to $1,400,000, and homeownership assistance was $149,000 going to $400,000, MOTION: Sandler moved that homeownership assistance be reduced to 5.33%, and the owner- occupied housing be increased to 18.67%. Bears seconded the motion. Sandler said that she believes that the numbers were reversed, and she doesn't want to make the final allocation of what the percentages should be, Richman asked how the percentages were generated. Hightshoe said that it is based on public input. Greazel asked what would be an example of home- ownership assistance, Hightshoe said that it could be down payment assistance or construction of homes for homeownership such as the recent Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship and Habitat for Humanity owner-occupied projects. (The homes are not used for rental.) Anthony asked if a low-income person that would like to buy a house could apply for that type of support, Hightshoe answered down payment assistance is an eligible activity, Richman asked if $200,000 a year is automatically allocated, Hightshoe answered that $200,000 is allocated to owner-occupied housing rehabilitation administered by our Housing Rehab. Department. There is a current waiting list for this program. The City used to have a down payment assistance program, but not anymore. Sandler mentioned that there are other possibilities to get help for down payment that are available to the public, Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 5 Richman asked what is the average loan that a person applying will get for home-ownership assistance (rehab. project), Hightshoe stated that most projects are less than $25,000 (due to lead requirements), The monthly payment is based on the household's income, All housing costs can not exceed 30% of the household's income, including the loan. MOTION: Sandler moved to amend her motion so that staff review the chart, verify the numbers, and explain to the commission if there are any mistakes. Anthony seconded. Greazel said that what he would like to see in the chart is what was spent last year to compare it to what is planned to be done in the next years. Sandler said that the spreadsheet is done for 5 years, and that it will not contain information about each individual year, but for the five years as a whole, Sandler removed her motion and asked the staff for clarifications. Richman suggested removing the chart completely from the application guideline. MOTION: Richman moved to remove the chart from the application packet. Greazel seconded the motion. Richman withdrew his motion. Will discuss under next agenda item, MOTION: Greazel moved to recommend the CITY STEPS document, with the changes voted on, correct any typographical/minor errors, and forward to Council as written. Sandler seconded the motion. Sandler said that she wants to be sure that it could be amended at any time and a new recommendation sent to Council. Hightshoe stated that yes, the CITY STEPs document can be reviewed and amended at any time based on Council approval. Sandler stated if the homeownership numbers were not a mistake, they will address the policy shift at a later date with possible new recommendations to Council. Motion carries: 6-0, DISCUSS AND REVIEW FY06 CDBG/HOME FUNDING PROCESS TIMELlNE Hightshoe said that the new timeline includes 2 applicant workshops. Hightshoe also stated that some commission members had expressed an interest in consolidating the two March meetings into one, Anthony asked how the process was in the past. Hightshoe replied that there were two meetings; the first meeting reviewed application scores and discussed large differences of scores on various applications, The second meeting is reserved for project funding and allocation recommendations, Sandler said that she would like to have separate meetings and be able to think about it for another week before having to make a decision. Greazel said that for the persons who have not been through the allocation process it is pretty confusing, and they will need to be educated about how things are going to work, Hayek said that it would be a great idea to do some education for new members in January, Hightshoe stated she will put it on the January agenda, Hightshoe said that they plan to strongly encourage both new and old applicants to attend the meetings, Sandler asked if they could require applicants to attend one workshop, Hightshoe answered that the commission could do that. She added that if it is a requirement, then any last minute application would be denied, In previous years, the commission has recommended funding for a few last minute applications. Anthony said that maybe the commission could add two points in the scoring sheet for attending the workshop, APPROVE FY06 CDBG/HOME APPLICATION MATERIALS Hightshoe said staff added the applicant workshop dates in the applicant guide. Sandler said that maybe it should be mentioned in the guideline that the commission will allocate points for participating in workshops, Referring to page 9, question 18 from Non-housing Application Guidelines, Sandler said that "this project" should be capitalized in order to be strongly emphasized, Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 