HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-13 Info Packet CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
~ January 13, 2005
(~ITY OF IOWA (~ITY
www.icgov.org
IP1 City Council Meetings and Work Session Agendas
IP2 Memorandum from the Director of Planning and Community Development: 1-80 Land Use
Planning Area
I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
IP3 Letter from Mayor Lehman to Lisa Beckman, Iowa City Human Rights Commission: Housing
Issues
IP4 E-mail from Mike Sullivan: Scheduling a Meeting
IP5 Memorandum from Public Works Project Coordinator to the City Manager: Agenda Items
IP6 E-mail from Jay Honeck to the City Manager: City Trucks and Snow Removal
IP7 Quarterly Investment Report October 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004
IP8 [Approved Minutes] Scattered Site Housing Task Force Minutes: December 6, 2004
PRELIMINARY DRAFT/MINUTES
IP9 Board of Adjustment: December 8, 2004
IP10 Historic Preservation Commission: December 9, 2004
IPll Charter Review Commission: January 6, 2005
IP12 Economic Development Committee: November 19, 2004
IP13 Scattered Site Housing Task Force: January 3, 2005
IP14 Scattered Site Housing Task Force: December 13,2004
IP15 Historic Preservation Commission: January 8, 2005
i £
~IT¥ ~OU~IL INFORMATION PACK£T
CITY OF ;ITY January 13, 2005
www.icgov.org
JANUARY 17 WORK SESSION ITEMS
IP1 City Council ings and Work Session Agendas
IP2 Memorandum from Director of Planning and Community 1-80 Land Use
Planning Area
:ELLANEOUS ITEMS
IP3 Letter from Mayor Lehman to ia Beckman, Iowa City HL Rights Commission: Housing
Issues
IP4 E-mail from Mike Sullivan: ng a Meeting
IP5 Memorandum from Public Works Pro City Manager: Agenda Items
IP6 E-mail from Jay Honeck to the City and Snow Removal
IP7 Quarterly Investment Report October 1, to December 31, 2004
IP8 [Approved Minutes] Scattered Site Housi ~k Force Minutes: December 6, 2004
Pr MINUTES I
IP9 Board of Adjustment: 8, 2004
IP10 Historic Preservation Com~ December 9, 2004
IPll Charter Review Commi., January 6, 2005
IP12 Economic Develo Committee: November 19, 2004
IP13 Scattered Task Force: January 3, 2005
IP14 Scattered g Task Force: December 13,2004
IP15 Historic Pr ~rvation Commission: January 8, 2005
~_--~'-;=~=~r~ City Council Meeting Schedule and
Work Session Agendas January 13, 2005
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
· MONDAY, JANUARY 17 Emma J. Harvat Hall
Martin Luther King Jr. Day Holiday - City Offices Closed
· TUESDAY, JANUARY t8
..... C~.....;,~; .... ,,,,, ,., ...... ,,,,~,,,.= ..... EmmaJ. HarvatHall
6:15p Special Work Session
· 1-80 Land Use Planning Area (Franklin)
· Planning and Zoning Items
· Agenda Items
· Council Appointments
· Council Time
· Identification of Priorities for Discussion
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
I TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS
· WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 26
3:00p-5:00p Joint meeting with City Councils of Iowa City,
Coralville, North Liberty, Iowa City Community
School District, and Johnson County Board of
Supervisors
· SATURDAY, JANUARY 29 Emma J. Harvat Hall
11:30a o12:30p Special Work Session with lC Legislators re: Priorities
· MONDAY, JANUARY 31 Emma J. Harvat Hall
6:30p City Conference Board Meeting
Separate Agenda Posted
TBA Council Work Session
· TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
· MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14 Emma J. Harvat Hall
6:30p Council Work Session
· TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15 Emma J. Harvat Hall
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting
Meeting dates/times/topics subject to change
FUTURE WORK SESSION ITEMS
Regulation of Downtown Dumpsters
~ -~ ~ IP1
.~_-,~,,.~,~;~-~_ City Council Meeting Schedule and
Work Session Agendas
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
, MONDAY, JANUARY 17 ] Emma J. Harvat Hall
Martin Luther King Jr. Day Holiday - City Offices CIo//¢ed
/
· TUESDAY, JANUARY 18
6:00p Special Formal Council Meeting / Emma J. Harvat Hall
Executive Session (Imminent Litigation)
/
Special Work Session
· 1-80 Land Use Planning Area (Franklin)
/
· Planning and Zoning Items
· Agenda Items //
Council Appointments
:ouncil Time
· /
· of Priorities for Dlscussi(~n
7:00p Rec Formal Council Meeting /
UTURE AGENDAS
· WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 26
3:00p-5:00p Joint meeting City ( )wa
Coralville, North .~rty,
School District, )hnson Co~ Board of
Supervisors
· SATURDAY, JANUARY 29 Emma J. Harvat Hall
11:30a-12:30p Special Work Sessio~ th lC Legislators re: Priorities
· MONDAY, JANUARY 31 Emma J. Harvat Hall
6:30p City Conference Board
Separate Agend
TBA Council Work Session
· TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 1 ~ Emma J. Harvat Hall
7:00p Regular Formal Cou~ Meeting
FEBRUARY 14 ~ Emma J. Harvat Hall
MONDAY,
6:30p Council Work Se ~ion ~..
15 Em"~qa J. Harvat Hall
TUESDAY,
FEBRUARY
7:00p Regular Fo/~l Council Meeting
/
Meeting dates/times/topics subject to change
FUTURE WORK SESSION ITEMS
Regulation of Downtow~Dumpsters
Date: January 12, 2005
To: City Council -'t'-~, J, 1A.4 ' --'~Z/[~
From: Karin Franklin, Director, I~D~ I 1~~v'
Re: 1-80 Land Use Planning Area
At the Council's January 3rd work session, the request was made to schedule discussion of
future land uses in an area roughly defined by Highway 1, 1-80 and the City's growth limit line. A
map showing this specific area is attached. This request grew from consideration of the
expanded TIF district in this part of the city.
I have included in your packet a copy of the section of our current Comprehensive Plan that
addresses this area. We have not yet done the district plan for the North Corridor Planning
District.
Most of the information provided in the Plan continues to be pertinent. However, there are a
couple of aspects of development of this area that have changed since 1997. As you will see in
reviewing the enclosed section of the Plan, the land use anticipated at the 1-80 interchange was
office research park development. The reality has been that office research park uses have
been difficult to entice to this site with the opportunities presented at the University's Oakdale
Research Park. In fact, Northgate Corporate Park has developed primarily for office uses and
was recently rezoned to Commercial Office (CO-1).
Plans for transportation infrastructure in this area have evolved. We have a preliminary
alignment for an arterial street to connect Scott Boulevard with Highway 1 via a bridge over 1-80.
This road would ultimately proceed west to become an extension of Oakdale Boulevard in
Coralville. The approximate alignment is shown on the enclosed map.
This portion of the North Corridor District will be served by the Highlander lift station. An
analysis of capacity of the lift station and the potential for upgrades will need to be done to
properly evaluate appropriate land uses in the watershed.
A factor, which is not considered in the current Comprehensive Plan, is the transition between
the land uses that may develop along Oakdale Boulevard extended and the existing rural
residential and agricultural uses to the north and east of the City's growth boundary.
Development of a more specific land use plan for this area will result in an amendment to our
Comprehensive Plan and will need to be considered by your Planning and Zoning Commission.
I would suggest that after some preliminary discussion and direction by the City Council that this
item be referred to the Commission for their consideration. Please be advised that the
Commission is currently winding up their work on the Zoning Code and will be delving into the
Subdivision Regulations once their recommendation is made to you on the Zoning Code. They
are also scheduled to address the Central Planning District as their next district planning effort.
This, of course, can be changed at the Council's direction.
Cc City Manager
Planning & Zoning Commission
Bob Miklo
143
£ORRIDOR
I)LFINNINO
145
NORTH CORRII OR
PLANNING
DISTRICT
Description of the North Corridor Planning District
The North Corridor Planning District is bounded by Interstate 80
on the south; Dubuque Street on the west; the Iowa River, Rapid
Creek, and iowa City corporate limits on the north; and the long-
range planning boundary on the east. With the exception of land
around the Highway 1/I-80 interchange, the North Corridor Plan-
ning District is in unincorporated Johnson County. Approximately
one-half of the unincorporated land in the District is already devel-
oped for suburban residential uses. The property around the 1-80
interchange with Highway 1 is developed for office research park
and highway commercial uses. In the North Corridor Planning
District, there are no acres of land zoned for residential develop-
ment within the current city limits. There are approximtely 355
acres of developable land within the Iowa City long-range plan-
ning area.
The natural environment of the North Corridor Planning District
includes gently rolling farm land, stream and river corridors, and
wooded hills. Residential development has occurred primarily in
the wooded areas immediately north of 1-80. Protection of the
Rapid Creek flood plain will be an important consideration for fu-
ture development of this District.
Unique features of the North Corridor Planning District
The North Corridor Planning District evolved from the need to iden-
tify an approximate 700 acre area which could be served with mu-
nicipal sanitary sewer via the River Corridor Trunkline. Options
for this service area included River Heights, an unincorporated
residential part of Johnson County north of Iowa City on the west
side of the Iowa River; properties around the proposed extension
of Oakdale Boulevard where it will intersect County Road W-66; a
large area which included property on the east side of the Iowa
River, north and south of Rapid Creek; and the area defined in the
146
first paragraph. The area defined was chosen because a costly
river crossing for sanitary sewer line extensions is not needed,
and the area is contiguous to the Iowa City corporate boundary.
Rapid Creek forms a natural boundary on the north side of the
District. When the proposed extension of Scott Boulevard north of
1-80 occurs, eventually connecting with 320th Street and intersect-
lng with Prairie du Chien Road, the north limit of this planning
district may be reconsidered. It is not anticipated that these street
extensions will take place within the twenty year timeframe of this
plan.
Addition of the unincorporated parts of the North Corridor Plan-
ning District to Iowa City's corporate boundaries is most likely to
occur through voluntary annexation, a process initiated by prop-
erty owners. It has been the policy of Iowa City to add land to the
corporate boundary by voluntary means except in unusual circum-
stances (see Growth Policy). Because nearly half of the unincor-
porated area in the North Corridor Planning District is already de-
veloped, annexation in the short term is unlikely.
The 1-80 interchange with Highway 1 provides one of the few op-
portunities for office research park development in Iowa City. Na-
tional Computer Systems (within the North Corridor Planning Dis-
trict) and American College Testing (south of 1-80 in the North Plan-
ning District) are successful examples of this type of development.
With the tone set by these two companies and the advantages of
interstate exposure, land around this interchange should continue
to be preserved for office research park and research develop-
ment park opportunities.
Municipal services
Sanitary sewer service for much of the North Corridor Planning
District will be provided by a lift station located in the Rapid Creek
flood plain. Effluent will be pumped from the lift station and sent
by a force main to the River Corridor Trunkline. Sufficient capacity
exists within the River Corridor Trunkline to serve approximately
700 acres at a density of 15 people per acre.
The remainder of the North Corridor Planning District will be served
by the Highlander lift station located near NCS on Highway 1 North.
Relocation and upgrading of the Highlander lift station will be nec-
essary at some point in the long term future. With full develop-
ment of northeast Iowa City and this portion of the North Corridor
Planning District, the main sewer trunkline which serves this area--
the Northeast Trunk--will require upgrading also. Currently prop-
erties within the North Corridor Planning District that are in
unincorporated Johnson County are served by septic systems. [ 0R lDO
Municipal water service is provided to the incorporated area. Prob-
lems with low flows will be rectified with completion of the new
LflNNIN0
Iowa City municipal water system in 2002.
Trafficways DI~'~ I CT
The primary trafficways serving the North Corridor Planning Dis-
147
N0~H C0RRiDOR trict are Dubuque Street, PrairieduChienRoad, and Highway l
(Dodge Street). All of these arterial streets extend to the unincor-
porated area of Johnson County. There are no local east-west
arterial streets within the North Corridor Planning District. Linder
)Lfl lN0 Road provides a narrow, rural road connecting Dubuque Street to
Prairie du Chien Road. Between Prairie du Chien Road and High-
way 1 North, the beginning of a collector street system is forming
DIeT, lET in the Prairie View Estates subdivision. Interstate 8O carries the
bulk of local east-west traffic in this area between the Dubuque
Street and Dodge Street interchanges.
Future trafficway improvements in this area are contemplated with
the realignment of Prairie du Chien Road north of 1-80, the exten-
sion of Scott Boulevard north over the interstate to Highway 1,
and the extension of 320th Street or Oakdale Boulevard east to
connect with Highway 1 at the future Scott Boulevard/Highway 1
intersection. Only the Prairie du Chien Road realignment has been
programmed, with construction anticipated by the County in FY98.
Open space
Since the area within Iowa City's corporate limits at the writing of
this plan is anticipated for office research park development, no
open space need is defined in the Neighborhood Open Space
Plan. Upon annexation ofareas for residentialdevelopment, open
space needs will be calculated.
Neighborhood Associations
There are no designated neighborhood associations within the
North Corridor Planning District.
Schools
Existing residential development is served by Shimek and Lincoln
Elementary Schools. With the proposed extension of Oakdale
Boulevard to County Road W66, Wickham Elementary, in
Coralville, will also be accessible to portions of the North Corridor
Planning District.
Highlights of the North Corridor Planning District
1. Annexation of unincorporated areas is unlikely in the short-
range future, since almost half of the land is already devel-
oped for suburban residential uses.
2. The Highway 1/I-80 interchange provides one of the few
opportunities for office research parks and research de-
velopment parks in Iowa City.
3. Sewer lift stations will be required to serve the North Corri-
dor Planning District. Capacity exists in the River Corridor
Trunkline to accommodate growth in more than half of the
District.
4, The extension of Scott Boulevard over the interstate may
push the North Corridor Planning District boundary north.
North Corridor Planning District]
IP3
January 10, 2005
CITY OF IOWA CiTY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
Lisa Beckmann, Chairperson (3 ~ 9) 3 s 6- s 000
Iowa City Human Rights Commission (3]9) 356-$009 FAX
City Hall www,icgov.org
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Re: Housing Issues
Dear Lisa:
Thank you for your letter of January 4, 2005 concerning the siting of subsidized housing in Iowa
City.
The Scattered Site Housing Task Force created by the City Council last year continues to
address this issue, and I anticipate they will bring their recommendations to Council in the
spring. At this point in time, I believe the most effective way the Commission can be involved is
to communicate your concerns directly to the Task Force. Your intent to have the chairperson,
Matt Hayek, attend a Commission meeting for the purpose of further discussing your concerns
is an excellent next step.
I appreciate the Commission's interest in this veryimportant issue, and I am sure your insights
will prove helpful for the Task Force and the City Council as we continue to explore alternatives
for siting subsidized housing units locally.
St~IY'
Ernest W. Lehman
Mayor
cc: ,,~ity Council
Matt Hayek
mgr/Itr/beckmann.doc
IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
HUMAN RIGHTS A HUMAN ISSUE January 4, 2005
Mayor Ernest Lehman /
410 E. Washington / -,,~~
Iowa City, IA 52240
CITY OF IOW.4 CITY
Re: Housing issues
Dear Mayor Lehman:
The Iowa City Human Rights Commission at its recent meetings has been discussing the
proliferation of low-income housing and related services on the south side of Iowa City.
Over time, there seems to have developed a high concentration of low-income people, a
high concentration of recent arrivals in town, a high concentration of minority
populations, and a high concentration of troubled populations of various kinds on the
south side of Iowa City.
Matthew Hayek was asked to attend the Commission's December meeting but due to
unforeseen events, we were unable to achieve a quorum. The Commission is interested
in discussing the issues above with Mr. Hayek to determine whether his Scattered Site
Committee has addressed the issues raised in the Human Rights Commission meetings
over the last several months.
In September, I wrote a letter to you asking if the Commission could speak to the Council
regarding their concerns. Mr. Helling informed me of the Scattered Site Committee and
the Commission decided to wait to send its letter to Council until after we reviewed the
report generated by the Scattered Site Committee. Since September, however, Councilor
Bob Elliot has contacted Heather and informed her that he and other Councilors would be
willing to speak to the Commission regarding the housing issue and the Commission's
concerns. I appreciate Mr. Elliot's offer and the Commission would very much like to
meet with him and other willing Council members.
I have attached the letter I drafted in September but did not send. It sets out the questions
the Commission had at that time. We would like to invite Mr. Elliot and other interested
Council members to attend one of the Commission meetings. If you have an alternative
suggestion that would be more convenient, that would be fine as well. Please contact me
at 358-9023 so that we can arrange a meeting.
Sincerely, _
Le ec '
Chairperson, Iowa City Human Rights Commission
CIVIC CENTER · 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 · (319) 356-5022
September 28, 2004
Mayor Ernest Lehman
410 E. Washington
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mayor Lehman:
The Iowa City Human Rights Commission, at its recent meetings has been discussing the
proliferation of low-income housing and related services on the south side of Iowa City.
Over time, there seems to have developed a high concentration of low-income people, a
high concentration of recent arrivals in town, a high concentration of minority
populations, and a high concentration of troubled populations of various kinds on the
south side of Iowa City.
The Commission has some questions for the Council related to this topic. Specifically,
we are wondering if the Council has any resources or plans to address this issue. The
Human Rights Commission believes that the City Council has been on record of favoring
scattered sites of such populations. The Human Rights Commission is struggling with
the City Council's public posture favoring "scattered sites," while the reality is grouping
low income housing and services on the southeast side.
The Human Rights Commission would be interested in meeting with members of the City
Council to discuss this issue. Please contact me at 358-9023 so that we can arrange a
meeting.
Sincerely,
Lisa Beckmann
Chairperson, Iowa City HumanRights Commission
Scheduling a meeting
Marian Karr
From: Mike Sullivan [msulliva@co.johnson.ia.us]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 3:32 PM
To: Albumett; Amold-Olson & Associates; Cedar Rapids; CenterPoint; Central City; ECICOG; Ely; Fairfax;
Hiawatha; Hills; Howard R. Green; IowaCity Clerk; Iowa City Manager; Iowa Environmental Education
Project; James Houser; JCCOG; Johnson County; Kelly Hayworth; Linda Langston; LinnCounty
Supervisors; Lisbon; Lone Tree; LuBarron; Marion; Mike Goldberg; MountVernon; North Liberty; North
Liberty City Administrator; Palo; Patrick Murphy; Priority One; Robins; Sharon Meyer; Shueyville; Solon;
Springville; Tiffin; University Heights
Subject: Scheduling a meeting
Importance: High
The Johnson County Board of Supervisors had tentatively schedule the next Public Leadership Summit meeting for
Monday, January 24, 2005 at 4:30 p.m. There are scheduling conflicts for an important group of participants for the
meeting on the 24th. We will host the meeting. I am asking everyone to check your schedules to Monday, February 7th or
Tuesday February 8th, 2005 to meet at 4:30 p.m. I will coordinate once I have received your responses.
Best Regards,
Mike Sullivan
Mike Sullivan
Johnson County Executive Assistant
913 South Dubuque Street, Suite 201
Office (319) 339-6198, extension 309
Fax (319) 356-6036
msulliva@co.johnson.ia.us
1/10/2005
City of Iowa City
M MOFIANDUM
Date: January 10, 2005
To: Steve Atkins
From: Kim Johnson.~
Re: Agenda Items
The following are costs associated with the Capital Improvement Projects being
presented for acceptance at the January 18th Council meeting:
1 ) Willow Creek Interceptor and Lateral Sewers Project
Contractor: Kenko, Inc.
o~o Project Estimated Cost: $ 8,550,000.00
*:o Project Bid Received: $ 7,326,298.47
.,. Project Actual Cost: $ 7,578,903.89
Marian Karr
From: Alexis Park Inn [AlexisParklnn@mchsi.com]
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 7:22 AM
To: steve-atkins@iowa-city.org
Cc: cou ncil@iowa-city.org
Subject: This MUST stop
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Atkins,
For the second straight winter, we are facing an unrelenting attack on our business by the incredible racket
made by City snow removal trucks working less than 50 yards away from our hotel -- all night long.
