Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-05-26 Info Packet CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org May 26, 2005 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IP1 Tentative Future Council Meetings and Work Session Agendas IP2 Memorandum from the Assistant Finance Director to the Finance Director: MedCheck Bill Review IP3 Memorandum from the JCCOG Solid Waste Management Planner: Update on curbside recycling customers survey IP4 Letter from Bill Brooks to Council Member Vanderhoef: Proclamation thank you IP5 ECICOG Meeting Thursday, May 26, 2005 [Submitted by Mayor Pro tem Wilburn] IP6 E-mail from Douglas DJ Elliott: ILC/EClCOG Workshop IP7 E-mail from Helen Burford: Channel 4 Schedule of Bob Yapp Presentation PRELIMINARY DRAFT/MINUTES IP8 Human Rights Commission: March 22, 2005 IP9 Planning and Zoning Public Hearing: April 28, 2005 IP10 Parks and Recreation Commission: May 11, 2005 IPll Police Citizens Review Board: May 10, 2005 IP12 Historic Preservation Commission: May 12, 2005 IP13 Historic Preservation Commission: April 28, 2005 IP14 Scattered Site Housing Task Force: April 25, 2005 IP'I5 Public Art Advisory Committee: May 5, 2005 ~ City Council Meeting Schedule and IP1 ~ Work Session Agendas uay2~, 2oo~ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org I TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS I · MONDAY, JUNE 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, JUNE 7 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY, JUNE 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, JUNE 21 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting MONDAY, JULY 4 Emma J. Harvat Hall Independence Day - City Offices Closed · TUESDAY, JULY 5 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall TBD Special Council Work Session Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY, JULY 18 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session · TUESDAY JULY 19 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00P Regular Formal Council Meeting ·. MONDAY, AUGUST 1 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY AUGUST 2 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY. AUGUST 15 Emma J. Ha/vatHall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY AUGUST 16 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY. SEPTEMBER 5 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall Labor Day - City Offices Closed TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 6 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall TBD Special Council Work Session Regular Formal Council Meeting DATE: 05/18~2005 TO: Kevin O'Malley, Finance Director -~,;~. ~ , FROM: Erin Herring, Assistant Finance Direct RE: MedCheck Bill Review When an employee suffers a work-related injury that may be potentially costly to the City, we typically hire a Nurse Case Manager from Corvel Corporation in Cedar Rapids. Her job is to manage the employee's medical care and the cost of the care with the goal of returning the employee to work as soon as possible. In the past, this service has been beneficial to both the City and the employee. Another service offered by Corvel Corporation is MedCheck Bill Review. Under this program, the City may submit any medical bills it receives for review. Corvel analyzes the invoices and compares the amount the City has been charged to what is reasonable and customary for the medical procedure that has been performed. Once the analysis is complete, Corvel contacts the medical provider and requests that they adjust their billing accordingly. The City pays the medical provider the adjusted amount of the billing and pays Corvel 25% of the savings. During 2004, we tested the program and submitted 31 invoices totaling $146,327.03 for MedCheck Bill Review. The City saved $36,084.10 and paid Corvel $9,021.06, for a net savings of $27,063.04 or 18%. Since this trial proved to be successful, I am recommending that we continue this program for all medical bills the City receives. This would only include workers compensation and Police and Fire Chapter 411 disability related invoices. Please let me know if you have any questions. Date: May 25, 2005 To: Iowa City City C~,,~I. From: Brad Neuman~"~CCOG Solid Waste Management Planner Re: Update on curbside recycling customers survey During the next two weeks we will be mailing out a random sample of 1000 curbside recycling surveys to City of Iowa City refuse customers. The survey is intended to measure the interest in making changes to the current curbside recycling collection program. The survey will ask whether or not curbside recycling collection customers