6 Hayek asked if there is a way for staff to send back applications for corrections. Hightshoe added if could be done, but most applications are received the day it is due, Hightshoe said that there could be a one- week period to ask for corrections and clarifications, however we would most likely have to change our schedule to reflect an additional week, Richman proposed that on the ranking sheet, Section V, Capacity/History, questions number 2 and 3 be reduced to a possible 4 points, and add an additional question regarding workshop attendance, Applicants would receive 2 points if yes, 0 if no, Anthony said that it is really hard for a commission member to determine if a budget is justified, and that he trusted the staff to determine this, He added that if the budget is not justified the application should not be presented for ranking, Anthony mentioned that Hightshoe and Long have more experience and can easily determine whether the budget is justified or not. Anthony proposed to have a two-stage process. The first step would be staff review for recommendation and budget evaluation. If the budget is not justified then there is no step two for that application, Step two would be the actual ranking of the projects by the commission. Sandler said that she would like to have the staff review the applications and determine if they are justified applications, Hayek said that maybe staff should only give their opinion regarding their application/budget without necessarily taking the application out of the process. MOTION: Richman made a motion that on the ranking sheet, Section V. Capacity/History, questions 2 and 3 be reduced to a possible 4 points each, and an additional question for workshop attendance included. 2 points if yes, 0 if no. Staff will also remove the last page of the application that includes the chart. Sandler seconded the motion. Motion carries 6:0. Hayek said regarding concentrations that he would like to see a note that the commission will consider potential impacts in elementary school districts. MOTION: Richman made a motion to leave the first sentence of option one from the FY06 Applicant Guide, and take everything else out. Greazel seconded the motion. Motion passed 6:0, Richman asked if the applications are distributed electronically, Hightshoe replied applicants can obtain a hard copy, a word document on disk, or download the electonic version from the City's website, Richman mentioned there should be a clear distinction between the guide and the application itself, This could be done by removing the term guidelines from the actual application. MOTION: Greazel moved to approve the guidelines as discussed. Bears seconded the motion. Motion passed 6:0, MONITORING REPORTS Eagles' Flight- Hannah's Blessing Child Care Bears said that she spoke with the director of the program. She said that it is going well, but that the numbers are going down. They've been getting calls about them offering infant care, which they do not offer now. They've been putting flyers up to present the services that they offer, Greater Iowa City Housinq Fellowship- Lonqfellow Manor Sandler said that they are working on the units, and everything is going all right. Neiqhborhood Centers of Johnson County- Planninq Bears said that they spent their funds, Compeer- Operational Expenses Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes November 18, 2004 Page 7 Hayek said that he talked with the new director. He said that it is going well. He said that the new director is also the president of NAMI. Compeer is now housed at NAMI, which reduces their cost as they no longer have to pay rent. Hayek mentioned that they are doing a lot of fund raising and education, and are up to 14 volunteers. Greater Iowa Citv Housinq Fellowship- Affordable Rentinq Anthony said that they got $623,000 from City HOME funds. They are building 17 units. They spent about 70% of their funds, He mentioned that they constructed duplexes and townhouses that are scheduled to be finished by 2005, He said that the apartment complex is scheduled to be done by April 2005. MOTION: Sandler made a motion to adjourn, Anthony seconded the motion, Motion carries 6-0, The meeting adjourned at 9:22 PM. Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus s:/pcd/minutes/hcdc/2004/hcdc11-18-04,doc Housing & Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2004 Tenn Name Expires 01115 02/18 02/19 03/11 03/18 04/15 OS/20 06/17 07/15 08/19 09/29 10/21 11/18 12/16 Jerry Anthony 09/01/05 X X X X X X X OlE X NM X OlE X Erin Barnes 09/01/06 X 0 X X X X X X X NM X OlE OlE Lori Bears 09/01/07 X 0 X X X X X X X NM X X X John Deeth 09/01/04 X X X X X OlE 0 X 0 NM -- -- -- -- -- -- Mark Edwards 09/01/05 0 X X X X 0 0 OlE 0 NM X X 0 William Greazel 09/01/06 X X X X X X 0 X 0 NM X X X Matthew Hayek 09/01/07 X X X X X X X X X NM X X X Michelle Mackel 09/01/06 X X X X X X X OlE X NM -- -- -- -- -- -- Jayne Sandler 09/01/05 0 0 X X X 0 X X X NM X OlE X Brian Richman 09/01/07 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X Rita Marcus 09/01/06 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- OlE Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member