Here is an email I received this morning, from one of my tenants (and an employee) in the building BEHIND
the hotel:
I had hoped to be able to come in to help out today, but that is contingent on my being able to get any sleep. The city, in
its infinite wisdom, has decided that the ONLY place to dump excess snow is along the road between the hotel and the
airport. And apparently the ONLY time they can do that is between midnight and, well, it's 2:15 am now with no end in
sight. They have two loaders with constant backup alarms going, and dumptrucks banging their bins every 2 minutes.
This is all occurring less than 50 yards from the hotel. My only consolation is that you won't miss me tomorrow because
all your guests will have bailed or demanded their money back, so you won't be able to pay me anyway.
I tried to get a picture of the activity but my digital cam doesn't have the flash power to get it. So, I made a digital audio
recording of it from INSIDE MY ROOM which I have attached. The recording was started at 2:30 am. Something has got
to be done about this. It was bad enough last year when they were across the highway, but this is truly unacceptable.
This tenant's building is shielded by the hotel. I can only imagine what the noise was like inside the hotel
itself. (I can send you the .mp3 recording of the sound, if you'd like. I didn't think the city would accept an
email with an attachment.)
These trucks, working all night long, are causing irreparable harm to my business. I'm begging you -- pleading
with you -- to do SOMETHING about this problem.
In my view, the City needs to either:
(a) Follow its own noise ordinance, and don't bang those trucks all night long.
(b) Find a more suitable place to dump snow, away from populated areas.
Our hotel guests are paying, on average, $100 per night to enjoy the luxury of an aviation theme, jacuzzi hot tub
suite. They come from all over the Midwest to enjoy our unique ambience -- which the City is systematically
destroying. There is no way visitors to our area should be subjected to this kind of treatment by the city of
Iowa City.
The courtesy of your reply is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Jay Honeck
Owner/Innkeeper
www. AlexisParklnn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
1/7/2005
IP7
CITY OF IOWA CITY
QUARTERLY
INVESTMENT REPORT
OCTOBER 1, 2004
to
DECEMBER 31, 2004
Finance Department:
Prepared by:
Brian Cover
Senior Accountant
OVERVIEW
The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield. The
primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the
preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The City's
investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet
operating requirements that cash management procedures anticipate.
In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed with
the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six month U.S.
Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for riskless
investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum standard for the
portfolio's rate of return. The average return on the six-month U.S. Treasury Bill,
as obtained from the monthly publication Public Investor, was 2.51% at 12/31/04.
The investment program seeks to achieve returns above this threshold,
consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. Investments
purchased by the City of Iowa City for the fourth quarter of this year were 25
basis points higher than the threshold.
Rates on new investment purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the
second quarter were approximately 112 basis points higher than investments
purchased at this time last year. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at
which banks lend to each other. The Federal Reserve raised the target of the
federal funds rate to 2.25% on December 14, 2004. The Federal Reserve has
raised interest rates 125 basis points since June.
The quarterly investment report lists investments by fund, by institution, by
maturity date, and investments purchased and redeemed.
New official state interest rates setting the minimum that may be paid by Iowa
depositories on public funds in the 180 to 364 day range during this quarter were
1.38% in October 2004, 1.35% in November 2004 and 1.45% in December
2004.
Federal Funds Rate
7.00
6.50
6.00
5.50
5.00
4.50
4.0O
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE
12/31/2004
INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST
NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE
VAN KAMPEN GOVT MUTUAL FUND 22-Ju1-85 N/A 200,000.00 VARIABLE
NORWEST BANK SAVINGS 01-Dec-99 N/A 200,000.00 VARIABLE
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST IPAIT 13-Jun-02 N/A 2,000,000.00 VARIABLE
IPAITANELLS FARGO IPAIT 29-Nov-02 N/A 1,802,265.84 VARIABLE
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 07-Jan-05 2,000,000.00 1.49
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 14-Mar-03 14-Jan-05 454,724.71 2.39
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 14-Jan-05 750,000.00 1.49
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 21-Jan-05 2,000,000.00 1.53
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 28-dan-05 750,000.00 1.53
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 10-May-04 04-Feb-05 2,000,000.00 1.81
LIBERTY BANK CD 10-May-04 11-Feb-05 750,000.00 2.27
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 10-May-04 18-Feb-05 2,000,000.00 1.85
US BANK CD 08-Sep-03 25-Feb-05 961,187.50 1.90
US BANK CD 08-Sep-03 25-Feb-05 663,221.00 1.90
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 20-May-04 25-Feb-05 750,000.00 1.86
IOWA STATE BANK CD 24-Sep-04 25-Feb-05 637,492.50 2.51
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 20-May-04 04-Mar-05 2,000,000.00 1.88
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 20-May-04 11-Mar-05 750,000.00 1.90
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 08-dun-04 18-Mar-05 2,000,000.00 2.02
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 08-Jun-04 25-Mar-05 750,000.00 2.04
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 08-Jun-04 01-Apr-05 2,000,000.00 2.06
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 08-Jun-04 08-Apr-05 750,000.00 2.08
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 08-Jun-04 15-Apr-05 2,000,000.00 2.10
WEST BANK CD 15-Oct-04 15-Apr-05 500,000.00 2.31
UlCCU CD 29-dun-04 22-Apr-05 750,000.00 2.46
UlCCU CD 29-dun-04 29-Apr~05 2,000,000.00 2.46
UlCCU CD 29-Jun-04 06-May-05 750,000.00 2.46
LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Aug-04 13-May-05 2,000,000.00 2.50
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Sep-04 20-May-05 750,000.00 2.70
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Sep-04 27-May-05 2,000,000.00 2.70
WELLS FARGO SLGS 05-Nov-02 01-Jun-05 3,957,849.00 2.34
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-05 184,742.45 1.67
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 01-Jun-05 5,600,000.00 2.65
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Sep-04 03-dun-05 750,000.00 2.90
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Sep-04 10-Jun-05 2,000,000.00 2.90
UICCU CD 24-Sep-04 17-Jun-05 750,000.00 2.81
UICCU CD 24-Sep-04 24-Jun-05 2,000,000.00 2.91
WEST BANK CD 17-Dec-03 30-Jun-05 3,929,076.89 1.55
FARMERS & MERCHANTS CD 01-Jul-04 01-Jul-05 974,504.00 2.75
LIBERTY BANK CD 10-Aug-04 01-Jul-05 3,500,000.00 2.50
UICCU CD 24-Sep-04 01-Jul-05 750,000.00 2.86
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 01-Jul-05 3,000,000.00 2.48
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 08-Jul-05 2,000,000.00 2.69
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 15-Jul-05 750,000.00 2.46
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 22-Jul-05 2,000,000.00 2.81
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 29-Jul-05 750,000.00 2.56
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 05-Aug-05 2,000,000.00 2.83
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 12-Aug-05 750,000.00 2.37
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 1g-Aug-05 2,000,000.00 2.60
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 26-Aug-05 750,000.00 2.45
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 02-Sep-05 2,000,000.00 2.65
WEST BANK CD 10-Nov-04 09-Sep-05 750,000.00 2.73
INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST
NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE
WEST BANK CD lO-Nov-04 16-Sep-06 2,000,000.00 2.79
WEST BANK CD lO-Nov-04 23-Sep-05 750,000.00 2.79
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 30-Sep-05 2,000,000.00 2.77
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 0%Oct-05 750,000.00 2.78
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 14-Oct-05 2,000,000.00 2.79
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 21-Oct-05 750,000.00 2.81
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 28-Oct-05 2,000,000.00 2.83
UICCU CD 09-Mar-04 01-Nov-05 4,282,466.76 2.06
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 04-Nov~05 750,000.00 2.84
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 11-Nov~05 2,150,000.00 2.96
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 18-Now05 750,000.00 2.97
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 23-Nov-05 2,150,000.00 2.98
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-05 186,128.03 1.87
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 02-Dec-05 750,00000 3.00
UICCU CD 12-Dec-03 09-Dec-05 6,577,860.00 2.33
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 09-Dec-05 2,150,000.00 2.99
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 16-Dec-05 750,00000 3.00
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 22-Dec-05 2,150,000.00 3.00
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-06 187,523.98 2.17
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Dec-06 188,930.41 2.57
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01-Jun-07 190,347.39 267
TOTAL $111,528,320.46
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENT ACTIVITY
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31,2004
INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 9/30/04 105,976,033.03
INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INTEREST
INSTITUTION TYPE DATE DATE RATE
PURCHASES 10/01/04 TO 12/31/04
WEST BANK CD 15-Oct-04 15-Apr-05 2.31 500,000.00
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 01-Jun-05 2.65 5,600,000.00
iOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 08-Jul-05 2.69 2,000,000.00
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 15-Jul-05 2.46 750,000.00
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 22-Ju1-05 2.81 2,000,000.00
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 29-Ju1-05 2.56 750,000.00
IOWA STATE BANK CD 15-Oct-04 05-Aug-05 2.83 2,000,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 01-Jul-05 2.48 3,000,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct~04 12-Aug-05 2.37 750,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 19-Aug-05 2.60 2,000,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 26-Aug-05 2.45 750,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 20-Oct-04 02-Sep-05 2.65 2,000,000.00
WEST BANK CD 10-Nov-04 09-Sep-05 2.73 750,000.00
WEST BANK CD 10-Nov-04 16-Sep-05 2.79 2,000,000.00
WEST BANK CD 10-Nov-04 23-Sep-05 2.79 750,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18*Nov-04 30-Sep-05 2.77 2,000,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 07-Oct-05 2.78 750,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 14-Oct-05 2.79 2,000,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 21-Oct-05 2.81 750,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 28-Oct-05 2.83 2,000,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 18-Nov-04 04-Nov-05 2.84 750,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec*04 11-Nov-05 2.96 2,150,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 18-Nov-05 2.97 750,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 23-Nov-05 2.98 2,150,000.00
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 07-Dec-04 02-Dec-05 3.00 750,000.00
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 09-Dec-05 2.99 2,150,000.00
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 16-Dec-05 3.00 750,000.00
US BANK CD 22-Dec-04 22-Dec-05 3.00 2,150,000.00
TOTAL PURCHASES 44,700,000.00
REDEMPTIONS 10/01/04 TO 12/31/04
IOWA STATE BANK CD 21-Nov-03 01-Oct-04 1.50 (2,150,000.00)
UICCU CD 13-Now03 08-Oct-04 1.51 (750,000.00)
UICCU (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) CD 09-Mar-04 12-Oct-04 2.06 (301,248.36)
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Nov-03 13-Oct-04 1.50 2,150,000.00)
UNION PLANTERS CD 13-Nov-03 13-Oct-04 1.50 2,150,000.00)
IOWA STATE BANK CD 13~Nov-03 15-Oct-04 1.55 2,150,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 16-Jan-04 15-Oct-04 1.45 (500,000.00)
IOWA STATE BANK CD 13-Nov-03 22-Oct-04 1.57 (750,000.00)
WEST BANK (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) CD 17-Dec-03 28-Oct-04 1.55 (342,524.42)
IPAIT (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 29-Nov-02 29-Oct-04 1.45 (270,772.95)
COMM FED (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) CD 13-Sep-04 29-Oct-04 2.39 2,052,171.77)
IOWA STATE BANK CD 13-Nov-03 29-Oc~-04 1.62 2,150,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 19-Dec-03 05-Nov-04 1.39 (750,000.00)
IOWA STATE BANK CD 06-Apr-04 05-Nov-04 1.25 (750,000.00)
UICCU CD 19-Dec-03 12-Nov-04 1.52 2,000,000.00)
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 06-Apr-04 12-Nov-04 1.46 2,000,000.00)
UICCU (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) CD 09-Mar-04 16-Nov-04 2.06 (215,874.15)
UNION PLANTERS CD 19-Dec-03 19-Nov-04 1.50 (750,000.00)
IOWA STATE BANK CD 06-Apr-04 19-Nov-04 1.25 (750,000.00)
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL CD 19-Dec-03 24-Nov-04 1.42 2,000,000.00)
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 06-Apr-04 24-Nov-04 1.49 2,000,000.00)
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 22-Jul-04 30-Nov-04 1.85 1,717,000.00)
IPAIT (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 29-Nov-02 30-Nov-04 1.45 74,780.52)
WEST BANK CD 17-Dec-03 30-Nov-04 1.55 105,625.42)
COMM FED (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) CD 13-Sep-04 30-Nov-04 2.39 264,478.39)
WELLS FARGO SLGS 05-Nov-02 01 -Dec-04 2.16 (57,231.00)
LIBERTY BANK CD 11-Mar-04 01 -Dec-04 1.47 274,005.59)
FARMERS & MERCHANTS CD 19-Dec-03 03-Dec-04 1.45 750,000.00)
FREEDOM SECURITY CD 06-Apr-04 03-Dec-04 1.49 750,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 10~Dec-04 1.41 Z,000,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 17-Dec-04 1.41 750,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 23-Dec-04 1.45 2,000,000.00)
WEST BANK CD 14-Apr-04 30-Dec-04 1.45 750,000.00)
LIBERTY BANK CD 28-May-04 30-Dec-04 1.87 .~,722,000.00)
TOTAL REDEMPTIONS (39,147,712.57)
INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 12/31/04 111,528,320.46
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
SUMMARY BY FUND
12/31/2004 12/31/2003
FUND INVESTMENT INVESTMENT
TYPE AMOUNT AMOUNT
ALL OPERATING FUNDS 87,976,383.20 96,369,003.16
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND 6,537,672.26 5,554,215.14
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT RESERVE FUND 700,000.00 700,000.00
BOND RESERVE FUND 16,314,265.00 9,817,184.00
TOTAL 111,528,320.46 112,440,402.30
CITY OF IOWA CITY
INVESTMENTS ON HAND
LISTING BY INSTITUTION
12/3112004 12/31/2003
INSTITUTION INVESTMENT INVESTMENT
NAME AMOUNT AMOUNT
COMMERCIAL FEDERAL BANK 29,504,724.71 21,812,465.21
FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK 974,504.00 1,250,000.00
FREEDOM SECURITY BANK 8,500,000.00 7,300,000.00
HILLS BANK & TRUST 0.00 21,346.50
IOWA STATE BANK 13,737,492.50 21,600,000.00
IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST 3,802,265.84 5,462,209.95
LIBERTY BANK 7,187,672.26 10,850,000.00
U OF I COMM CREDIT UNION 17,860,326.76 17,244,006.00
UNION PLANTERS BANK 5,500,000.00 5,050,000.00
US BANK 6,674,408.50 8,174,408.50
US TREASURY NOTES AND AGENCIES 0.00 0.00
WELLS FARGO BANK 4,157,849.00 4,271,751.00
WEST BANK 13,429,076.89 9,204,215.14
VAN KAMPEN 200,000.00 200,000.00
TOTAL 111,528,320.46 112,440,402.30
MINUTES
SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE
DECEMBER 6, 2004
SENIOR CENTER, LOWER LEVEL CLASSROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Jerry Anthony, Darlene Clausen, Matthew Hayek, Jan Left, Jan
Peterson, Sally Stutsman, Joan Vandenberg
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Steve Rackis
OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Eastham, Amanda Cline, Tracy Glaesemann, Alexis Kluklenski, Erick
Owomoyela
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm.
Approval of the November 22, 2004 Minutes:
Several revisions in spelling and grammar were noted for the Minutes.
MOTION: A motion was made by Stutsman, seconded by Left, to approve the November 22 Minutes as
amended. Motion carried 7-0.
Peterson arrived at this point.
DELIBERATIONS REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Hayek began the meeting by handing out a list of criteria the group had discussed for consideration in
constructing a definition of "concentration". Hayek said that this list was created from the November 22
discussion. He said the goal is to discuss the five listed criteria as needed, perhaps adding more, then adopt
or reject the criteria in order to reach a group consensus about the definition. He also noted the list of
secondary considerations at the bottom of the page, to keep in mind for the discussion, as these may be
more related to impacts of concentration.
Vandenberg asked at what meeting the tables referenced in the criteria list were handed out. Hayek replied
they are from the research done by the University students and distributed at the November 8 meeting.
Stutsman asked if mobility and quality of life data are considerations that will or will not be included in the
discussion. Hayek replied he would like to include those things, but the data do not seem to be available. For
example, mobility data collected by the Census are only available on a county level. Vandenberg added that
school mobility data are available, too. Hayek noted that while the information from the Broadway study is
helpful, its scope is too narrow.
Hayek asked if the Taskforce would like to consider mobility in schools. Vandenberg said the data is already
compiled and would be easy to gather. Peterson said the type of assisted housing is a factor that leads to
high mobility, and can present a special problem. Clausen asked if the mobility data includes information on
the type of housing in which the students live. Vandenberg replied that the data involves the percentages of
students who enroll in and leave each school building.
Stutsman noted that mobility was listed as one of the biggest challenges in the schools. Peterson replied that
mobility definitely correlates with poverty. Though she was thinking more in relation to transitional housing, it
is also an issue with lower income housing in general because of lack of stability. Hayek suggested it could
be a proxy for neighborhood cohesion.
Peterson asked if mobility would be added to the criteria list. Hayek asked if there is a consensus to add
mobility data from the schools to the criteria list. Anthony said that it should be added only if it can be linked
to Iow ITBS scores. Peterson asked if the data is linked. Vandenberg replied yes, mobility is a big issue even
for middle class children.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 2
Anthony asked if the data is available for mobility versus Iow ITBS scores. Vandenberg replied that data
could be retrieved. Anthony noted that he did not find a correlation between mobility and Iow scores in his
preliminary study of the currently available data. Vandenberg said that data might be available by looking at
students who had attended at a particular school building for less than a year. She said she will check on
getting the information for the Taskforce. Anthony said mobility could be useful if it can be linked to
performance.
Hayek invited discussion about the criteria currently on the list. Stutsman asked if Hayek is looking for a
consensus on the items. Hayek replied that the Taskforce needs to decide yes or no to the list of criteria.
Some discussion may be needed for the individual points. Clausen asked if a percent per census tract cutoff
should be defined. Anciaux answered that the question is whether the Taskforce wishes to use this criteria.
Peterson asked if rental and ownership data should be included in the criteria. Hayek replied the first table
includes data on all kinds of assisted housing, which is linked to the Physical Inventory of Assisted Housing
list that sparked much discussion at the last meeting. Stutsman asked why that information would not be
included. Peterson replied there might be different impacts due to owner-occupied versus rental units, in
terms of stability, income, and density. Assisted housing is a very large category, and may not get to where
the problem lies.
Hayek asked what the breakdown of assisted housing units is in the community. Nasby replied they are
predominantly rental units, and noted that specific numbers and addresses can be obtained for owner-
occupied assisted units. He said that an estimate of the number of assisted owner-occupied units is under
100, and as such the ratio of rental to owner-occupied units is probably about 10:1 or higher. Clausen noted
that the table indicates a much longer list of rental units than owner-occupied ones. Hayek said he is not sure
how much impact that distinction may have on the discussion.
Vandenberg said that the spectrum of the types of housing, including student, elderly, and disabled, may be
addressed as a secondary concern when discussing impacts. Hayek agreed, saying that though numerically
there may be a concentration of a particular housing type, the impact could be different.
Vandenberg asked about the final point under the secondary considerations, whether the crime data was not
useful. Hayek replied that the current data broken down by watch area basically shows where the large retail
centers are located. He noted that the data gathered by the Gazette was from a very small number of
incident codes and was only for a short period of time.
Hayek asked the Taskforce if the crime data was useful. Vandenberg replied that point may also be an
impact. Left noted that the data does not give meaningful information about serious crimes such as assault.
Stutsman said that data can be gathered, but it would be very time-intensive to weed out those who were
charged versus those who were not, to remove duplicate data. Hayek agreed that the crime data would be
more appropriately considered an impact.
Peterson said the criteria seemed very clean in terms of defining concentration, while impacts are separate
under the secondary considerations.
MOTION: Vandenberg moved to adopt the five definition criteria listed with the addition of mobility data in
elementary schools, as available. Stutsman seconded. Hayek asked if there was any discussion of the
motion.
Anthony suggested the Taskforce make the link between mobility data and school performance before
adopting that as a criteria, to avoid having criteria adopted for which no link can be found. Also, regarding the
question of rental versus owner-occupied assisted housing, for example tract 18 has the highest percentage
of owner-occupied units in the city, which may skew the data under consideration. The criteria should be
linked to school performance, to give a solid base to the argument.