would be interested in co-mingling their recyclables in one container (to be separated at another location), and if this type of program would increase their participation. The results of the survey should be available in six to eight weeks. In the meantime, staff is investigating how we would operate a co-mingled recycling program. The survey results will be considered in our staff recommendation of how best to proceed with any program changes. If anyone has any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at 356-5235 or by email at brad-neumann@iowa-city, org. cc: Jeff Davidson Rodney Walls Rick Fosse jccogsw/mem/curbsidesurvey.doc City of Belle Isle o-- e -gaFa Ms. Dee Vanderhoef City of Iowa City 2403 Tudor Drive Iowa City, IA 52245 Dear Dee: Thank you for issuing the proclamation declaring May, 2005 as Neurofibromatosis Awareness Month. All of us involved in the drive to raise awareness of NF are so lucky to have leaders like you willing to add the time to your busy agendas to issue these proclamations. I know how many requests like this we all receive. And I know it is not taken lightly when so much time and effort are required to do so. Please know that I deeply appreciate your stepping forward to do this favor, not only for me and my family, but for more than 100,000 Americans who have been touched by NF. When I reviewed the Children's Tumor Foundation's web site, www.ctf.orq, listing over 60 cities, towns, villages and counties issuing proclamations this year, I realized what wonderful people we have in public service in this country. The effort this year reached from coast to coast. And with TV and internet postings, who knows how many people have now at least heard of neurofibromatosis, or NF? The awareness your proclamation raised is so important to the future identification of a cure. On behalf of the Children's Tumor Foundation, I extend my heartfelt thanks to you for your Proclamation. I hope someday I will have the opportunity to also help with a cause that is dear to you. atitude, Mayor City of Belle Isle, FL City of Belle Isle '." 5218 SL Regis Place ~ Belle Isle, Florida 32812 '." 407-947-5025 Member: Florida League of Cities - Tri-County League of Cities - National League of Cities Submitted by Mayor Pro EAST CENTRAL IOWA Wi 1 burn COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS YOUR REGIONAL PLANNINO AGENCY MEMORANDUM DATE: May 18, 2005 20: ECICOG Board of Directors FROM: Doug Elliott, x~ecutive Director SUBJECT: Next Meeting - Thursday, May 26, 2005~ The ECICOG Board of Directors will meet on Thursday, May 26, 2005, 1:00 p:m., at the ECICOG offices. As you will recall, the centerpiece, of this month's agenda is a strategic planning session. The agenda has been revised accordingly, allowing you to dispense with the month's business items at the beginning of the meeting, and leaving the majority of the time for strategic planning. The planning session will be facilitated by Sondy Dtiggett, one of the consultants who was involved in the previous strategic planning process. Our goal is to adjoum the meetihg no later than 3:30 p.m. Minutes of the April 28th meeting are also enclosed. Additional items are highlighted below: Item 2.0 Routine Matters: Financial statements for th,e month of April are enclosed. Item 3.1 Staff Reports: Staffrepo[ts are englosed. Item 3.2 Transportation Report: Staff will present a recommendation on the response from the Request for Proposals for transit service in Washington County for the ECIT. Item 4.1 Solid Waste TAC Report: Minutes of the most recent meeting are enclosed. Please review the remainder of the enclosed materials, and contact Us if you' have questions before the meeting on the 26th. Enclosures 108 Third Street SE, Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401 319-365-9941 FAX 319-365-9981 www. ia.net/-ecicog East Central Iowa Council o, f Governments Board Meeting Notice 1:00 P.M. May 26, 2005 I East Central Iowa Council of Governments 108 Third Street SE, Suite 300- Cedar Rapids, Iowa TEL 365-9941 FAX365-9981 pages 1.0 CALL TO ORDER · 1 Recognition of Altemates .2 Public Discussion .3 Approval of Agenda 2.0 ROUTINE MATTERS 1-3 .1 Approval of Minutes (April 28, 2005) 4-6 .2 Preceding Month's Budget Reports/Balance Sheets 3.0 AGENCY REPORTS 7-15 .1 Staff Reports - information only 16 .2 Transportation Report · consider staffrecommendation on Washington County Service for ECIT 4.0 COMMITTEE REPORTS 17-18 .1 Solid Waste Technical Advisory Committee - information only 5.0 OLD BUSINESS · 1 Approval of Expenditures 6.0 STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION Sondy Daggett, facilitator 