Vandenberg asked where the owner-occupied statistic came from on census tract level. Anthony replied
Rackis provided it. Peterson noted the potential problems with owner-occupied versus rental unit data is the
reason she keeps looking at that particular issue. Anciaux said that the highest percentage of assisted
housing is rental units, which is indicated on table 1 on the right side. He is looking at the percentage of
assisted rental units only, and not considering owner-occupied assisted housing units because there are
relatively so few.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 3
Anciaux continued by saying that if a concentration is found, a goal can then be created for not to allow more
than a certain percent of all units built in a particular area be assisted units, for example. Vandenberg asked
if a specific percentage needs to be identified in the criteria. At one time the proposal was to use two times
the city average. Anciaux said yes, it will need to be determined. Section 8 vouchers will continue to be used
where the families can find housing, but guidelines can be laid out for developers interested in building
assisted housing, outlining where it can be built.
Peterson said she does not want to randomly pick a number because of the ramifications it will have on the
availability of affordable housing. Vandenberg explained that the formula of two times the city average was
discussed at the November 22 meeting, and was a Federal desegregation guideline. Peterson noted that a
rationale is needed for any number chosen. Hayek said he thinks everyone on the Taskforce agrees that any
number chosen is somewhat arbitrary and at a minimum needs to be defensible.
Anthony said that regarding the criteria, which are all good, unless they are linked to an impact, there could
be no defense of the decision. If percentage of free/reduced lunches can be linked to assisted housing, it
should be taken into consideration. Clausen asked if the link with flee/reduced is known. Anthony replied no.
Clausen asked if free/reduced can be linked to criteria points 1 and 2. Left said linking with points 3 through 6
can be done. Clausen agreed, but noted that elderly and disabled cannot be related to schools, so if they are
included, free/reduced cannot be linked to points 1 and 2. She is fine with linking it to points 3 through 6.
Anciaux asked if the criteria need to be linked to school proficiency, or if it is enough to discuss where Iow-
income housing is located and whether or not it is concentrated. Anthony said other criteria could be linked to
Iow-income housing locations and concentration. However, for point 3 about free/reduced lunch, the
Taskforce does not have data with which to make a link. Free/reduced numbers are not available according
to the type of housing, whether assisted or not. Also, the Taskforce is not looking at the impacts in schools,
just whether or not there is a concentration. For that, the data is not needed, so it should be removed.
Clausen asked for confirmation that the free/reduced data in question was not 'available because of
confidentiality issues. Anthony and Vandenberg replied yes. Left asked if point 3 should be removed.
Clausen agreed.
Nasby noted there is a motion currently on the table, and asked if there is an amendment to the motion.
Hayek replied the Taskforce is still discussing it.
Vandenberg asked if it is a large leap to say that a high number of assisted housing units in an elementary
school attendance area impacts free/reduced lunch numbers. Anthony replied it is a large leap, because in
some areas, though overall school enrollment has decreased, free/reduced enrollment has increased. Also,
in areas where school enrollment has increased, flee/reduced enrollment has increased at a higher rate than
general enrollment. He feels that increases in free/reduced is because as the economy suffers, a greater
number of families qualify for free/reduced even though they do not live in assisted housing. Also, he would
like to see free/reduced numbers compared to ITBS performance scores.
Anthony suggested that since the flee/reduced data is unavailable, the Taskforce should turn its attention to
something else. Vandenberg added that the data would become very complex because of factoring out the
additional programs and resources available at schools with the higher percentages of free/reduced. Anthony
replied that the data is not helpful then, it is not needed to determine concentration of assisted housing, and
so it should be left out.
Hayek asked if leaving that data out affects other processes, such as impacts. Anthony said if numbers are
available, they should be used. Otherwise, drop the line of inquiry and move on, because developers will be
dismayed by the Taskforce's decision, so the numbers used need to be clear, and the Taskforce's
recommendation needs to be defensible and reasonable. Peterson said that the discussion of impact will be
very important in the process, because that has more meaning for her than just looking at concentration.
Impacts are what will lead to development of the housing recommendations.
Anthony noted that some Iowa City schools have done very well on their ITBS scores, and asked if the
percentiles given are statewide comparisons. Left replied they are against a national percentile and that Iowa
City schools scores slightly lower in the state percentiles. Anthony asked how Iowa City School District
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 4
compares within the State. Left replied Iowa City still ranks among the highest scoring districts, along with
Ames and West Des Moines.
Stutsman asked if the motion will be amended. Vandenberg asked if the motion should be amended. Hayek
asked if there is a consensus that point 3 should be removed from the criteria list. Clausen and Left agreed.
Peterson said it would be wise to be cautious. Stutsman agreed to remove it from the criteria if it can be
addressed under impacts.
MOTION: Vandenberg amended her motion to accept the list of criteria with the addition of school mobility
data, to include deleting point 3 from the list. Stutsman seconded.
Anthony noted that point 4 can go either way in an argument. For example, not having services in other
tracts would be an argument against building assisted housing in those tracts, because services would then
have to be moved into those other locations. Anciaux noted that the reference articles presented two
opposed opinions about the concentration of services. However, since Iowa City is small, it is less likely that
services will be inaccessible regardless of where they are located.
Clausen noted that at the last meeting it was discussed that services moved to a certain area after the need
arose. Peterson said services were located there because that was where they were needed, and
questioned whether that is a problem now. Hayek replied that it is not a ~roblem so much as it could be an
indication that there is a concentration in an area.
Stutsman added that there has been resistance to establishing services in outlying areas because of
transportation issues. Hayek said that is an impact issue, so the question is whether point 4 should be used
to define concentration. Anciaux questioned how much more concentration of Iow-income families is desired
in areas that are close to services. Not everyone needs the same services.
Stutsman said the services are located where they are because there was a need. Anciaux noted that the
services are offered for the entire community. Peterson suggested the services are located there because
the land or space was affordable. Anciaux replied that if financial concerns are the primary reason for
determining locations of services, assistance should be provided to help spread them out. This may create
more housing opportunities, by not forcing families to live in certain locations in order to have access to these
services.
Peterson said she is in favor of having services accessible to all residents of Johnson County, so the
question is whether this is a viable indicator. Anthony asked if the criteria point helps in the definition in any
way. Anciaux noted that services can go anywhere in the Iowa City area and be accessible to residents.
Hayek added that statement assumes private or public transportation. Stutsman also disagreed, saying that
not all families have cars. Anciaux replied that in making that statement, he assumes all people have access
to public transportation.
Vandenberg said services are located where they are Largely because of an issue of need. Peterson noted
that Shelter House is being built in its new location because of financial reasons. Anciaux said that in his
opinion Shelter House should have been located elsewhere. Peterson asked where. Anciaux replied across
from the lC Recreation Center by the bus depot.
Vandenberg suggested that both considerations factored into the decisions of where to located services.
Stutsman suggested property values are lower in the area because there is a high concentration of Iow-
income families. Vandenberg agreed, saying that perception became reality.
Hayek said the task is to determine whether the location of services, whether police, non-profit, or
social/human service, is helpful in identifying concentration of assisted housing. Clausen replied that she
thinks it is an impact of concentration. The location is not a definition of concentration, though concentration
of assisted housing may draw services into an area. Anciaux noted that a satellite police station was opened
in the Broadway area. Vandenberg agreed that other services such as DHS and Adult Corrections have
chosen to have additional offices in the area too, so it should be a consideration under impacts.
Rackis arrived at this point.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 5
Peterson said it is a very complex issue, because there are a number of considerations that factor into
location selection. Left questioned that while Vandenberg said some services chose to have offices in that
area, was it really a choice? Vandenberg replied that it might have been more an issue of efficiency, and not
so much choice. Peterson said that when dealing with limited resources, services do choose to operate in
certain areas because it is easier to reach a higher number of people.
Left said she thinks location of services is a criterion. Stutsman agreed, pointing out that there are no
services in Walnut Ridge because there would be no point in placing them there. Left noted there are many
tracts without as high a number of services. Stutsman said that policymakers have chosen to locate offices in
the area because of the accessibility and efficiencies.
Clausen said then the services are not a definition, because having services located in an area does not
mean there is a concentration present. Vandenberg said her interpretation is that a need for services in an
area is an indicator of concentration. Anciaux noted that having services in an area does not mean more
assisted housing needs to be built in that area. While traveling on the bus with children may be difficult, for
example, Iowa City is still not a very large area for service providers to spread out into.
Hayek asked how many would like to remove point 4 from the criteria. Anthony, Clausen, and Peterson
would like it categorized as an impact. Leff would like to keep it as a criterion. Vandenberg said it is both
criteria and impact. Hayek agreed it is both, but would like it to remain a criterion. Anciaux said it should be a
criterion, because the number of services in the area both now and in the future should be taken into
consideration.
Hayek suggested noting the concerns of the three who would like to have services (point 4) removed, but
continuing with the vote on the amended motion as outlined above. The Taskforce members expressed
general agreement with that suggestion.
Rackis offered some insight on the decisions to locate services in Eastdale Mall. As far as Workforce
Development was concerned, the chief consideration was cost. Also, Goodwill Industries and another service
agency was already there at the time Workforce was moving. In conjunction with the Federal Workforce
Investment Act of 1998, the Governor of Iowa made DHS a mandatory partner for co-location with the
employment training programs. He said that DHS was interested in that building because of a desire to
move the Income Maintenance workers into the same facility as the Promised Jobs workers, who were
working with the same population. DHS was also able to share a phone system with other groups, which
made the move affordable for them. So, many dynamics were involved in locating the services in Eastdale
Mall, not all involving the local area population.
Stutsman noted that during the deliberations to decide where to locate services, that area was indicated as
being very appealing. The County had even purchased land on Mall Drive for a Human Services Health
Service. Rackis added that another reason was because it is on a bus line, which is a key requirement for
Workforce Development.
Hayek asked if there is agreement with noting the concerns on point 4 in the criteria and continuing with the
vote. Left asked if a vote is needed on the amendment first. Hayek said yes. Anciaux asked if all motions
could be withdrawn and process begun again, to avoid confusion. Nasby said no they should be voted on.
Hayek explained that the amended motion currently on the table for a vote is to approve criteria points 1, 2,
4, and 5, with the addition of mobility data from elementary schools if it is linked to proficiency as point 6.
Hayek asked if there was any more discussion about the motion.
VOTE: 7-0-1 voted in favor of the amended motion (Anthony abstaining). Reservations of some of the
Taskforce members are noted with the acceptance of criteria point 4.
Peterson asked what the next step is. Hayek replied next is a determination whether there is a concentration
according to the adopted criteria. Clausen asked if a specific percentage needs to be established first.
Anthony suggested investigating impacts first. Hayek asked if the Taskforce would like to adopt
Vandenberg's suggestion of two times the City averages.
Anciaux asked what the Federal guidelines are for a concentration. Vandenberg replied it is 40%. Anthony
and Nasby noted 40% is for poverty. Nasby noted that poverty level is 30% of the area median income.
Anthony said that there are census tracts that meet that 40% poverty standard.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 6
Anthony asked if the City has guidelines for measuring any kinds of concentration. Nasby replied it does in
CITY STEPS. Anthony asked for confirmation that the guidelines outlines in CITY STEPS are acceptable
with HUD. Nasby said the CITY STEPS Plan has used this definition since 1995 and HUD had accepted the
plans. Anthony recommended following the City guidelines regarding concentration as outlined in CITY
STEPS. Nasby said, for clarification, the number for defining concentration in CITY STEPS is 10% more than
the City average, and this is used for indicating concentrations of both Iow/mod income and minority
households.
Hayek asked if the same measure is used for all issues. Nasby explained that HUD only requires the City to
determine concentrations for those two demographic categories. Hayek asked how that would be applied to
the two tables adopted in the criteria. Nasby replied that with a 7.4% citywide average in the number of
assisted rental units, any tract with 17.4% or higher would be concentrated.
Anthony recommended using the City guidelines as the Council has already approved it and HUD has
accepted the definition. Vandenberg said she did not know such a guideline already existed, and agreed that
using the CITY STEPS number makes sense. Stutsman asked for confirmation that determination of the City
guideline was a community process. Nasby replied that the number was established in the original CITY
STEPS plan in 1995, and though it is open to discussion annually, it has not been changed for any of the
succeeding two 5-year plans. He said that the definition of concentration is a community-determined
guideline so each city could be different.
Clausen said if the CITY STEPS guideline is used, only tract 4 has a concentration looking at the one table.
Vandenberg said if table 2 is used, there are concentrations in tracts 4 and 18. Hayek asked what this City
guideline is used to determine. Nasby replied it is used to determine concentrations of Iow/mod income and
minority households. The threshold is 10 percent more than the City average. For example, the City average
of Iow/mod income households is 53.4%, so any tract with 63.4% or more Iow/mod income families would be
concentrated. Anthony confirmed it is 10 percentage points above the City average.
Anthony noted there is a correlation between race, income, and assisted housing. A City-adopted standard is
much more defensible than creating a new number. Vandenberg agreed, but added that if following that
guideline, tract 18 does not have a concentration. Clausen replied that data from table 2 includes tract 18.
Anthony noted that table 2 is the percentage of the total assisted units in each tracts, which is a different
number.
Nasby said that if the Taskforce is using table 1, it depends on which half of the table is used, whether it is
rental only or includes owner-occupied units. He suggested perhaps taking a two-tiered approach. Anthony
said that 10% would need to be added to each table to determine the averages of all the sets of data.
Clausen pointed out that in table 1, tract 18 does not qualify. Anciaux noted however that the percentage in
tract 18 could not rise very much. Anthony agreed.
Anthony said that extending the City guideline to include this issue is easy to defend. Vandenberg disagreed;
saying that not having a concentration in tract 18 does not make sense. Anciaux replied that tract 18 is very
close to the proposed cutoff and the number of assisted units can only rise 1.1%. Clausen said the number
would be different if using the number of all units in the tract. Vandenberg said that it would be important to
factor out elderly and student populations in that case, in order to keep to the spectrum of need in mind.
Anciaux pointed out that assisted housing consists primarily of rental units, and is also the type of housing
the City can influence most directly, so the Taskforce should go with the data in table 2. Though tract 18
does not qualify, it is close to the cutoff point. Vandenberg replied that it does not make sense for that tract
not to fit in to the criteria. Anciaux added that there is a concentration of services in that area, too, which may
skew the data.
Nasby said that if considering only rental units, keep in mind that some tracts have a very Iow percentage of
rental units overall, which would remove those from consideration. For example, tract 105 would not qualify
even though it includes Windsor Ridge, because it is a predominantly owner-occupied tract. Vandenberg
said that while she agrees with the City's definition of concentration, perhaps table 2 is not the correct table
to use in the criteria.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 7
Anciaux asked what assisted housing population Windsor Ridge serves. Nasby replied it is 75 units of
housing for the elderly. Anthony noted that if using the left-hand side of table 1, tract 105 fits, and so perhaps
that is the data to use. Nasby pointed out that side of table 1 includes owner-occupied units. Anciaux said
that using the data from the left side of table 1, tract 18 has a relatively Iow number and has room for an
additional 10% of assisted housing units. Rackis replied that is because of the high number of owner-
occupied units in the tract overall. Tract 18 has a higher percentage of owner-occupied units than the City as
a whole. Also, the total number of units is very high already, plus there is room to grow.
Vandenberg clarified that the difficulty is with density. Anthony agreed, questioning what if the Taskforce
focuses only on rental units while the difficulties are the result of owner-occupied units? If so, and owner-
occupied units are allowed to increase, the issues may become worse. Right now, in tract 18, 58% of the
units are owner-occupied, while 42% are rentals. So, it is likely the issue rests with both types. Hayek
pointed out that those numbers reflect all units, whether or not they are assisted housing. Anthony agreed,
noting that in order to solve the problem, other populations may need to come into the area rather than
limiting the number of assisted rental units.
Anthony continued by noting that what is currently being said in these deliberations is that more assisted
housing is not wanted in certain tracts. While that may be a valid concern due to impacts of assisted housing,
it may not prove to be a good public policy because of adverse effects on the amount of affordable housing
overall. Root causes of why assisted housing is moving into those tracts need to be examined, such as cost
of land and zoning laws.
For example, Anthony said that tract 18 is one of the few places where zoning allows construction of rental
units. Also, in the comprehensive plan, assisted housing has deliberately been concentrated into certain
areas. So, saying no more assisted housing will be I~uilt in certain tracts means that effectively no more
assisted housing will be built, unless some of the underlying factors are addressed. Those factors need to be
addressed in the discussion of where to stop assisted housing from being built, in light of where assisted
housing is allowed to be built. Stutsman said that NIMBY-ism will not allow assisted housing to be built in
certain areas. Anciaux suggested that a fair-share policy and possibly some type of inclusionary zoning could
be considered.
Hayek said the Taskforce needs to finish the discussion about what percent to use in determining
concentration, whether that would be the CITY STEPS' number or some other one. After doing that and
determining if there are concentrations according to the criteria adopted, then the Taskforce will look at
impacts.
Anthony said there is a strong logic with going with the CITY STEPS' numbers, because of having to defend
the decision to developers, as well as the fact that not using the City's numbers may be questioned. The
Taskforce members expressed general agreement. Stutsman noted the issue is with what tables the number
will be applied to.
Peterson pointed out that both tables 1 and 2 are only part of the criteria just accepted by the Taskforce.
Hayek agreed, asking if the City standard would only apply to table 2, the poverty level per census tract.
Anthony replied no, it should be applied across the board. Hayek noted that, statistically speaking, if
comparison numbers are at the lower end of the spectrum, 10 percentage points added to a lower number
has much more significance than if added to a higher number. Anthony said he still recommends using the
City number because deviating from a City standard will require very strong logic to back up. The same
number can be applied across the board for many different issues. If the City and HUD accept the number,
then go with it.
Vandenberg asked whether the formula should be applied to table 2. Hayek replied that the number of
census tracts should be divided into 100 to obtain an average per tract for assisted housing. There are 17
tracts, but it might not be defensible to simply divide into 100 to get an average. Anthony disagreed, saying
that table 2 is just the total of where the units are, and does not relate that to the total number of units in each
tract. What needs to be decided is which side of table 1 should be used.
Hayek pointed out that table 2 is part of the criteria, then suggested that perhaps table 2 should not have any
formulas applied to it, but should stand alone. Anthony said that table 2 does not give any useful information.
For example, assuming there are a total of 100 assisted units in the City overall, table 2 says that of those
100 units, one third are in tract 4. If tract 4 has only 34 units total, then having 34 assisted units in that tract is
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 8
a problem. However, if tract 4 has 3400 units total, 34 of which are assisted, then there is not so much of a
problem. The table does not give information relative to the rest of the City. The issue is table 1.
Vandenberg noted that table 2 gives information on the varied percentages in different areas. Clausen
agreed, saying the table shows that assisted housing is not scattered, because of all assisted housing
available, most of it is located in two tracts. It gives information on its own, without applying formulas to the
data. Hayek said that table 2 could be used, with exceptions in the data noted when discussing impacts. For
example, though a tract may show a high number of assisted housing units, the impact is different for some
reason, possibly because of a higher number of units overall.
Anciaux asked where tract 105 is located. Hayek replied it is on the east side of town.
Nasby suggested that additional data could come from listing the percentage of all housing units in the City
that are located in each tract, and compare that to the percent of assisted housing units in each tract.
Vandenberg replied then the density issue comes into play, which is a dual issue for the schools because of
problems that arise from both assisted housing, as well as the overall high number of units in the attendance
areas. The percentage may show a small number compared against the overall tract population. The number
of rental units varies widely between tracts.
Rackis said it is a problem not to be able to determine how many high-needs students live in assisted
housing versus non-assisted units. Vandenberg said that anecdotally, she knows that DVIP, MECCA, and
HACAP are issues. Rackis agreed that the type of assisted housing is a concern.
Anciaux asked if the City tracks how many houses are sold on contract, which then are listed as owner-
occupied but operate as rentals. Is this a problem in Iowa City? Nasby said that the Recorder's Office may
have that information, but it does not appear to be as pervasive in Iowa City as elsewhere. He said that in the
Housing Rehabilitation Program he would guess the number of contract sales at less than 2%.
Anthony said the reason he has concerns with table 2 is because some tracts do not allow assisted housing
because of zoning. Issues like those need to be factored out, so it does not say much. Hayek pointed out
that lack of assisted housing one place does not mean it is not concentrated, and may raise questions about
current zoning.
Vandenberg asked whether any areas were identified as having more than the City average when the City
created the 10% criteria for Iow/mod income families. Nasby replied that census tract 4 qualified as 10%
above the City a~,erage for minority households. For Iow/mod income, the census tracts down town qualified
but none of the others. Hayek noted that is a product of the student population living in the downtown area.
Vandenberg said that the difficulty lies in considering so broad a spectrum, including students, elderly, and
disabled. The high need families are the ones with high impact, and including all the groups complicates the
issue. Anthony said that students should be taken into account, because even though they are temporary,
more students replace the ones who leave, and the character of the neighborhood remains the same.
Hayek said that students may not be factored out, but perhaps recognition could be given that student
poverty is different than other kinds of poverty. For one, it is temporary. Stutsman agreed, saying it is self-
imposed, as well. Anthony noted that though it is self-imposed on an individual basis, groups of students
come through again and again, and that has an impact. Clausen agreed that students have an impact on the
Northside neighborhood. Vandenberg pointed out that students do not live in assisted housing. Clausen
noted there is less assisted housing located in those areas populated by students.
Hayek said that student poverty issues can be discussed as impacts. Peterson said she views the secondary
considerations as impact questions to consider. So, when a concentration is identified, the impacts can begin
sorting out the various types. She noted it is strange not to have tract 18 meet the criteria, though.
Vandenberg agreed.
Hayek said that if elderly and disabled are factored out, the only tracts that have above 17.4% according to
table 1 are tracts 4 and 14. Tract 21 is largely elderly/disabled, and 105 is only a high percentage due to
Regency Heights.
Anthony asked why elderly should be factored out, since they need to use services and the Taskforce is
looking at all assisted housing. Clausen agreed, noting that the Taskforce is not just looking at school data,
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 9
but the issue of assisted housing overall. Hayek agreed, but added that it could be argued that the impacts of
the different types are different. Peterson noted that would be covered in the impact discussion
Peterson asked whether a tract is out of the discussion if it does not qualify according to the 10% formula
applied to table 1. Clausen suggested taking into consideration that tract 18 meets a certain number of the
listed criteria, such as three of the five. Then it would qualify in another way. Left agreed that meeting some
but not all criteria would work.
Hayek asked for confirmation that meeting three of the five criteria points would qualify for the definition of
concentration. Peterson asked if tract 18 would then qualify. Clausen said it meets point 4. Vandenberg said
that programs for high needs are consistently targeted for schools in tract 18. Tract 18 needs to qualify.
Nasby left the meeting.
Anciaux asked what Federal criteria was used for the desegregation guideline. Vandenberg replied it was
two times the district average. Anthony noted the City does not use that as its criteria. Vandenberg agreed
that it makes sense to use the City number. Anthony said he is looking for a number that is defensible in a
debate. Stutsman asked what the point of continuing the discussion is, if the criterion shows there is no
problem. Left replied that not all criteria need to be fulfilled in order to qualify.
Stutsman agreed that the criteria make sense, but tract 18 should be included. Clausen noted that tract 18 is
very close to the potential cutoff point. Anciaux said that if the left side of table I is used, then tract 18 is not
that close to the cutoff. Vandenberg asked if it is valid to use the percentages that way, since they vary so
much.
Left said that though tract 18 is only 1.1% away from a potential cutoff when using table 1 that may still be
too much more for the schools to handle. Anciaux replied that 1.1% may be the light at the end of the tunnel
for residents of the area. Vandenberg added that it would be 1.1% of the total number of units, which would
be a lot of people. Left said that is why she agrees with having tracts qualify by meeting three of the five
criteria.
Anciaux asked how many blocks are in a census tract, and if it would be difficult to break table 1 data down
into blocks. Glaesemann replied each census tract is broken down into two or three block groups, and data is
available on how many assisted housing units are located in each. Peterson asked how many blocks are in a
block group. Anthony replied tracts are broken into 10-15 blocks.
Anciaux suggested that obtaining data from the block groups may skew the data and also might give more
specific information about the location of housing. He noted that he would like to have the information broken
down to the block level. Glaesemann replied that while census data does break down to the block level,
certain data such as income are not available at that level, in order to preserve anonymity. Anthony agreed.
Glaesemann added that the students gathered and mapped the information for table 1, so the data is
available only down to the block group.
Clausen asked for confirmation that block group size varies. Glaesemann replied yes, depending on the
population.
Hayek noted that the Taskforce has not formally adopted the City's guideline for concentration being at 10%
above the City average, or decided whether it applies to table 1, 2, or both. Vandenberg said the percentage
cannot apply to table 2. Hayek agreed, saying that table 2 should stand on its own. Anthony agreed the
percentage should apply only to table 1, and noted that tracts that do not allow assisted housing need to be
factored out of the data. Vandenberg said information outlining the fact that some tracts do not allow assisted
housing could be included in the Taskforce's report.
Hayek said that Anthony's recommendation to apply a percentage that is defensible is a good approach,
though it will have an impact on the data on table 1. Clausen pointed out that tract 18 will qualify using other
criteria, and data gathered at the block group level may give more specific information about other areas that
qualify. Vandenberg said that tract 18 will qualify according to the nature of assisted housing available.
MOTION: Stutsman moved to adopt the CITY STEPS criteria for concentration, that being 10% above the
City average, applied to the right side of table 1. Leff seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 6, 2004
Page 10
Peterson asked whether the Taskforce needs to officially adopt a number for the criteria needed for a tract to
have a concentration. Anciaux said he would like to see the data broken down into block groups first.
Clausen said she would like to see the mobility data linked with proficiency. Anthony would like to have the
location of services in official form, so as not to rely solely on personal knowledge. Clausen added that
information outlining both where the service is and when it was put in that location would be helpful.
Hayek inquired about the next meeting date, which currently is December 20. Anciaux, Left, Vandenberg,
and Hayek may have conflicts that night. Anciaux suggested meeting December 13. Glaesemann noted that
block group data will not be available in time for a meeting on December 13, since that would give only two
days to put the data together and Finals are coming up.
Clausen asked if the mobility and proficiency data can be gathered in a week. Vandenberg said it depends
on where the data is and how difficult it would be to pull. For example, if it is in a database, it can be put
together quickly. Anciaux and Anthony suggested meeting next in 2005.
Vandenberg asked about the timeline for the Taskforce, and whether some members should work on some
topics outside of the meetings in order to keep things on schedule. She volunteered to assist with that.
Hayek replied the plan still is to report to the City by the end of January or early February. However, the
Taskforce still has to get through steps two through four and have a public hearing.
Hayek asked about meeting on December 13. Anthony replied that the data may not be available. Anciaux
agreed that the students need to concentrate on Finals. Stutsman asked about meeting December 27.
Rackis replied that the City offices are closed that day.
Vandenberg asked if there is a way to divide and conquer the issue. Hayek agreed that would be helpful,
except the process is linear and not conducive to that approach. Also, the process is likely to speed up now
that the criteria have been decided. Step four will not require a large research project, rather
recommendations to the City on what to consider and investigate.
Clausen asked if the data can be received prior to the meeting to give time to read through it and be
prepared. Hayek noted that waiting until January to meet is a very long time, and asked how many people
would be available to meet on December 20. Four people would be available. Six people are available on
December 27. Hayek asked about meeting on the 13th even though the data may not be available.
Vandenberg suggested that meeting on the 13~ would keep the momentum going. Left agreed. Stutsman
asked if it would be useful to meet without the data. Glaesemann asked about meeting on a different day
during the week of the 13th. The data will not be available before the meeting, but it could be passed around.
Hayek asked if another day would work for the rest of the Taskforce. Peterson suggested meeting at a
different time during the day during the week of the 13th. Anciaux would not be able to attend.
Vandenberg asked whether there would be something to discuss without the data. Hayek asked if the school
data would be available by the 13th. Vandenberg replied she probably could get it by then. Clausen
suggested looking at points 4-6 and waiting on the block group data. Clausen asked also where information
about the location of services could be obtained. Hayek replied that Staff could put that together.
Consensus reached to meet next on December 13 at 5:00 p.m. Rackis said he will check on the conference
room. Hayek noted that it would be fine if the block group data were not available.
Hayek distributed data received from Charles Eastham from Greater Iowa City Housing Authority on ITBS
scores and proficiencies for review. It will also be included in the packet for the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Anciaux moved to adjourn. Clausen seconded, and the motion passed uncontested. The meeting
was adjourned at 6:55 pm.
Minutes submitted by Robyn Miessler-Kubanek
s:lpcdlminuteslScatteredSiteHousingTaskforcell 2-06-04ssht,doc
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce
Attendance Record
2004
04/29 05/12 05/17 06/07 06/21 07/12 07/19 08/02 08/16 08/30 09/20 10/04 10/18 11/08 11/22 12/06 12/20
D. Anciaux X X X X X O/E O/E X X X O/E X X X X X
J. Anthony X O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X
D. Clausen X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X
M. Hayek X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
J. Left X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
J. Peterson X X X X O/E X X O/E X X X X X O/E O/E X
S. Stutsman O/E X X X X O/E X O/E O/E X O/E X X X X X
VandenBerg X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
MINUTES IP9
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Denis Keitel, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer, Michael Wright
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek
OTHERS PRESENT: Viles Velton, Greg Schrock, Drew Dillman, Ron Kramer, John Nolan, Paul
Campo, Dick Brown, Nestor Lobodiak, Dick Larew
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Keitel called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM.
CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 10, 2004 BOARD MINUTES
MOTION: Maurer moved to approve the minutes from November 10, 2004. Wright seconded the
motion, Motion passed 5:0.
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS:
EX004-00022 Reconsideration of an application submitted by Verizon Wireless for a special exception to
permit installation of a telecommunication tower site for property located in the Interim Development
Single Family Residential (I-DRS) zone at 637 Foster Road.
Miklo said that at the last meeting the Board failed to approve the application with a vote of 2 to 2. He
added that in the meantime the applicant had provided further information regarding the lighting, which
was a concern for some Board members. Miklo said that the height of the tower would also be reduced
from 150 feet to 130 feet.
Miklo said that communication towers and satellite devices are permitted by special exception in the ID-
RS zone, provided the distance of the tower from the property line is equal to or greater than its height
above grade. He mentioned that the tower is proposed to be located behind the storage garages for golf
carts on the Elks Club property at 637 Foster Road, approximately 400' from the Foster Road right-of-way
and 1,500' from the Iowa River. The base of the tower will be obscured by the trees in the area.
He said that according to the applicant, the proposed tower will have capacity for three additional wireless
providers. The applicant has provided an affidavit that Verizon Wireless has a policy of allowing co-
location on their towers. Co-location, while increasing the height of the tower, minimizes the number of
future towers that will be necessary to serve the area.
Miklo continued the staff report saying that the special exception must be in accordance to the general
standards. Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He mentioned that the setback requirement is meant to
address safety concerns if the tower were to fall. These types of towers, he said, are designed to fold in
on themselves if they become unstable. Miklo added that under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) preempts local government on regulating radio frequency
emissions of telecommunications facilities. Because the FCC regulates radio frequency emissions, a local
government may not deny a request to construct a facility based on perceptions that the tower may harm
the health of area residents.
Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. He said that while the tower will be visible from residential properties, it would not impede
their use or their further development.
Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in
the zone in which such property is located. He added that the tower will not affect development or
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
December 8, 2004
Page 2
redevelopment of other area properties. He said that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or
necessary facilities have been provided.
Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. He added that the applicant notes the site will generate two to four
vehicle trips per month per carrier. He mentioned that the existing access to Foster Road will be used,
and would not contribute to congestion on area public streets.
Mikio said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or
standards of the zone in which it is located. He mentioned that the use of communication tower should
not conflict with other permitted uses in the Interim Development zone.
Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said
that the proposed communication tower does not conflict with the use of the property as private open
space as designated by the Comprehensive Plan. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plan supports the
development of communication technologies within the City.
Miklo said that the main impact of the tower is visual. He said that the top of the tower will be visible from
properties in the neighborhood and properties on the other side of the Iowa River. He mentioned that the
applicant has provided justification for a tower in the area based on wireless service demand, and they
stated that the tower will have enough area for four carriers, thus minimizing the chance that additional
towers will locate in the area in the future.
Miklo said that staff recommends that £X004-00022 a special exception to permit installation of a
telecommunications tower site for property located in the Interim Development Single-Family Residential
(I-DRS) zone at 637 Foster Road be approved.
Maurer excused himself because he is a member of the Elks Club.
Public Hearing Opened
Viles Veltoq, 8500 W. 110th Street, Suite 300 Overland Park, KS, said that after the October meeting, and
after hearing the concerns of persons involved, Verizon Wireless has decided to reduce the height of the
tower from 150 feet to 130 feet. With regard to the lightning he said that lightning will not be necessary.
Gre.q Schrock, 821 Normandy Drive, said that he lives across the street from where the site is planned.
He said that he took a few pictures in the morning, and the skyline is gorgeous, and the tower will be
sticking up in the middle of all that. He said that there are other areas further back were the tower could
be placed. He added that the picture that was shown of where the tower will be placed is taken from the
side where the trees are the tallest. He said that they are being told that they will not see much of the
tower when in fact they will see a lot of the tower. Schrock mentioned that at the last meeting it was said
that the foliage will cover most of the tower. He added that there is no foliage at the moment. He said that
it would be better to locate the tower in a different place.
Drew Dillman, 845 Normandy Drive, said that his house faces directly at the tower. He said that he
appreciates the changes that have been made, and they are entirely positive. He said that he hoped that
it was mentioned in assurance in writing that they will not add lights to the tower. He said that he would
prefer not to have the tower at all, but if they have to have it, they would prefer that it be moved further
back from the river along the freeway. He said that he wanted to express the appreciation for the changes
made.
Ron Kramer, 1135 Pleasant Valley, said that he is one of the trustees of the Elks Club. He said that there
are 600 members that use the club. He mentioned that they worked with Verizon to place the tower in a
place that is least obtrusive for everybody. He added that if they were to move it further north the tower
will intrude in the golf course itself.
John Nolan, said that he is one of the trustees of the Elks Club. He said that Verizon will confer a major
benefit for the recipients of the tower signal, and that is the best place to put it to serve the University of
Iowa community.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
December 8, 2004
Page 3
Paul Campo, 1201 Walnut Street, Kansas City, said that he would like to read some exhibits that he
would like to be clear for the record. He mentioned: the Staff Report dated October 13 with attachment 1
to 4, the minutes from the October 13, and November 10th meetings, the letter from Federal Airways and
Airspace dated October 15 2004, the letter from Trevor Wood dated November 1st, the email from Trevor
Wood dated December 1st 2004, the email from Brice Pufahl dated November 9th 2004, the memorandum
from John Yapp dated December 1st 2004, and the photo simulation picture both at 130 feet and 150 feet.
He said that if the email from Brice Pufahl is reviewed, he talks about the capacity issue that drives the
tower. Calls are being made and they do not go through because towers have just a certain capacity.
Public Hearing Closed
MOTION: Wright moved to approve the special exception EXC04-00022 a special exception to
permit installation of a telecommunications tower site for property located in the Interim
Development Single-Family Residential (ID-RS) zone at 637 Foster Road subject to maximum
height of 130 feet and no lightning. Leigh seconded the motion.
Keitel said that he voted previously in favor of the motion. He added that knowing that there would be no
required lightning makes him more in favor of this. He said that he is in favor of expanding the
technological capabilities of Wireless communications. He said that will vote in favor.
Alexander said that she voted against when the issue first came up. She mentioned that she is pleased to
see the changes. She said that no one will be happy to have a tower in their, neighborhood, and as much
as she resists, she recognizes that is a part of the century, and she would vote in favor.
Leigh said that she also voted against at the last meeting. She said that she was concerned about
lightning. She said that she is very pleased with the changes made. She added that it meets both the
general and specific standards, and will vote in favor of the application.
Wright would vote in favor of the application. He said that he believes that it meets the general and
specific standards required for a special exception.
Motion passed with a vote of 4-0.
Maurer rejoined the meeting.
EXC04-00027 Discussion of an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a special exception
to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the property in the Low Density
Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue.
Miklo said that the First Presbyterian Church was built in 1974 when this property was zoned R1A, Single
Family Residence Zone. Churches were a permitted use in the R1A zone. In 1983, he said, as part of a
citywide rezoning, the City rezoned this property to RS-5, Low Density Single-Family. Religious
institutions require a special exception in the RS-5 zone. He added that any extension of the existing
church on this property requires approval of a special exception.
Miklo mentioned that the applicant is requesting a special exception to enlarge the parking area, to
provide an additional of 14 parking spaces. He added that this came to the City's attention when a nearby
resident complained about work being done on the property and wondered what it was for.
Miklo mentioned that there are some specific standards in the Zoning Ordinance regarding religious
institutions. He said that it is required that religious institutions have access to a collector or an arterial
street and that religious institutions in the RS-5 zone are required to have a minimum lot area of 40,000
square feet and buildings must be setback of 2 feet for every one-foot of building height. Miklo said that
the existing church and the proposed parking lot meet all of these requirements.
He said that because this would be a new parking area, the regulations for off-street parking and loading
would apply. The section requires that parking areas be hard-surfaced, provides dimensions for parking
aisles and spaces, and references screening and parking lot tree requirements. Miklo said that the
portion of the parking area within fifty feet of the residential lot shall be screened from view according to
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
December 8, 2004
Page 4
the screening section of the City Code. The section states that a planting screen of pyramidal arbor vitae
may be used, or other evergreen varieties may be used if approved by and spaced according to the City
Forester. Miklo added that the planting bed must be separated from the parking area by a curb or barrier
such that sand and saltwater runoff would not damage the screening.
Miklo mentioned that the applicant has submitted a site plan that shows compliance with the City's
screening and parking lot tree standards. Evergreen shrubs are proposed around the perimeter of the
area, and along the existing access drive to rear garage. He said that two parking lot trees are proposed,
one at north and one at the south end of the parking area.
Miklo said that in addition to the specific requirements for religious institutions, there are the general
standards that have to be met for a special exception. He said that the specific proposed exception
should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He
mentioned that in staffs view the expansion of this religious institution to include additional parking will
have minimal effect on public health, safety, comfort or welfare. He added that the parking area will
produce slightly more storm water runoff due to the impervious surface being added, however, the
existing drainage patterns are not proposed to change.
Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the
neighborhood. He mentioned that the proposed parking area is an expansion of an already existing area
and with the landscaping around the parking area, property values should not be affected.
Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in
the zone in which such property is located. He said that the proposed paved parking area will not affect
development of surrounding properties.
Next he said that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are
being provided. Miklo said that all are existing.
Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize
traffic congestion on public streets. He mentioned that existing driveways are in place to serve the
existing church.
Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being
considered, the specific exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or
standards of the zone in which it is located. He said that with implementation of the site plan dated
December 1st 2004, including the landscaping and tree requirements, all other City Codes would be met.
Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of
the City. He said that the Northeast District Plan identifies this area as appropriate for institutional uses,
which would include religious institutions.
Staff recommends that EXC04-0002? , an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a
special exception to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the property in the
Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be approved, subject to
conformance with parking area site plan dated December 1st, 2004.
Public Hearin.q Opened
Dick Brown, 2905 Saddle Club Road, said that they did not realize that they needed a permit to expand
the existing parking lot. He said that they applied for the exception to increase the parking lot. He added
that on Sunday mornings people have to park on the streets, and would prefer to have their own parking
lot. He said that a couple of letters complain about the application, and they are the same people that
complain about parking on street. Brown says that the light in the parking lot has been there till 1975 and
no one complained about it until now. He said that they would do whatever it is necessary to comply with
City requirements.
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
December 8, 2004
Page 5
Keitel asked if the land is generally sloping toward the southwest. Brown said that nothing drains to the
east, but towards the west.
Wright asked if the southwest part of the proposed parking lot would be adequately protected from
erosion. Brown said that if it required to do something more to stop the erosion than they would have to
do it, to protect themselves and surrounding properties.
Maurer asked if the land further west is still the property of the church. Brown replied that is just grass and
it is the property of the church.
Wright asked if the playground equipment belongs to the church. Brown said that it belongs to the
daycare center that works out of the church.
Nester Lobodiak, 229 Green Mountain Drive, said that he would break his concerns down into two areas,
procedural and substantive. He mentioned that procedural aspect, in October he was awakened by
construction equipment which started earth moving illegally without benefit of the required special
exception. He said that he called the City and got a stop work order issued. The church, as he said, filed
application for special exception by mail on approximately November 12th. He added that the next day he
was personally at the City Hall meeting with John Yapp. They went over the application which was
deficient, without conforming to the Zoning chapter. Lobodiak mentioned that he filed an opposition letter
on December 2nd showing that there was no effort to comply with the Zoning chapter by the church. He
added that in the previous night he found out that the church mailed a site plan the day before he filed the
opposition. He said that he was prepared to discuss about how the application does not comply with the
City requirements, however, he found out the night before that the church added materials to the
application, and did not have time to file any opposition to that matter.
Regarding the substantive nature he said that there is a portion of the parking area that would not be
screened, and it would directly affect his house. He said that the south-east corner should be screened
and it is not. He said that it is not screened because they put a driveway in an area which is currently only
grass. He said that he is not happy with the plan and he had only 22 hours to consider it.
He said that it is not screened; it does not tell that in fact they will plant arbor vitae, and the planting bed
must be separated from the parking area by a curb or barrier such that sand and saltwater runoff would
not damage the screening. He said that he does not believe that the site conforms to the site. He said that
the application should be tabled to wait for input from neighbors which did not have the revised site plan.
Brown said that the driveway that goes to the garage will never be paved.
Holecek said that it is traditionally practiced that when the applicant is notified that the application is
deficient it will augment the application, and the revised application and site plan presented in front of the
Board is what the Board should consider. She said that the persons do have notice, and the right to be
heard on the evidence, so she does not believe that it is deficient from this point of view.
Dick Larev~, said that he is a neighbor and also a member of the church. He said that he was out of the
country, and did not know that the church would be expanding the parking lot. He said that he came
home and got a note that the City had sent. He said that he has been in construction for many years. He
said that he went back to the code and found information readily available from the website, which is a big
improvement over the years. He said that he was concerned about some details, and he got the answers
from the new plan. He said that he would urge the board to approve the application.
MOTION: Maurer moved that EXC04-00027, an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church
for a special exception to permit a 60' by 80' paved extension of their current parking lot for the
property in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) Zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be
approved, subject to conformance with parking area site plan dated December 1st, 2004.
Alexander seconded the motion. Maurer amended the motion to add that the screening
requirements are met and extend as far south as the garage. Alexander seconded the motion.
Alexander said that she would vote in favor. She said that the application does comply with the
requirements for a special exception for religious institutions; the site plan is in compliance with the city
Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes
December 8, 2004
Page 6
screening and parking lot tree standards. Alexander added that it will not be detrimental to or endanger
the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, the proposed exception would not be injurious to the
use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair
property values in the neighborhood. The establishment of the specific proposed exception would not
impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses
permitted in the zone in which such property is located, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or
necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Adequate measures would be taken to provide
ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. She mentioned that adequate
utilities, drainage and access are in place to serve the existing church. Alexander said that the proposed
use is consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City.
Wright said that he would vote in favor. He said that he had some concerns in terms of water run off. He
added that it meets the general and specific standards.
Keitel said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated. He said that as a professional
engineer he is not concerned about the stormwater numbers presented from the City engineer.
Maurer said that he would vote in favor for the reasons already stated.
Leigh said that she would vote in favor for the reasons already stated.
Motion passed 5-0.
APL04-00004: Miklo reported the appeal was withdrawn.
OTHER:
The next meeting of the Board will be on January 12th 2005.
Miklo presented a certificate for Keitel's 5 years of service in the board.
Holecek reminded the Board that they have to use the general and specific standards as basis for their
decisions, to show the logic of their conclusions.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM.
Board Chairperson Board Secretary
Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus
s:lpcdlminutes/boa120041boa12-OS~O4.doc
Board of Adjustment
Attendance Record
2004
Tel-m
Name Expires 01/14 02/11 03/10 04/14 05/12 06/09 07/14 08/11 09/08 10/13 11/10 12/08
Carol Alexander 01/01/08 NM X X X NM X X X NM X O/E X
Dennis Keitel 01/01/05 NM X X X NM X O X NM X X X
Karen Leigh 01/01/07 NM X X X NM X X X NM X X X
Vincent Maurer 01/01/06 NM O X O/E NM X X X NM X O/E X
Michael Wright 01/01/09 NM X X X NM X X X NM X X X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
IPIO
MINUTES DRAFT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
DECEMBER 9, 2004- 7:00 P.M.
EMMA HARVAT HALL - CIVIC CENTER
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Justin Pardekooper, Jim Ponto, Tim Weitzel
MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Mark McCallum, Amy Smothers, Jann Weismiller
STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty
OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Helen Burford, Jim Harris, Edward Left, Emily Left, Lisa Left,
John Shaw, Regina Bailey
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION:
Certificates of Appropriateness.
701 Oakland Avenue. McCafferty stated that this is an application for a certificate of appropriateness for a
project at 701 Oakland Avenue. She said this is a non-contributing property in the Longfellow Historic
District.
McCafferty said the owners submitted an insurance claim, because their aluminum siding was damaged
by hail, and they have finally settled with their insurance company to reside the house with fiber cement
board. She said the house was originally done in stucco, which was damaged when the aluminum siding
was applied, so it really is not feasible to repair the stucco.
Edward Left said the five-inch fiber cement board is fine with him. He said the project will significantly
improve the appearance of the house. Ponto asked if the chimney would be boxed in, and Edward Left
confirmed this.
Gunn asked if the cornerboards and trimboards would stay in place, as much as possible. Edward Left
said that all of the trim will be fiber cement board, and the window trim would look like the wood. Gunn
asked about the finish for the closing in of the chimney. Edward Left said he assumed it would be fiber
cement board. Gunn said that he would prefer something with a stucco finish boxed in but just a smooth
finish of some kind. McCafferty said there is available a fiber cement board with a stucco texture that
comes in panels. Gunn suggested using that for the chimney, because then it looks a little bit like
masonry. Edward Left said that made sense, and he would be fine with that.
MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the siding at 701 Oakland
Avenue, including the alteration of the chimney box to use something with a stucco finish or fiber
cement board with a stucco texture. Gunn seconded the motion.
The motion carried on a vote of 5-0.
8 Bella Vista. McCafferty said this application includes a number of projects for this house. She said the
house is a Prairie School style home with Classical Revival influence, and the applicant proposes
changes to the front of the house.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 9, 2004
Page 2
McCafferty said the existing house has a crumbling patio in the front and also has brick infill where double
French doors were replaced. She said the house has an entry canopy, which is very likely not original, as
it does not really quite fit the house.
McCafferty said the owner proposes to replace the front canopy and also construct a new front patio that
would extend the entire width of the house and therefore cover up some basement windows. She said the
owner also would like to remove the infill brick and replace it with a French door and sidelights.
McCafferty said there would be some site work for concrete steps. She stated that John Shaw is the
architect for the project.
Harris said he saw an article about a house that is exactly like his in Cedar Rapids, which gave him ideas
as to what to do with his house. He said the house in Cedar Rapids had a 12-foot masonry original deck
on the front. Harris said the patio deck would be consistent with those on the house in Cedar Rapids.
Shaw said the entry canopy would be fairly close to the one on the Cedar Rapids house but would
obviously need to be modified to fit this house.
Gunn asked'what color brick would be used. Shaw said he intended to ask for a submittal at the time and
select the closest match. McCafferty noted that there is a local supplier of historic brick and gave the
contact information to Shaw.
MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the projects at 8 Bella Vista,
as proposed. Weitzel seconded the motion.
Maharry said this appears to fit the guidelines and would blend in nicely with the structure that is already
there.
Weitzel said the guidelines are very unclear on these kinds of porches, because there are not a lot of
these in Iowa City. He said this porch has clearly become a maintenance issue, and for preservation of
the main structure, something has to be done with it. Weitzel said the proposal to add drainage is a good
idea, and the windows can't really be seen from any elevation. He said the existing design of the porch is
not historically significant in and of itself so much that it couldn't be altered.
The motion carried on a vote of 5-0.
GILBERT-LINN STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT.
Maharry said there was not enough support at City Council to approve the district as proposed. He said
that because it is a planning and zoning matter, it will move to a joint meeting between the City Council
and Planning and Zoning Commission for further discussion. Maharry said after that the issue would
either be approved, denied, or sent back to the Historic Preservation Commission for revision.
Maharry said he thought the City Council seemed hesitant to approve the district in the face of
documented opposition by majority property owners. He said there were very passionate arguments
encouraging approval on the basis that it would be good for the City. Maharry said that not enough City
Council members agreed that the property owners' rights should be superseded by this becoming a local
district. He said a supermajority vote, six of seven members, was required for approval.
Maharry said there was not a lot of support for defeating this, even from those who were not in favor. He
said he felt people wanted to have the district sent back to the Commission for revision rather than having
it voted down outright.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 9, 2004
Page 3
2005 WORK PLAN:
Maharry stated that the Commission reviewed its past year's progress as well as projects for next year at
its annual work session meeting. He asked members to review the work plan for amendments or
adjustments before it is turned in to City Council.
Maharry said the Commission will place finding financial incentives for the upcoming year on its priority
list. Burford said the State has been lobbied to put money into its fiscal year budget for State tax credits.
She said, however, that nothing has been done to change the process in order to streamline the
paperwork. Burford added that the State is currently writing a homesteading act for historic homes to give
some type of homesteading tax credit. She said this has not yet been proposed to the legislature.
McCafferty stated that she would like to see local incentives for which the City could set its own
parameters, including not requiring the high threshold of a substantial rehabilitation. She said there are
some mechanisms by which local incentives could be done, one of which would be the area revitalization
district.
McCafferty said she would do more exploration on the incentives issue. She said that Dubuque provides
several incentives and said she would do research into those local tax incentives. McCafferty added that
the TARP Program is available for those meeting the income guidelines. She said the advantage to the
TARP Program would be that a homeowner would not have to comply with the HUD regulations.
McCafferty said that next year staff will work on the Central Planning District, and preservation will be a
significant part of that plan. She said the Commission may want to add it into the work plan as something
that the Commission will wish to have involvement with.
Maharry asked McCafferty, should she have time before her employment with the City ends, to collect
evidence for increasing the amount of staff time to be allocated to historic preservation, possibly using
comparisons to what other cities do. He noted that the amount of properties covered by Commission
review has increased by 30% since McCafferty became the planner for the Commission.
MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the 2005 Work Plan, with the addition of Commission
involvement in preparing the Central Planning District as a work plan item. Ponto seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0.
MINUTES: NOVEMBER 10, 2004.
MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the minutes of the November 10, 2004 meeting of the Historic
Preservation Commission, as written. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0.
DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION:
2005 HRDP Grant.
McCafferty said the Commission may want to apply for an HRDP grant to update the Preservation Plan,
as much of the survey and evaluation work has been done. She said, however, that the grant request is
due January 18th, McCafferty said that Richard Carlson would be willing to assist in the grant writing, and
Maharry and Weitzel also volunteered to help with writing the grant. McCafferty stated that this is a
matching grant so that City Council approval would be needed.
Iowa Cultural Community Grant.
McCafferty said the State suggested applying for this grant to get additional staff to work on educational
issues. Maharry noted that this grant application is due in March.
Preserve America Communities Application.
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 9, 2004
Page 4
McCaffedy said that she had not been able to review the requirements for this grant yet. Maharry said he
was not certain that there are any benefits from this grant. He said one criteria of this is a private/public
collaboration project that was done within the last three years. McCafferty said the Englert might qualify,
and Maharry said that 925 Washington Street also might qualify. Maharry noted that the deadline for this
grant occurs every quarter.
Save America's Treasures.
McCafferty said she included this article for Commission information.
Letter from State Historical Society of Iowa.
McCafferty said this is the official letter regarding the two historic districts that have been approved by the
State.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:58 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte.
s:lpcdlrninuteslhpc/2004HPCminuteslhpc12-O9-O4.doc
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
December 9, 2004
Page 5
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2004
reriTl
Name Expires 2/12 2/26 3/11 4/8 4/22 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/14 7/8 7/22 8/10 8/26 9/2 9/9 9/23 10/14 11/10 11/18 12/09
A. Smothers 3/29/05 X O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X O
J. Enloe 3/29/06 O/E X X X O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X X O X X X X X O X X X X
M. Maharry 3/29/05 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O
J Pardekooper 3/29/06 ............................................................................ X
J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X O/E O/E X X X
P. Sueppel 3/29/06 O/E O/E X X X X X X O X O ....................................
J Weissmiller 3/29/06 ........................................................ O X O/E O/E O O
T. Weitzel 3/29/05 X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X X X X X X X O X
J. Zimmer 3/29/07 ............ O/E O/E O/E X O/E X O O X X O O O ................
Key:
X = Present
O - Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
.... - Not a Member
IPll
MINUTES DRAFT
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 2005 - 3:30 PM
HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
Members Present: Kevin Wemer, Andy Chappell, Karen Kubby, Penny Davidsen (on
speakerphone), Naomi Novick, Vicki Lensing, Nate Green, Lynn Rowat, and William
Sueppel, Chair
Staff Present: Marian Karr, Eleanor Dilkes
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Sueppel called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM.
APPROVE M1NUTES
MOTION: Kubby moved to accept the minutes of December 8, 2004, as written;
seconded by Chappell. Motion carried 9 to 0.
MOTION: Kubby moved to accept the minutes of December 13, 2004, as written;
seconded by Novick. Motion carried 9 to 0.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
REVIEW CHARTER
Sueppel asked if any of the members had anything new they wanted to share. Hearing
nothing new, the members decided to discuss the four main issues that they have left.
The first issue, how the mayor is elected, was discussed. Novick stated that she feels
they have a good system now, and she likes that the mayor is part of the City Council and
gets to discuss and vote as a member of the Council. Davidsen stated that she feels the
election of the mayor should stay as it is, and that the mayor could be a district
representative, if the Commission chooses to go to "true districts." Kubby stated that she
has re-read the Charter many times, as well as talked to others, and she is still in favor of
going to a directly elected mayor. Chappell stated that he also supports the idea of a
directly elected mayor. Green stated that he originally was of the opinion that if our
system is working well that it should not be changed, but he feels there should be more
"openness" to the process. Werner stated that he likes the system as it is now, and he
feels the "first among equals" is best. Rowat stated that he feels that all voters have, in a
sense, had a chance to vote for who is going to be the mayor, by electing the Council
members. Lensing stated that she and Rowat were in the same group at the last public
hearing, and that what he stated is basically what their group felt: that if the
responsibilities of the mayor are not going to change, then leave the election of the mayor
as is. She, therefore, agrees that they should keep the system as is. The discussion then
turned to a term limit for the mayor, and Novick stated that people have been suggesting
Charter Review Commission
January 6, 2005
Page 2
a limit of four years. Sueppel ended the discussion by stating that he also feels the
system works as it is, and does not want to change at this time. Lensing noted that she
~vould like the Commission to let the Council know that they would like to see this
process done in as open and public of a manner as possible. Dilkes noted that in the past
this process was done by secret ballot, but that process was stopped and now the Council
member's vote must be public.
MOTION: Novick moved to "TA" Section 2.06 A, B and C--Mayor, as written;
seconded by Rowat. Motion carried 6 to 3 (Green, Chappell, and Kubby voting the
negative).
The discussion then turned to term limits for the mayor. Lensing stated that she has not
changed her mind on this, but noted that members of her group at the last public hearing
did bring this up. She wants to acknowledge that some people have concerns about this
and want term limits, but that as a Commission, she felt they had decided not to address
this area. Novick stated that quite a few people feel that four years should be the limit.
MOTION: Novick moved that the mayor, who is selected from among the Council
members, hold office for no more than four years (two terms). No second. Motion
dies.
Section 2.02 Division into council districts - Kubby stated that she would favor keeping
the 4 at-large, 3 district seats. Novick stated that the original idea behind this was to
make sure that representation was evenly distributed throughout the city. She noted that
in past Charter Review Commissions, the idea of having 5 districts was discussed, in
order to spread the representation around.
MOTION: Kubby moved to "TA" Section 2.02 Division into council districts as
written; seconded by Chappell. Motion carried 9 to 0.
Sueppel then turned the discussion to the "method of selecting district councilpersons.
Kubby stated that the question then that had them hesitating was: if they had true
districts and the majority of council felt that one of the district members was the best
person to be mayor, and had four or more votes to be mayor, what does that mean - is it a
good thing or not? She stated that she then tried to find some examples of this situation,
and does not feel that they would have a problem with it locally. Davidsen agreed with
Kubby's statement. Chappell noted that he has spoken in favor of the mayor being
directly elected by the people, and that since that idea was voted down, he feels the
system should stay as it is. The concept of voters being disenfranchised was discussed at
some length, with members giving their opinions. (TAPE ENDS)
MOTION: Section 2.01--Composition and 3.03--Regular city election - Kubby
moved to create language in the Charter to have the districts be true districts;
seconded by Chappell. Motion failed, 8 to 1, with Kubby voting in the positive, and
the remaining eight members voting in the negative.
Charter Review Commission
January 6, 2005
Page 3
MOTION: Lensing moved to "TA" Section 2.01 and 3.03 as written; seconded by
Green. Motion carried 8 to 1; Kubby voting in the negative.
MOTION: Kubby moved to "TA" the entire Charter as amended by previous
action of the Commission (as reflected in the red-line version dated 11/3/04 and one
additional change in Section 2.05); seconded by Rowat. Motion carried 9 to 0.
MOTION: Kubby moved to authorize Dilkes to make grammatical changes as
deemed necessary in the final redline version of the Charter; Novick seconded.
Motion carried 9 to 0.
REQUEST FOR VIDEO ON DEMAND (VOD) iNFORMATION
Karr explained to the members that this is a request that was in their December packet,
where the local government channel wanted to know if the Charter Commission was
interested in designating anyone on the Commission to do an interactive program with
their Infovision program. This issue had been put off during December due to the public
session that was being planned and held. Kubby suggested that they look into this from
more of an educational tool perspective. Karr will contact staff and ask they inform
Chair Sueppel of options.
PRESENTATION TO COUNCIL
Sueppel opened the discussion by asking who is going to prepare the presentation for the
City Council; what is it exactly that this person should prepare; and do they want to
include recommendations to the Council as to whether they should adopt the
recommendations by ordinance, or submit it to a vote of the people, and if they do this by
ordinance, does the Commission favor one ordinance, or perhaps more than one as some
are strictly grammatical changes, and others are things that people might want to take
issue with. Dilkes stated that her tentative opinion is that if the Council were to adopt
every change made in one ordinance, objectors could still, within 30 days, ask to have a
section of the ordinance be submitted to voters. Dilkes further stated she would need to
look at the issue in more detail.
Sueppel noted that Chappell had given the members a copy of an article from the County
News regarding San Francisco using ranked voting.
The discussion then turned to what the presentation would entail. Chappell stated that he
believes they need two documents to present to the Council. One would be the "nuts and
bolts" changes that the Commission is proposing, and the second document would be
narrative-type of report, further explaining the changes and issues that the Commission
has brought up. He feels that the first document, the "nuts and bolts", should be done by
staff (Karr & Dilkes), and the second document should be done by one of the members.
He further suggested that a Commission member do a draft, and then the Commission as
a whole wold review.
Charter Review Commission
January 6, 2005
Page 4
Kubby noted the following issues that have been raised by the Commission members
during their review: the police/fire chief being approved by Council and appointed by the
City Manager; restrictions on referendum; desire to have a citizen's guide for the Charter;
and the time-frame that was presented by staff. Sueppel suggested they review the
minutes from their meetings thus far, and pull the main discussion topics from there.
Chappell stated that he feels they should pick someone on the Commission to start a
preliminary draft of this presentation. Novick suggested that Chappell do this, and
members agreed. It was decided that Kubby would work with him, as well, on this draft.
Dilkes asked for clarification on what she and Karr are to do, which is an explanation of
the actual changes that are being made, and not issues that the Commission merely
discussed. She said they would include items such as the staff time-line as it will help to
clarify the changes.
Sueppel asked when this Commission ends, and Karr noted approximately May 4, 2005.
She further stated that the Commission's "work is done" when they present their proposal
to Council, but that does not mean that they won't be asked for further information or
review. Karr then asked for clarification of the January 14th meeting agenda. Items to be
addressed are: review public heating of January 13, and review final reports by
Dilkes/Karr and Chappell/Kubby. It was further decided that Chappell and Kubby would
have their version of the presentation to Karr by 10:00 AM on Thursday, January 13.
Dilkes ended the discussion by asking the members if they wanted to set a public hearing
for the Council on the Charter Commission's recommendations, and whether to give
them to the voters or do this by ordinance. Majority agreed to present recommendations
only, and not request setting of a hearing.
OLD BUSiNESS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Rowat moved to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Green. Meeting
adjourned at 5:13 PM.
IP12
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
NOVEMBER 19, 2004
CITY HALL, CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
Members Present: Ernie Lehman, Bob Elliot, Regenia Bailey
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Steve Nasby
Others Present: Brian DeCoster
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Chairperson Lehman called the meeting to order at 8:00AM.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 12, 2004
Motion: Elliot moved to approve the minutes from October 12, 2004 meeting as written. Bailey
seconded.
Motion passed 3:0.
DISCUSSION-APPLICATION FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE
Nasby said that Big Ten Rentals is re-located within the Highway 6 Urban Renewal Area. Nasby noted
that the applicant is proposing to renovate his facility at 1820 Boyrum Street. He mentioned that the tax
assessment on the property (as of January 1,2004) is currently $694,520 and that figure is lower than the
"TIF base" that set the value at $737,000 (the January 1, 2003 assessed value). Nasby said that TIF
would require the value of the building needs to be increased by at least 15% over the assessed value,
which in this case would be about $798,000. Nasby said that he discussed this matter with DeCoster and
the City Assessor's Office. He said that DeCoster had determined that even though he purchased the
building less than the assessed value, would have to increase the value with more than 15% to qualify for
TIF. Nasby also mentioned that the applicant is asking for 10 years of tax rebates for the property.
DeCoster said that they used the 2003 values to determine the increase needed to qualify for TIF. Nasby
said that we would like to use the $694,520 number as that is the current assessed value, but that he
doesn't believe that that would be possible because the Highway 6 TIF district was certified this year due
to the Southgate project, and 2003 is the district base year. Nasby confirmed to the committee that the
base value is stuck with $737,000.
DeCoster said that he wanted to apply for this last year, thinking that it will be a fairly simple deal, but as
he got more information, things got complicated. He said that he thought that it would not be that
uncommon in a TIF district for a property to be sold below the assessed value. Lehman said that they
always used TIF to encourage development in areas that are less developed. He asked that if they use
the $737,000 base what happens if the assessed value goes down to $600,000 how is he going to get to
$847,000 which is 115% of the 2003 base value. Nasby said in that situation if he does not get to
$847,000, there will be no TIF rebate even if he makes the improvements.
DeCoster said that he will not appeal the tax assessment down, and will try to keep it high enough so the
TIF could work. Lehman said that DeCoster should try to get the tax assessment down anyway since he
purchased the building for much less than the assessment. Nasby said that the TIF only gives a rebate on
taxes, but if DeCoster manages to lower down the taxes with the assessors' office then he would have to
pay less in taxes. DeCoster said that if he wants the TIF he will have to invest more in the building.
Lehman said that if the assessed value goes down, than the applicant will pay taxes for the assessed
values, but in order to qualify for TIF, the value has to increase 15% from 2003. DeCoster said that he
looks for the long-term benefits of the TIF, and that is why he is requesting a 10-year period. DeCoster
listed some changes that he will like to do include glass and brick along the front and put sculpted style
canopies over the windows. He said that he would like to rent out a portion of the building so interior
improvements will be made as well. He said that he would also like to add one garage door in front, and a
few garage doors in the back to get in and out of the building.
City Council Economic Development Committee Minutes
November 19, 2004
Page 2
Lehman said that if the assessed value is decreased, DeCoster will have to have a higher increase in the
assessed value to get any TIF money at all. He said that he does not see the numbers working, and he
doesn't see any financial advantage by doing so. Nasby said that any TIF advantage will not be at the
beginning of the TIF agreement but there could be some near the end date.
DeCoster said that he could see getting the assessed value to the required level with all the changes that
he wants to do. Lehman said that investing the money in the building does not mean that the value will
increase directly proportional with the spending; the value depends on how the assessor values it.
Elliot said that it is better to talk with an appraiser or assessor because it seems that it might be easier for
DeCoster to just pay lower taxes instead of trying to qualify for TIF. DeCoster said that even if he wants to
do the improvements the value will still increase and he would have to pay higher taxes. Lehman asked at
what time does the 15% kick in. Nasby said that you have to increase with 15% of the value in the first
year of the TIF rebate. Lehman asked if there is a factor relative to market rate increase in value. Nasby
said "yes" and that the increase for TIF purposes have to be due to improvements.
Elliot said that if it is assessed at $737,000 and can not get TIF unless it reaches $847,000, it might take
three or even more years to reach that goal. Lehman added that if it does increase due to market forces
rather than improvements the project may not get TIF at all. Elliot asked if the TIF hangs in there even
after five years if there had been no increment. Nasby said that it was in effect for whatever timeframe
was in the agreement.
Bailey asked DeCoster what is his assessed value, when he believes that would reach the goal.
DeCoster answered that assuming that he would do noting to the building, and live it the way it is, after
the third year he would pay less taxes with the TIF, but if he would improve the building without TIF, the
taxes will go higher than the current ones.
Elliot said that this is a rather peculiar situation. He added that he is in favor of the project, but that he is
concerned about the well being of the applicant because he can not see the numbers working out.
Bailey said that there are some requirements regarding the minimum wage. She said that $15,600, which
is the estimated salary, is barely over the 30% median income level. Bailey said that the lowest paid job
would just meet the median income housing. DeCoster said that he hires a lot of people from the Hope
House, and even if it is hard work, a lot of them do not have where else to turn. Bailey asked if the $7.50
per hour is paid for contract or seasonal employees. DeCoster replied that this amount is for both part-
time and full-time, especially those without a drivers license.
Bailey said that the role of minimum wage requirements is that the City does not support businesses that
would also require other services in the community.
Lehman said that it might happen that they do invest the money and do not reach the $847,000
assessment, and when the goal will be finally achieved, it will because of the market rate, and not of the
value increase, and it will result in not getting any TIF money at all.
Bailey said that if there is little to benefit it might be better to weigh and see if it is acceptable to comply
with all other constraints from the City. Bailey inquired about what other things may apply to getting a
TIF? Nasby said that design review is a requirement and other than that there is some annual reporting
for the business. Bailey asked DeCoster if design review would present any problems. DeCoster said
that he did not think so. Lehman said that design review is much easier now than it was in the past and it
should not be an issue. Bailey added that it may be better to work an accountant on a spreadsheet
regarding the tax situations and determine if this TIF process is really worth doing.
Lehman asked if there is any cost related to the application for TIF. Nasby answered that there is no cost
but the time of the applicant. Lehman said that it is a no lose situation for the applicant in the TIF. He
added that if it works out the applicant could save some money.
MOTION: Elliot moved to approve a seven years, '100% TIF tax rebate with a maximum of $42,000.
Bailey seconded the motion.
City Council Economic Development Committee Minutes
November 19, 2004
Page 3
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 AM.
Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus.
s:/pcd/minutes/hcdcJ2oo4/edcl 1-19-04.doc
Council Economic Development Committee
Attendance Record
2004
Term
Name Expires 01/26 03/30 07/01 09/02 10/12 11/19 00/00
Regenia Bailey 01/02/08 X X X X X X
Bob Elliott 01/02/08 X X X X X X
Ernest Lehman 01/02/06 X X X X X X
Key:
X = Present
O -- Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
IP13
MINUTES
SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE
JANUARY 3, 2005
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Jerry Anthony, Darlene Clausen, Matthew Hayek, Jan Left,
Jan Peterson, Sally Stutsman, Joan Vandenberg
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Steve Rackis
OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Eastham, Maryann Dennis
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm.
Approval of the December 6, 2004 and December 13, 2004 Minutes:
Some edits noted for the minutes. Leff gave edits to Hayek. Anciaux moved to accept both the December 6
and 13 minutes as revised. Stutsman seconded and the motion passed 7-0.
DELIBERATIONS REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Hayek suggested the Taskforce begin this meeting by discussing the new data and information regarding the
location of service agencies as requested by the Taskforce and compiled by City staff. He also noted that
the packet contained additional information from Vandenberg. Hayek distributed the list of service providers
he and Peterson compiled by looking at the United Way Service Providers list index. Hayed said that this
was the list that was sent to City Staff and all locations were then plotted on the map. This map was posted
on the wall and the agencies were identified according to the reference numbers on the list that was
distributed. He noted that the list is subject to change if the Taskforce members want to add or subtract
agencies.
Clausen asked what the providers in bold denoted. Nasby answered that the key to the different typefaces is
located at the bottom of the last page. Regular typeface denotes on-site services, bold denotes services
provided in the community (e.g. in home care), and italics denote a combination of site based and in-
community services. Stutsman asked whether National Alliance for the Mentally III (NAMIJC) should be on
the list. Peterson replied it depends on what are considered direct services. NAMIJC provides support and
education. Stutsman said she understood that organization to be mostly advocacy. Peterson said it also
provides support groups, classes, and operates a hotline.
Hayek reiterated that the list is subject to editing. For example, Johnson County Public Defender is on the
list, but its location is determined by other factors, as the office needs to be in a commercially zoned area
and near the courthouse. Hayek said that he, Peterson, and City staff tried to be inclusive on the list rather
than exclusive. Peterson added that compiling the list was difficult because some offices are not located in
areas where they provide services, while others offer services that are unrelated to their locations.
Anthony arrived at this point.
Vandenberg noted that there is a Coralville Family Resource Center now that could be added. Stutsman
asked whether the Iowa Department of Human Services is on the list. Peterson agreed it should be added if
it is not on the list. Hayek asked how the Taskforce would like to approach the list, as it would be too much to
edit during a meeting. He suggested looking over the list after the meeting and sending comments and
suggestions to him via email.
Anthony asked if the Taskforoe members could have a map of the locations. Nasby said yes, though it would
be probably have to be shrunk to ledger size. He asked whether the Taskforce would like the current map or
the one after the list is changed. Hayek recommended making changes and then replotting the map before
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 2
sending out to the Taskforce members. Peterson asked for confirmation that amendments would include
providers that the Taskforce members think are not relevant, or should be added. Hayek said yes.
Anthony asked if the list was of all services in the City. Nasby replied no. Hayek said that he and Peterson
tried to be inclusive when compiling the list, but it is not exhaustive. Stutsman asked whether the Juvenile
Court should be on the list. Hayek said it depends on where the services are provided. Stutsman replied the
office is on Kirkwood Avenue, so usually provided at that location. Left said they also have liaisons in the
schools.
Hayek noted there is a large number of providers whose administrative headquarters are in one place, but
that offer programs or assistance in the schools or neighborhoods. Peterson suggested that is true for the
majority of service providers, as the office location is usually determined by other factors, such as availability
of space. Hayek gave the example of the Girl Scouts, who have troops in many of the elementary schools
but are actually based in Cedar Rapids.
Hayek said he would send an email reminding the Taskforce members to send comments and suggestions
to him. Stutsman noted that the Iowa Department of Human Services is located under "H" on the list.
Clausen asked what Hayek is looking for, since this is all new information to some. Stutsman replied people
might have changes or edits to the current list. Hayek agreed, adding that the goal is to have all relevant
services listed, but if someone does not have any suggestions, that's fine. Anciaux noted there are some he
does not recognize. Peterson added that some that are not listed would require phone calls to get specific
information about what they do and where. Also, she questioned what the information would ultimately tell
the Taskforce, since such a small number of services are located in a specific place for a specific reason.
Vandenberg asked whether outreach programs should be included or not. Stutsman replied yes. Hayek said
those services may not be able to be plotted, but it would be helpful to have a list.
Peterson said that for instance, certain services are targeted to certain schools for specific reasons, such as
student advocates and special Girl Scouts troops. Some organizations that have gone to great lengths to
provide services in the area can probably be identified easily. Hayek asked if it would be possible to plot
those on a map. Vandenberg said yes.
Left asked if the services could be listed by census tract. Anciaux suggested they be listed by census block
group. Left added that it would be helpful know what agencies exist in the different tracts. Vandenberg added
that she would like to know if they provide service to the neighborhood. Left volunteered to help gather this
information, if needed.
Peterson said there are things such as transitional housing that have an impact on the neighborhood, but
does not provide services. Vandenberg said there are different types of services. Hayek agreed, noting that
Elder Services is an example of one that is difficult to categorize, since their office mostly coordinates elder
care that is done in the client's homes. Stutsman said that service is denoted on the list in bold, which
indicates that it is out in the community. Hayek added that it is currently plotted as a dot on the map, but
perhaps instead it should be on a list saying it provides services out in the community.
Clausen said that the map indicates most services are located in the central and eastern parts of the City.
Peterson replied that agencies try to find places with affordable rent. Hayek added that there is also the
question of commercial versus residential zoning, which dictates where certain things can be located. All of
that needs to be considered as well.
Hayek asked when the tract data will be available. Nasby replied it will be ready for the next meeting packet,
and asked if the Taskforce would like any other information to be broken down by block group. Hayek said
possibly, and that the Taskforce will talk about it.
Hayek moved on to the discussion about the additional school data. Vandenberg began by noting that data
from the School District might be over-represented because the district regularly gathers this data and has it
readily available. She continued by saying the chart she submitted in the recent packet reflects 2003
proficiency data, 2002-03 mobility data, and 2003-04 free/reduced information. The data is compared to the
overall school enrollment for each building. The data submitted by Eastham for the last meeting included
only free/reduced lunch students. The newer chart in the packets is looking at overall enrollment in the
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 3
school and the data does in her opinion indicate a stronger relationship between mobility and reading
proficiency.
Hayek asked why the data now reflects a diagonal rather than a horizontal line. Vandenberg replied it is
because the total number of students eligible for free/reduced lunch at each school varies widely. For
example, 50 students at Lemme are eligible for free/reduced, while 210 are eligible at Wood. Anthony asked
for confirmation that the difference between the two charts is that the one submitted by Vandenberg shows
the percentage of the whole school, while the one submitted by Eastham shows the percentage of just 3rd
through 6th grades in free or reduced lunch. Eastham replied that is not correct, and that the y-axis is different
on Vandenberg's chad from the one he submitted, not the x-axis.
Anthony asked if both charts deal with percentages of 3rd through 6th grades on free/reduced lunch.
Vandenberg replied that is correct, except on the reading proficiency chart, which reflects total enrollment in
each school. She noted that the distinction between the two data sets is significant. For example, 50% of
students at Wickham were not proficient, but only 30 students total are on free/reduced lunch. Those 15
students have a different impact than 45% not proficient students of the 210 students at Wood who are
eligible for free/reduced lunch.
Eastham said that in his view, the opposite is the case, because the best comparison is with like numbers to
like numbers. He noted that Vandenberg makes a valid point that it is difficult to evaluate schools with
relatively Iow numbers of students on free/reduced lunch with one year's data. He suggested another way to
look at the data might be to designate a cutoff number of students on free/reduced lunch, and only look at
schools that meet or exceed that number.
Vandenberg distributed an additional table, which gives a breakdown of the additional professional, certified
staff and programs in each elementary school. It does not include programs that are district-wide, and
assumes a general estimate of $50K per full-time position. All schools have at least one part time guidance
person and one part time reading person. This also shows what schools have programs previously
discussed by the Taskforce, such as BD and ESL. Left added that some special education services, such as
tutoring, are for students who need a little extra help but are not severely disabled, and all schools offer it.
Stutsman asked whether Hills had received some additional funding through grants. Vandenberg replied yes,
Hills and Penn have access to additional resources because they are more rural schools. Peterson asked for
confirmation that efforts had been made to obtain additional resources and grants for certain schools and
programs. Vandenberg agreed. She noted also that the asterisk on the chart by Wood is to indicate the plan
to have preschool and/or after-school programming for Wood for next year.
Stutsman asked what the "mental health" designation indicates. Vandenberg explained that it is onsite
therapy for students who are beyond the expertise of school staff.
Hayek asked about the designation of students who are not LF in the ESL program at Longfellow.
Vandenberg replied that indicates how many students attend the programs that are from other neighborhood
schools. Peterson noted that most of the students in ESL at Longfellow are not from that school, but are
assisted by a full time staff person. Vandenberg replied that the full time numbers of staff are weighted
according to the numbers of students.
Anciaux asked if the high numbers of ESL students at Mann are from Hawkeye Court. Vandenberg said it is
more due to Forest View trailer park. Peterson asked if additional services are being provided at Forest View.
Left replied that tutoring services are offered.
Hayek asked the Taskforce members to talk in general about the current position of the deliberations and
how to proceed. He noted that the procedure so far had been to develop defensible and reasonable criteria
to apply to different areas of the City, which has been a struggle. At the same time, there seems to be a
consensus that tract 18 has the bulk of the problems in the community. He asked which way the Taskforce
like to approach the issue, either to continue pursuing the criteria, or to begin with the area that has the
problems and attempt to support that conclusion with statistics or other information.
Anthony asked if the group is done with the school district charts, or if they will be discussed later. Hayek
replied the group could get back to the charts. Stutsman suggested doing the general discussion about the
criteria first, which may make the charts irrelevant. Vandenberg said she would like to find and build on the
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 4
group's common ground. Peterson said she would like to take a break from looking at data, since she is not
sure what relevance the data has or what it will tell the group. Vandenberg agreed.
Left said that there are probably a large number of people who already would agree that there is a problem,
and will be sympathetic to and support for the Taskforce's decision and recommendations. Anthony replied
he is not sure, as some groups will be concerned with changes because of what the cost of land and zoning
laws already in effect will have on their operations. They may have an opposite view, and are the ones that
will need to be convinced.
Anthony expressed concern with the process of the deliberation, first of all because the Taskforce does not
reflect equal representation from all sides of the issue. The Taskforce was created because of the letter
written by the School District, and two people from the district are part of the Taskforce. However, no one
who produces, administers, or lives in assisted housing is on the Taskforce. A case will need to be made to
the ones not represented on the Taskforce. Having a realtor, developer, or a resident of assisted housing on
the Taskforce would help legitimize the decisions to those groups. Since they are not part of the decision-
making process, all data and decisions will need to be very clear and defensible in order to reach out to the
ones not represented.
Anthony continued by noting that at the November 22 meeting, there had been discussion about keeping
away from school district data during the deliberations. He still believes that should be the approach because
the proficiency data is not linked to assisted housing, and it can be read both ways. Other factors can be
investigated and used in the Taskforce deliberations. He noted it is not the Taskforce's mandate to address
educational issues within the School District, but to evaluate the housing issue. He suspects that the
Taskforce's recommendations will still benefit the schools. However, not approaching the solutions from a
school-impact perspective will increase the legitimacy of the Taskforce's decisions.
Hayek asked if the school data should be removed from both the criteria of a concentration, as well as the
impacts. Anthony replied yes, because of the lack of link to assisted housing. Vandenberg agreed that it is a
community issue, not just a school issue, but noted that the Taskforce does not have very much data from
other areas of the community. Also, she said the neighborhood school is a reflection of the neighborhood,
and people buy or do not buy houses in certain attendance areas because of the school. The two are very
closely related, so it would be important to establish that link.
Vandenberg added that while data on the number of students on free/reduced lunch who live in assisted
housing is not available, she does have the number of students who are in poverty. An increase in poverty in
certain areas is not desirable, and increasing the amount of assisted housing will increase the number of
students who are in poverty. Different groups have common ground already, as they all want to have more
affordable housing in Iowa City. The question is where it will be located, and how to make it palatable or
positive to the rest of the community.
Anthony said that since the poverty data could be obtained, the Taskforce can use the poverty data for
deliberations and leave out the link to th.e schools. Vandenberg said that is fine, though she believes there is
a link to the schools. Anthony agreed that there is a link between free/reduced lunch and proficiency, but
questioned whether it is related to assisted housing. Solutions created by the Taskforce may work for the
schools as well, but since there is a lack of representation from all sides of the issue, he would like to avoid
the question of school impacts altogether.
Hayek suggested considering school impacts in the same category as the other impacts. Anthony replied
that if there is a correlation between school performance and poverty, the Taskforce probably could just
examine poverty and leave the schools out of the discussion. The school data is conflicting and not
conclusive, and he is not comfortable using it.
Vandenberg asked what the Taskforce members' common ground is, whether there is consensus that
concentrations of poverty exist. Anciaux noted that according to federal standards, Iowa City does not have
concentrated poverty. However, the group can say that meeting federal standards is undesirable, so assisted
housing should be spread out more to prevent increased concentrations from occurring in the future.
Anthony suggested waiting for the block group data to see what it shows. Alternatively, the group can use
the CITY STEPS standard of adding 10% as a benchmark to evaluate poverty.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 5
Vandenberg asked what goal the Taskforce is shooting for, adding that she does not wish to take the path of
least resistance. Developing in certain areas because it has the cheapest land and least hassle is probably
not the best way to plan a community. A better community does not have such a strong division between the
good and bad parts of town. Anciaux said Iowa City already has a strong division. Leff agreed, saying that
people in the community also probably agree that there is a problem on the south side of town.
Peterson observed that a lot of the impact data the Taskforce would like to examine is not available, which
poses a problem and leaves the group with only school data. Left noted also that the letter from the School
District led to the creation of the Taskforce, and leaving out the school impacts would seem to negate that
fact and the people who said there is a problem. Vandenberg agreed, saying that approximately 170 people
from different facets of the community expressed concern about putting all the poor people in the same area
of the city.
Rackis said he was at the conference and does not recall the conclusion was there is a concentration of
assisted housing, although assisted housing was a topic of discussion. A letter from the School District
stated a concentration of assisted housing was affecting school performance. However, after the Taskforce
was formed the City Council rejected a request by Burns to build duplexes for disabled people south of
Highway 6. The Council decision was partially due to the School District as it had identified a concentration
of assisted housing in that area. The Taskforce was formed to determine whether or not that was a true
statement. If the Taskforce concludes there is a concentration of assisted housing in tract 18 without
accounting for the fact that it is 57% owner-occupied, the group could appear to assume that none of the
people in the owner-occupied units have children in the schools.
Vandenberg said it does not matter where people live, if they are in poverty. Rackis replied it is still a leap of
faith if only assisted housing is included in the discussion. Vandenberg disagreed; saying that in the future,
more poor people in one area is undesirable, regardless of where they live. Assisted housing equals more
poor people. Anthony disagreed; saying that poor people can also live in owner-occupied housing. Rackis
agreed.
Vandenberg noted that building more housing would bring more poor people into the area. Dennis replied
that more housing would house the poor people already in the community. High rent is very burdensome, so
giving them more affordable places to live would help them become less poor. Vandenberg asked if it would
be better if poor people could afford to live in different areas of town. Dennis said that would be great.
Vandenberg noted that is the common ground, since some of the poor people do not want to live on the
southeast side of town either.
Dennis said she is leery of saying that one of the recommendations is to stop building housing in a certain
area, as opposed to making other areas easier to develop. As soon as a restriction is placed on building
housing in one area, it will be big news because it is a violation of federal fair housing law. Hayek said
incentives could be given to develop elsewhere. Rackis agreed that a proactive rather than restrictive
approach would be more effective. Anthony added that all types of affordable housing, both rental and
owner-occupied, should be made more available throughout the community. That is not happening now
because of land costs and zoning, and that funneling lower income housing to the southeast side should be
stopped. The Taskforce expressed general agreement.
Rackis noted that much of the discussion about assisted housing in the community is based on
misinformation. For example, an old school principal thought that Pheasant Ridge is a Housing Authority site,
and said he wished the Housing Authority would stop expanding their programs. However, the Authority has
not expanded its public housing stock since 1998. Vandenberg replied that though people are not informed
about how public housing is administered, they still perceive a problem with concentration that needs to be
addressed.
Rackis added that the perception is that the Housing Authority runs Pheasant Ridge and Cedar Wood, and
that any housing with African American families who receive a subsidy is public housing administered by the
Housing Authority. People also say that the Housing Authority has advertised in Chicago, though that rumor
cannot be verified. Regardless, the City Council rejected a proposal for assisted housing on the basis that
the School District identified a concentration of assisted housing in certain parts of the City.
Hayek said that he has three things that the group seems to agree on at this point, they are as follows: 1)
Concentrations of poverty should be avoided, if possible; 2) More affordable housing is needed in Iowa City;
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 6
and 3) Affordable housing, whether assisted or not, should be scattered throughout the community. The
Taskforce expressed agreement with those three items. Stutsman asked whether a statement about
incentives should be added. Hayek replied that would be a step under implementation of policy.
Hayek suggested starting from those three points of agreement, and re-examining the criteria with those
three goals in mind. Perhaps also a re-examination could be done in a way that focuses less on school data.
Vandenberg noted that showing all the negative impacts or issues associated with assisted housing are not
the best way to proceed from a public relations perspective. Effort should be made to put a positive spin on
things, and look perhaps instead at the ultimate goal rather than the problems. Explaining how a
concentration of poverty and the culture of poverty that it produces can have far-reaching negative aspects is
more difficult to explain.
Anthony agreed, saying that though restricting development in tract 18 would cause controversy, giving
incentives instead would be effective because most people would prefer to live elsewhere. If a real option
were given, developers would be happy to accommodate that preference. Hayek said the Council would still
need to have reasons why the Taskforce wants to give incentives for housing in other areas. Anthony
agreed, saying that those reasons would be developed using the three common ground statements.
Eastham recommended giving some sort of time limit or framework in which the recommendations would be
carried out. Because the housing market is always changing, a recommendation with an ultimate goal and a
plan for re-evaluation in the future could be easier to accept. He said that a set of recommendations that
come about now will not have any effect for 15 years may not be effective if the housing market has changed
significantly in five years. Stutsman asked whether that too would be an implementation issue.
Peterson asked for confirmation that the group's recommendations are not being made at this point yet, as
she has other considerations to add to the discussion that might be helpful, such as guidelines for property
management. Hayek said no; these are not the final recommendations.
Stutsman asked Hayek to restate the three common ground statements again. Hayek did so. Peterson said
those are three very good large statements the group agreed with. She asked Anthony for confirmation that
he was referring to those statements when talking about giving reasons to the Council. Anthony said yes.
Hayek asked whether the Taskforce should go through a similar exercise with the criteria the group had
developed earlier. Anthony said he would like to wait for block data. Hayek noted that additional data is
available, such a median income and housing values. On the maps, if the areas populated by students are
set aside, patterns do emerge. Those two measures show concentrations of poverty, at least in relation to
the affluent areas.
Vandenberg asked whether incentives could be developed to put more housing on the west side of the river.
Hayek replied that is a question beyond the scope of the Taskforce, and is something the Council will have to
address. Anthony said that if the Taskforce has recommendations about zoning that the Council accepts,
perhaps the zoning laws can be amended and helps address the density question.
Rackis said that Iow-income families could not compete with students in some areas because the rental rates
are so high. His program restricts the amount of rent that can be paid, which is exceeded in the downtown
and other university areas. This limits Iow-income household's housing choices.
Dennis said that the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship does not have high numbers, but it appears their
units are scattered. They only own one multi-family unit in Coralville. Some information may be gathered, at
least anecdotally, that explains that poor people like to live in a house. Once they find a house that is safe,
decent, and affordable, they tend to stay, so kids stay in those schools. This is opposed to saying too many
poor people live in apartments. Peterson asked for confirmation that Dennis' and Eastham's groups would
have developed affordable housing in other parts of the City already if they had been able to get property.
Eastham agreed.
Hayek said he is noting down shelter and transitional housing, which are very controversial and should be
considered in light of those common ground statements.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
January 3, 2005
Page 7
Stutsman said that she would like to pursue dispelling myths and misinformation about public housing. The
recommendations will not be very helpful if the Council cannot combat the people who protest having
assisted housing in their neighborhoods. The only way to work on that aspect is to educate people and give
the facts. Vandenberg said the data from Dennis would be helpful for that part, to help show that people who
live in assisted housing are good neighbors.
Rackis said the Housing Authority could supply that data as well. His program has turnover because people
buy a house, or because they are removed from the program. However, that also leads into a discussion
about good landlords and management versus bad. Bad landlords lead to a concentration of problems.
Vandenberg agreed, noting that people like living at Pheasant Ridge and stay there for long periods, as
opposed to Cedar Wood, which has high turnover and many problems.
Vandenberg said some attention should be given to marketing, since focusing on all the negative impacts will
not help convince people to accept assisted housing in their neighborhoods. The Taskforce expressed
general agreement. Rackis said that the focus could be on the positive aspects, such as the high home-
ownership percentage in tract 18, because of people who transitioned out of public housing into home
ownership. Peterson suggested Habitat probably has information about positive outcomes as well.
Vandenberg added that the distinction should be made in the education part of the project between what
sorts of assisted housing are being dispersed. For example, the Taskforce is not suggesting that a place like
Cedar Wood will be built somewhere else. Peterson agreed, noting that goes back to the issue and problem
of referring to assisted housing as though it was one thing, rather than a huge variety, not all of which is
owned by the City.
Rackis agreed that most people's perceptions of assisted housing are of public housing, which in the past
usually involved a big tower with a lot of units, or a larger area over several blocks where families are
warehoused. Either way involves concentration. Most people think of Pheasant Ridge or Cedar Wood, rather
than a duplex or a zero-lot unit. People don't want to have large apartment units going up, and that's what
they think assisted housing will mean in their neighborhoods.
Anciaux said there was another Taskforce the Council created on neighborhood relations, and some of the
things they were considering should be revisited, such as the issues of neighborhood nuisances. Stutsman
said that sometimes those concerns could involve cultural issues. Anciaux agreed, and noted that while
those issues are outside the purview of this Taskforce, they should be noted because neighborhood
nuisances cause some of the perceptions that need to be addressed.
Rackis said that some of the recommendations made by that Taskforce that would have had a positive
impact on the neighborhoods and schools were not implemented because of lack of money. A lot of the
recommendations involved activities for children outside of school and City Recreation Center hours, to give
them something constructive to do.
Left suggested talking about the next meeting time before Anciaux needs to leave. Hayek said there are five
Mondays in January. Clausen noted that one is a holiday. Left said that the holiday is the 17th. Vandenberg
asked when the students would have the block data. Nasby said it would be available by the end of the
week. Hayek said that the group should meet two more times in January, in order to keep up the momentum
and tr.YthtO stay on schedule. Clausen suggested meeting on a night other than Monday during the week of
the 17 . Var ous members noted conflicts with those dates and Nasby noted that the data would not be
available in time for meeting on the 10th. Hayek recommended meeting on the 24th and 31
Anciaux left at this point.
Meetings set for the 24th and the 31st, both at 6:30 p.m. Nasby said he would confirm the room reservation.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the taskforce, Left moved to adjourn. Anthony seconded,
and the motion passed 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm.
s:lpcdlminutes/ScatteredSiteHousingTaskforcel2005/01-03-05ssht.doc
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce
Attendance Record
2005
01/03
D. Anciaux X
J. Anthony X
D. Clausen X
M. Hayek X
J. Left
J. Peterson
S. Stutsman X
VandenBerg
Key:
X = Present
0 = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
MINUTES
SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE IP14
DECEMBER 13, 2004
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Jerry Anthony, Darlene Clausen, Matthew Hayek, Jan Left, Sally
Stutsman, Joan Vandenberg
STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Steve Rackis
OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Eastham, Amanda Cline, Maryann Dennis, Gerry Klein
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Hayek called the meeting to order at 5:05 pm.
Approval of the December 6, 2004 Minutes:
Hayek said the minutes from the December 6, 2004 meeting are not yet available, and will be reviewed at
the next meeting.
DELIBERATIONS REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Hayek began by noting he will have to leave at 6:30 p.m. and Stutsman said she would also need to
leave by then. He then reviewed the decisions from the December 6 meeting, including a consensus on
five criteria to be used to define concentration, which will be applied to the different parts of Iowa City.
The first criterion uses data from table 2 from the Physical Inventory of Assisted Housing, indicating the
percent per tract of all assisted housing units citywide. The second criterion use data from table 1 of the
Inventory, indicating the percent of all assisted rental units citywide, with the addition of a 10 percentage
point threshold as defined by CITY STEPS. The third criterion is the location of services per census tract
and/or in school attendance areas. Fourth, poverty levels per census tract. Fifth, mobility rates in
elementary schools, if that data can be linked to poor academic performance.
Hayek noted that additional information was in the packets from Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship
(GICHF) and the school district. The GICHF data was submitted by Eastham at the December 6 meeting.
Hayek invited Eastham to discuss his data.
Eastham explained that the data is a comparison of proficiency in reading, as measured by 2003 ITBS
scores from third through sixth grades, related to the measure of school stability given to the Taskforce at
an earlier meeting. It also compares to the percent of free/reduced lunch enrollment from kindergarten
through sixth grades at all elementary schools. However, data was not plotted for schools with Iow
enrollment in free/reduced. In response to a question he said that there were five schools with less than
30 students enrolled in free/reduced lunch.
Eastham noted that Vandenberg provided stability data, expressed as a percentage, which he used
because of the apparent relationship between stability and academic proficiency. The measures for
stability and proficiency were not from the same year. The proficiency data used was from the 2002
school year, while the stability data was from 2003.
Anciaux arrived at this point.
Vandenberg asked from which handout the data was gathered. Eastham answered it was the one she
provided to the Taskforce from a couple months ago. Eastham continued by saying that though there is a
noticeable difference in proficiency in five schools, but no relationship is apparent from the plotted data
between proficiency and stability. He suggested that school proficiency is affected at least as much by
other factors as by mobility.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 2
Vandenberg asked what five schools had Iow proficiency. Eastham replied they are the schools with 60-
70% of students who are not proficient, and includes Lemme, Twain, Wood, Coralville Central, and
Longfellow. He noted that when comparing Hills and Roosevelt, those two schools have relatively better
proficiency rates in spite of very different mobility rates and comparable free/reduced enrollment.
Vandenberg asked where the percentage of free/reduced students who are not proficient came from.
Eastham said it was taken from the 2002 data provided by the School District. Vandenberg asked if the
tables use data from different years. Eastham replied yes, though the data is only one year apart.
Vandenberg noted that how stability and mobility are defined might be different. Mobility tracks the
number of instances of students enrolling and leaving in one school year. Stability is the number of
students who attend one school for one full year. Eastham replied that his recollection of the presentation
from the School District indicated stability is a more accurate measure of student movement than mobility,
which is why he used the stability number. Vandenberg added that impact on the school mobility would
be a greater measure because of movement in and out of classrooms. Eastham said the same
comparison could be done using mobility instead, though it may indicate even less of a relationship than
comparing stability.
Vandenberg asked for confirmation that the data used for Wickham, which indicates 50% of students in
third through sixth grades enrolled in free/reduced lunch were not proficient, was from 2002. Eastham
replied yes, he did not have non-proficiency data from 2003. Vandenberg noted, using Wickham as an
example, that the total enrollment of free/reduced is probably lower at some of the schools indicated.
Total number on free/reduced lunch at Wickham was 25. She added that she is interested in viewing data
on the tables from the same year. Eastham said he would do a new table using different data, if available,
though he thought the relationships probably would not change.
Hayek asked for confirmation that Eastham is saying there is not a significant relationship between
stability and proficiency. Eastham replied that the data does not indicate a relationship between less
stability, higher free/reduced lunch rates, and proficiency. Hayek confirmed that Eastham is saying that
the impact on proficiency is negligible, regardless of how stable the school enrollment is for the student.
Eastham answered that stability is not the most obvious factor indicated, and there are a large number of
factors within a school that influence proficiency. He also noted that it is unknown whether there is a link
between this data and the number of assisted housing units in the attendance areas.
Hayek asked if the rest of the Taskforce had any additional questions on Eastham's data. Clausen asked
for reiteration of the explanation of the difference between stability and mobility. Anthony replied mobility
indicates students who enroll and leave a particular school, while stability indicates the number of
students who remained enrolled for a full year. Vandenberg added that the data is gathered by fiscal year,
and that Iowa City has a high mobility rate because of it being a University town. Anthony agreed, noting
that Iowa City has 48% rental housing market.
Left pointed out that enrollment can change dramatically after the school year begins. For example, in
one school 82 new elementary students enrolled after the official count in September, and the school that
added the most students was Twain. The official enrollment count is due on the third Friday in
September, and determines how much money the schools receive. Anciaux asked for confirmation that
schools do not receive additional State funding for students who enroll after the official count is submitted.
Leff replied that is correct, schools do not receive funding until the following year.
Vandenberg noted in regards to the mobility rate for Twain in 2002, that the school added 100 students
from January through the end of the school year. Stutsman asked if Twain is on track to duplicate that
number. Vandenberg replied no. Left said that the school that has added the most students this year so
far has been Twain.
Dennis asked how many of the students live in assisted housing. Vandenberg and Left replied that
information is unknown. Dennis asked how many assisted housing units were added in that attendance
area, Vandenberg replied the number of additional assisted housing units since July might be available.
Gathering information on new student addresses may be possible, as well. It also depends on how
assisted housing is defined, though she estimates that a large number were on some sort of support.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 3
Anthony said it is unlikely 83 units of assisted housing have been added since July, so he hesitates to
assume a link between the added students and assisted housing. Vandenberg noted that the 83 students
added were from 2002, and was closely related to the transitional shelter units and subsidized housing
available in the area.
Vandenberg noted additional data submitted from the School District database, which looked at fourth
grade reading comprehension scores. National standards are that a score of 40% or lower is not
proficient, 41-90% is intermediate proficiency, and high proficiency is greater than 90%. Vandenberg
added that poverty and proficiency are not perfectly linked. There are economically disadvantaged
children who do well academically.
Peterson arrived at this point.
Vandenberg said that approximately 19.5% of students in the entire school district were not proficient,
while 39.2% of students new to the district that year were not proficient. The second number includes all
new students, including ones that had just moved to Iowa City before the tests were administered. The
next table separated out the numbers in relation to free/reduced lunch enrollment that showed 46% of
students who were on free/reduced lunch were not proficient. Of students on free/reduced lunch who
were not in the district the previous year, 53.5% were not proficient. She noted there is a dramatic
comparison with the number of students who are and are not on free/reduced, with non-proficiency in
students on free/reduced lunch higher than the general population by almost 20 percentage points.
Vandenberg said additionally about mobility in general that it is an issue even for children who not in
poverty, though it strongly correlates to poverty. Children are much more likely to change schools if they
come from families with incomes below $10,000.
The last page of the data Vandenberg submitted includes mobility information for the past four years. The
numbers are calculated by dividing the number of incidences in and out of each building by the total
enrollment of that building. The numbers vary widely from building to building. She added that some
schools have Behavior Disorder or ESL programs, which students move into and out of, and is included in
the data.
Hayek asked which schools offer BD and ESL programs. Vandenberg replied she does not have the BD
data on hand, though she knows that Longfellow has BD and ESL, Mann, Roosevelt, and Kirkwood have
ESL, and Horn, Wood, and Twain have BD. She can gather that information to ensure its accuracy.
Stutsman asked if students are transferred in from other attendance areas for these programs.
Vandenberg replied they are sometimes, though that varies as well. Students are kept in their home
schools when possible, though that is not always the case.
Anthony asked how the district mobility data compares statewide. Vandenberg replied it depends on what
part of the state is being compared. She has not seen that particular data released from the State
Department of Education, but it may be available. Left said the UEN, which includes the eight largest
districts in the state, might have that information. Vandenberg replied that the data is collected for Iowa
City, but is not submitted to the State, and that she can check on it. Anthony said he would like to
compare Iowa City mobility rates to the rest of the State, as well as to national statistics.
Anthony asked whether the mobility data distinguishes between students who change schools within the
district, and those who enter and leave the district. Vandenberg replied that one of the charts details any
movement in and out of the school buildings, but the ITBS score database does not distinguish students
that way.
Anthony asked for confirmation that a student transferring from one school to another within the district
would be recorded as two separate incidents. Vandenberg and Left replied that is correct. Anthony
suggested that the mobility rate could also reflect the local housing market, so areas with high number of
rental units would have a corresponding high mobility rate. Lower rental areas would have lower rates of
mobility within the district.
Anthony said he agrees that mobility is an issue that affects school performance. However, it is unclear
whether that is an issue in Iowa City because the data does not distinguish between movement within the
district and movement into and out of the district. According to a paper from the State Department of
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 4
Education website, one study concluded that residential stability may alleviate many of these issues, and
one way to increase residential stability would be to increase the amount of available affordable housing
in the area. This may help reduce the amount of intra-district mobility.
Anthony went back to note the data submitted by Eastham, saying that while charts using data from the
same year could be created, it is unlikely the results would change drastically. Also, he asked why the
focus is on only two schools, since other schools have high non-proficiency rates as well. For example,
Roosevelt has a stability rate of approximately 75%, which is about same as Longfellow, yet the two
schools' proficiency rates are very different. Additionally, many schools have higher non-proficient rates,
so perhaps a larger issue is being missed. Hills has a high free/reduced rate, but less than 40% are not
proficient, while Lemme has only 20% enrollment in free/reduced, but has a 60% rate of non proficiency.
Vandenberg replied that the data might be misleading because of a wide range in the number of students
at the individual schools. For example, there are only 20 students at Lemme enrolled in free/reduced
lunch. Also, some schools already have many interventions in place, which would indicate that additional
programs have had a positive impact.
Anthony agreed, but pointed out that parents might ask why interventions are not in place at other
schools with high non-proficient rates. Vandenberg replied that it is because overall, Twain and Wood are
less proficient. Lemme only falls into that category when the data is disaggregated. Anthony noted that
standard practice in policy discussions typically involves comparing percentages, because it standardizes
issues.
Vandenberg compared Lemme and Twain. Lemme has 30 non-proficient students, while Twain has 66
who are not proficient. She agreed that additional suppods would help all the schools. However, the
schools that lack stability and performance overall are the ones that get the most attention. Twain's
numbers would be even higher if it was not receiving so much additional funding for additional programs.
There is a difference between the overall percent and the percent of the free/reduced lunch population.
Vandenberg said that according to the chad supplied by Eastham, the schools with high instability are
indicated, though Roosevelt is an anomaly. While it may depend on how the data is viewed, her reading
of the data indicates there is a problem with having high concentrations of poverty in the Wood and Twain
attendance areas.
Stutsman left at this point.
Anthony said he does not see evidence of that link from the chad, because the line through the chart is
horizontal and does not indicate a relationship. Penn also could be included in the category. Vandenberg
asked for confirmation that Anthony is referencing the first chad. Anthony replied yes, and continued by
pointing out that Mann has stability issues due to a high number of students who are children of graduate
students, so should be performing poorly.
Left asked what the percentage of foreign students is at Mann. Vandenberg replied that Mann has a mix.
The free/reduced lunch number is lower, and many students come from other, more stable
neighborhoods. The number of ESL students who were not proficient is not available.
Vandenberg said that 46.5% of free/reduced students who had been in the district less than a year were
proficient, while 80.5% are proficient throughout the district. Anthony noted that while the table may
indicate that students who just moved are less proficient than students who have been here longer, that
percentage does not give any information about where the students live, whether in assisted housing or
not, or in what school they are enrolled.
Anthony pointed out that with Iowa City being one of the better school districts in the nation, it would be
surprising if there were not a gap in performance with students who just arrived. While the data says that
students who arrived recently are not doing as well, it is not helpful since it is not linked to assisted
housing or what school they are attending
Hayek suggested using the second number on the chad to answer the question of where students are
located. Anthony replied that would not work because the overall percentage does not indicate which
schools the students enrolled in. Hayek clarified that the second number can be used to show that
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 5
students on average perform more poorly when coming to this school district, as opposed to where the
students came from.
Anciaux asked how many students are in 4th grade. Vandenberg replied that 717 students were tested
this year. Anciaux asked how many were not in the district last year. Vandenberg replied she does not
have that data.
Vandenberg said that according to her knowledge, in areas with high rates of mobility and poverty,
students do not do well academically. She asked if there was agreement with that statement. Anthony
replied absolutely, all evidence and data shows that high mobility and poverty leads to poor school
performance.
Vandenberg said she does not need to tie the mobility to assisted housing, because it is a question of
poverty and housing density. She does not want to increase the amount of poverty in an area that already
has concentrations of poverty. She asked if some conclusion about the negative effects of poverty could
be drawn already.
Anthony replied that the issue is that the data cannot be tied to where students live, and other factors may
confound the data. He continued by agreeing that generally, mobility has an impact on performance, but it
does not appear to be strongly impacting certain schools' performance, according to the data available.
Reducing the rate of mobility would probably improve performance at all the schools. However, changing
mobility rates in Iowa City would be very difficult because the economy is very transient because of the
University, as well as the expensive housing market. Those two factors will make improving mobility rates
in the district overall very difficult.
Vandenberg pointed out that while people's mobility cannot be changed, public policy could be developed
to prevent an increase in poverty in certain areas. It is safe to conclude that increasing poverty rates will
increase mobility rates. Anthony replied he is not sure that is true, because even people who are not poor
who live in Iowa City cannot afford a house. That fact will affect elementary students' mobility within the
school district. He agrees that mobility is an issue, but in an area with such a high turnover rate, he is
unsure how much it can be reduced. He noted that resources or students could be shifted around in the
district if the two can be linked, but he does not see that strong a link.
Vandenberg said that though mobility rates may not be changeable in Iowa City, she would like to
develop some sort of policy that will encourage certain kinds of development to occur in other areas of the
City. She would like to have a community that does not have pockets where people live close together
and have high rates of poverty. Anthony replied that he agreed, but though he would like to use the
mobility data, no clear link has been established between mobility and performance, and there is no link
to assisted housing.
Hayek said the Taskforce members need to decide individually if the data indicates a link between
mobility and school performance or not. Vandenberg added there are many ways to interpret data, and
there are so many variables at work, such as additional support given to certain schools. Left noted that
each school has its own personality and may have other factors affecting their mobility rates, which
makes using a straight percentage difficult.
Anthony suggested moving some populations of students to other schools to help raise overall scores. An
assisted housing policy would take years to have an effect on the schools, but strategic redistribution of
students through bussing or other means might make faster changes in the meantime.
Hayek asked whether the mobility criterion should be maintained or removed from the list. Anthony said it
should be removed, as the link between mobility and school performance requires a leap of faith. He
agrees that it has an impact, but the data does not show a strong relationship. Also, there is no link
between mobility and assisted housing. Left and Vandenberg said to keep it. Anthony said he wants to
rely on evidence to create a defensible policy in the final analysis. Also, there are four other criteria that
can be used and only quantifiable and identifiable data should be used.
Anciaux asked whether people in affordable housing are more stable. Anthony replied that people who
live in affordable ownership housing have more stability than those who do not. This is true for both rental
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 6
and ownership, but more so with ownership. Vandenberg noted that one of the points made by Habitat for
Humanity is that people who live in their own homes do better in school. Anthony agreed.
Hayek said that the fifth criterion was accepted at the last meeting, so it may need to be officially dropped
from the list if that is the wish of the Taskforce. Anthony said that at the last meeting, the data was not
available. Clausen added that it was stated the data would be used if it showed a link to proficiency.
Hayek agreed, and said now it is up to the individual Taskforce members whether the data shows a link
or not.
Anthony said there is a question on two links, between mobility and performance, and between mobility
and assisted housing. Hayek noted that the link to assisted housing is a second issue, because the only
stipulation made at the last meeting was the necessity for a link between mobility and school
performance. Hayek agreed that the question of the link to assisted housing would have to be addressed
at some point, perhaps as an impact rather than a criterion. He added that he is satisfied with the link
between mobility and performance, and the second link warrants discussion later on.
Rackis asked why consideration was not being given to Penn, Kirkwood, Lucas, and Coralville Central
schools, given the data submitted by Eastham. Their rates of non-proficiency all exceeded Twain, though
Wood had the highest rate of non-proficiency of all schools. Vandenberg asked whether those numbers
were based on percentages. Rackis said they are total numbers. Vandenberg asked which table Rackis is
referencing. Hayek asked Rackis to hold it up. Vandenberg noted that the rates at Twain are affected by
interventions already in place at that school.
Rackis asked whether the high rates at Twain and Wood are from students in assisted housing.
Vandenberg replied the higher rates are caused by concentration of poverty. Rackis pointed out that even
if poverty is concentrated because of assisted housing, tract 18 still has 57% owner-occupied units.
Anciaux said he thinks the block data might prove to be more helpful in that analysis.
Hayek said that multiple criteria would allow more areas to be defined as concentrations. One or two of
the criteria will identify some schools or areas, but having multiple criteria will operate as checks and
balances. After applying the criteria to the different area and seeing how things work out, then the
Taskforce can look for trends and consistencies in areas that fulfill multiple criteria, and then draw
conclusions.
Vandenberg noted that people have different views of the data, which leads to an impasse. Hayek replied
that each person on the Taskforce will come to an individual decision about each issue, but extenuating
factors can be brought into the explanation of the findings. For example, in regards to the question about
which schools should raise concerns, while unexpected schools may be flagged by using some of the
criteria, they may not fit into the overall consideration because they do not fulfill enough criteria points, or
because of extenuating circumstances.
Vandenberg asked whether there is consensus that having multiple large assisted housing programs and
complexes in a very small area is an issue that requires intervention by some sort of public policy.
Peterson replied yes it is an issue. However, there are some leaps involved in going from problems in the
schools due to the unstable, high poverty areas, to changes in the housing policy that may have far-
reaching and unforeseen ramifications on the availability of affordable housing. It seems like an
educational issue is being addressed by examining housing.
Vandenberg said it is a neighborhood issue, but that schools are strongly involved because they have
quantifiable data. The police data was not very helpful, for example. Peterson agreed there is a problem,
and that she unaware of any other area in the county with the kind of concentration of that kind of housing
cited by Vandenberg.
Vandenberg asked for a sense of where the Taskforce members are, in terms of their opinions on the
subject. Anthony replied that he sees no link at all between school performance and assisted housing,
and is very concerned about how the process to consider assisted housing was started. He asked why
other factors are not under consideration, such as the age of the housing or race. He would like a clear
link between assisted housing and the criteria the Taskforce is using. For example, if mobility can be
clearly linked to school performance and also to assisted housing, then it should be used. Otherwise,
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 7
there is other data available that can be linked to assisted housing. He would also like to expand the list
of criteria.
Anthony added that he would like to restrict consideration to solid evidence, and a solid link to assisted
housing, because the Taskforce's findings will be challenged. He would like to remove criteria that do not
have firm evidence to support it. If it is controversial and debatable within the Taskforce, drop that
criterion.
Hayek asked if the Taskforce would like to drop all the current criteria and work backwards from the
desired goal. Anthony agreed that is a good idea, since there seems to be a strong opinion that no more
assisted housing should go into tract 18.
Clausen said she is not comfortable with the mobility data as it stands, and does not believe it shows a
good link or make very much sense because there are just as many schools that fall above the line as
below it. She noted she would like to look at the size of the complexes in question as a criterion for
concentration, because of large complexes having such a high number of families living close together
Peterson noted that the kind of housing is important, that there is less of a problem with assisted housing
than with high services/high needs transitional housing. Needs are different for people in shelter and
transitional housing, as opposed to a family that only needs assisted housing. Hayek said that it appears
the Taskforce members can agree with that statement.
Anciaux asked if more assisted housing should go into transitional areas. Peterson replied it depends on
the type, because the category of assisted housing is so large. Anciaux said that some sort of poverty is
necessary to live in assisted housing, so if a tract already has a high amount of transitional housing and
poverty in it, should more assisted housing be put in that tract, bringing in more poverty? Peterson
answered that it would depend on the available alternatives for providing affordable housing. If there were
no alternatives for providing affordable housing, then she would not be able to support a limitation on
where it can be built.
Clausen noted one alternative would be putting assisted housing elsewhere, into areas that currently
have none. Anciaux agreed it would be built somewhere. Hayek asked for confirmation that Anciaux is
asking about assisted housing that would be built in the future, rather than moving currently existing
housing. Anciaux replied yes, he means housing planned to be built in the future, and asked if it should
be directed into the same area or elsewhere? Peterson answered that the issue is not black and white,
since the category of assisted housing is so large and she does not know the ramifications of answering
the question, even theoretically.
Vandenberg said that one implication might be to cut off assisted housing, which is not something anyone
on the Taskforce wants to see happen. However, she would like to have some effort made to combat
NIMBY-ism and have a public policy that would allow other kinds of housing to be available in other areas
of the City. Also, if more assisted housing will be going into the southeast side of town, she would like
consideration given to the additional supports needed by families in transitional and shelter housing that
would allow them to become self-sufficient, and a policy that allocates money to those services.
Peterson said that asking for money for services is a different argument than asking for a policy that
restricts assisted housing. Hayek replied that no one has said that assisted housing will be restricted.
Vandenberg noted there is fear that assisted housing will be too restricted. Hayek agreed, but added that
while there are a number of different responses available, that aspect is more appropriate for the
solutions end of the discussion. He said he does not believe the Taskforce would recommend against
additional assisted housing being built in tract 18 without also strongly recommending that housing be
made available elsewhere in the City.
Peterson said that there seemed to be a sudden leap from looking at the definition of concentration to
asking whether more housing should be put in a particular place. She asked for confirmation of what is
currently being discussed, whether it centers around the School District or something else. Vandenberg
suggested that the Taskforce is being bogged down, and agreed that working backwards may yield better
results.
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 8
Anciaux asked what the shortage in assisted housing currently is within the community. Anthony said the
numbers are available. Hayek noted the CITY STEPS document would have that information. Anthony
added that Iowa City has the most expensive housing and the lowest homeowner rate in the State.
Hayek said that the plan was to apply several defensible, quantifiable measurements to each area. The
areas may be census tracts, school attendance areas, or something else. The plan was to apply the
measure to the areas see how things fit in according to the criteria, and see whether patterns will appear.
Perhaps there is only one area in town with these strong concerns, and the recommendation of the
Taskforce would be to take steps to alleviate that one situation. However, a consensus needs to be
reached among the Taskforce members. If there is a lot of disagreement over the criteria list, then
another approach may be needed.
Clausen noted there is a lot of disagreement with criteria point 5. Aisc, the locations of services per
census tract are not available. Once that data is available, applying the criteria may work. She added that
she is not sure if the current criteria list has the right things on it, though it is a good start.
Vandenberg asked what table 1 data will tell the Taskforce. Anciaux replied that data might not be as
beneficial as block group data may be. For example, there is a difference between the western and
southeastern ends of tract 18. Aisc, tract four can be examined this way, which includes Pheasant Ridge.
Vandenberg added that the different types of housing have not been nailed down. Peterson replied that
particular discussion is supposed to happen later, with the secondary considerations noted at the bottom
of the criteria list.
Hayek said that the Taskforce members are all trying to do the right thing. Anthony agreed, noting that if
the process were easy it would have been done already. Rackis added that common ground may already
have been identified, because there seems to be agreement that there are different concerns for different
types of housing. That raises the question of density, in terms of a duplex or townhouse, versus an
apartment complex. Peterson said she does not like lumping different types of assisted housing together.
Anciaux asked if more assisted housing is wanted, in general. Peterson replied that it depends on what
type. She does not see assisted housing as being one thing. Anciaux noted that census tract data is not
specific enough, either.
Hayek asked if the Taskforce would like to vote on the mobility data. Anciaux recommended waiting until
the next meeting. Hayek asked whether the other criteria should be kept and applied as planned. Left
suggested making mobility a secondary consideration. Hayek replied that is possible. Clausen agreed
that if mobility is reclassified, the individual circumstances for each school can be easily detailed.
Vandenberg said that more research could be done for the free/reduced data as well.
Hayek asked when the Taskforce should next meet. There are five Mondays in January. He would like
the Taskforce members to look at the data and criteria before the next meeting, and consider the
possibility of moving mobility to a secondary consideration.
Clausen asked if the data could be sent out a week earlier, to give more time to evaluate it. Nasby replied
he does not know when the block group data will be available, as the students are not back from break
until the middle of January. The data may not be ready until January 18.
Vandenberg suggested all the members thinking about what they believe to be true about the data
already, and look for common ground. Hayek said that individually, all can consider criteria points 1 and
2, and locations of services once that is provided. Nasby asked what services are wanted for mapping?
Clausen suggested public services. Anciaux suggested any service that assists a Iow-income person.
Nasby said that could include almost any service, so a better definition is needed. Peterson said that
since the definition currently includes students, elderly, disabled, and all types of housing, the list could be
extensive. Hayek suggested working with Peterson and City Staff to develop a list of services for
consideration by the Taskforce.
Vandenberg said that the Taskforce needs to define assisted housing. A lot is involved by including
students, elderly, and disabled, so terms need to be defined. Hayek replied that qualifications can be
noted if areas are identified inappropriately by the criteria, for example because it is a student area or
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes
December 13, 2004
Page 9
because of some other reason. Vandenberg noted that excluding certain populations would also exclude
some services.
Clausen asked for the United Way web address. Rackis said the Iowa City site has links to just about
everything, including to the United Way site. Hayek suggested Rackis email the address to him, and he
will email it to the Taskforce. Peterson said that the United Way website is not a comprehensive list of
human services. She noted that if all populations will be included, the Taskforce's list should be
comprehensive.
Hayek said work would be done to gather the additional information before the next meeting on January
3, 2005. Peterson asked how the locations of services would be determined. Hayek said he would work
with her and City Staff to come up with a list, and then circulate it to the Taskforce members for their
approval. Vandenberg asked if it would include all services. Peterson said since all populations are being
included, all services should be considered. Hayek said that reasons for excluding certain services could
be addressed during the discussion of secondary considerations.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business to come before the taskforce, Anthony moved to adjourn. Vandenberg
seconded, and the motion passed uncontested. The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 pm.
s:lpcdlminutes/ ScatteredSiteHousingTaskforce/12-13-04ssht.doc
Scattered Site Housing Taskforce
Attendance Record
2004
04/29 05/12 05/17 06/07 06/21 07/12 07/19 08/02 08/16 08/30 09/20 10/04 10/18 11/08 11/22 12/06 12/13
D. Anciaux X X X X X O/E O/E X X X O/E X X X X X X
J. Anthony X O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X
D. Clausen X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X
M. Hayek X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
J. Left X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
J. Peterson X X X X O/E X X O/E X X X X X O/E O/E X X
S. Stutsman O/E X X X X O/E X O/E O/E X O/E X X X X X X
VandenBerg X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member
MINUTES DRAFT
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
January 8, 2005 - 2:00 P.M.
McCollister Farmstead
2460 S. Gilbert Street
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Maharry, Jim Enloe, Mark McCallum, and Jim Ponto
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Gunn, Justin Pardekooper, Amy Smothers, Jann Weismiller and
Tim Weitzel
STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty
OTHERS PRESENT: Don Cochran
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.
Site Visit
Commission members met at the McCollister Farmstead, a local historic landmark, to review preliminary
plans for future site development. McCafferty said she had been in communication with Don Cochran
and his landscape architect, Steve Ford regarding this proposal. Doug Steinmetz, AIA, a preservation
architect who is a consultant to the State Historical Society of Iowa has also reviewed the plans and site.
McCafferty said that Steinmetz felt it would not be feasible to rehabilitate the barn, but it should be
thoroughly documented before demolition. Don Cochran showed McCafferty and Commission members
through the barn. He said he intends to reuse as many of the beams and columns as possible in a new
barn-like structure that he proposed to build in the same location. He said the new building will be used
for condominiums and he does not have plans yet from the architect. It may be oriented differently so it
may be designed like a bank barn. The group also walked the eastern portion of the site where Cochran
proposes to develop single family homes. He pointed out where the road, lots and trail will be located.
They discussed preserving the existing mature trees.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Shelley McCafferty.
s:lpcdlminutes/hpcJ2OO5HPCminuteslhpc1-8-05,doc
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
January 8, 2005
Page 2
Historic Preservation Commission
Attendance Record
2005
rerlTl
Name Expires 1/08
A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E
J. Enloe 3/29/06 X
M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E
M. Maharry 3/29/05 X
M. McCallum 3/29/06 X
J Pardekooper 3/29/06 O/E
J. Ponto 3/29/07 X
J Weismiller 3/29/06 O/E
T. Weitzel 3/29/05 O/E
Key:
X - Present
O - Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
..... Not a Member