7.0 NEW BUSINESS 8.0 LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION 9.0 NEXT MEETING: June 30, 2005 ECICOG is the Region l O planning agency serving local governments in the counties of Benton, Iowa, Johnson, Jones, Linn, and l;Vashington. MINUTES East Central Iowa Council of Governments Board Meeting 1:00 p.m. - April 28, 2005 108 Third Street SE, Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, Iowa MEMBERS PRESENT Lu Barron-Linn County Supervisor Randy Payne-Washington County Supervisor Ed Brown-Mayor of Washington Ann Hearn-Linn County Citizen Ric Gerard-Iowa County Supervisor Larry Wilson-Johnson County Citizen Don Magdefrau-Benton County Citizen Don Gray-Mayor of Central City Bill Daily-Benton County Citizen Linda Langston-Linn County Supervisor Gary Edwards-Iowa County Citizen Henry Herwig-Coralville City Council Dennis Hansen-Anamosa City Council Pat Harney-Johnson County Supervisor Wade Wagner-Cedar Rapids Commissioner Ross Wilburn-Iowa City City Council Charles Montross-Iowa County Supervisor MEMBERS ABSENT David Vermedahl-Benton County Supervisor Ed Raber- Washington County Citizen Leo Cook-Jones County Supervisor Vacancy-Jones County Citizen 'ALTERNATES PRESENT - None OTltER'S PRESENT - None STAFF PRESENT Doug Elliott-Executive Director Gina Peters-Administrative Assistant Mary Rump-IT~Transportation Planner Robyn Jacobson- Transit Administrator Eric Freese-Housing Specialist Chad Sands-Planner Lisa-Marie Garlich-Planner Jennifer Ryan-Planner Kristin Simon-Planner Lisa Treharne-Circuit Rider Amy Peterson-Grant Administrator 1.0 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Secretary/Treasurer, Gary Edwards at 1:02 p.m. .1 Recognition of Alternates - None .2 Public Discussion - None .3 Approval of Agenda M/S/C (Hansen/Herwig) to approve the agenda. All ayes. 2.0 ROUTINE MATTERS .1 Approval of Minutes (March 31, 2005) M/S/C (Gerard/Wilbum) to approve the minutes as written. All ayes. (Barton joined the meeting and served as Chair from this point forward.) .2 Preceding Month's Budget Reports/Balance Sheets Elliott gave an overview of the March financial statements. Quarterly departmental statements were included in the board packet. M/S/C (Wilburn/Hamey to receive and file the March financial statements for audit. All ayes. (Langston joined the meeting at this time.) 3.0 GUEST PRESENTATION Bill Dale, RouteMatch Director of Sales for US Central Division made a presentation to the board on dispatching software. He has been working with the ITS Ad Hoc Committee. (Montross joined the meeting at this time.) The board skipped to item 5.1 on the agenda. 5.1 ITS Task Force Langston referred to page 24 of the board packet, the ITS Ad Hoc Committee's recommendation for the ITS project. Discussion followed on the recommendation. M/S/C (Gerard/Brown) to accept the committee's recommendation as presented. Wilbum asked if legal counsel had reviewed the contract. Elliott stated he was waiting for the recommendation before consulting legal counsel. Edwards commended Langston, Raber, Jacobson and Rump for their work on the ITS project. All ayes. The board went back to item 4.1 on the agenda. 4.0 AGENCY REPORTS .1 Chairperson's Report - None .2 Board Members' Reports Brown reported that the water superintendent in Washington was working on a project to make chlorine. .3 Director's Report Elliott told the board a survey was sent out yesterday to cities and boards of supervisors in the region. The responses are due May 20. .4 Staff Reports Peterson reminded board members that CDBG applications for water and sewer need to have preliminary engineering reports completed prior to application submission. This will be the minimum requirement and any progress made beyond that will receive priority in funding. 5.0 COMMITTEE REPORTS .2 Solid Waste Technical Advisory Committee - information only 6.0 OLD BUSINESS .1 Approval of Expenditures M/S/C (Brown/Langston) to approve payment of expenditures. All ayes. 7.0 NEW BUSINESS Barron told the board about "Planting the Seeds," a conference to be held in Linn County on June 1-2. 8.0 LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION -None 9.0 NEXT MEETING: May 26, 2005 The meeting adjourned at 2:55 p.m. Gary Edwards, Secretary/TreaSurer May 26, 2005 Date Community Development Report Date: May 26, 2004 From: Chad Sands, AICP, Planner Lisa J. Treharne, Planner Lisa-Marie Garlich, Planner Amy Peterson, Program Administrator Eric Freese, Housing Inspector Status of Planning Projects · The City of Anamosa has asked for a service proposal to update the City's Comprehensive Plan. · Work is continuing on the Benton County Comprehensive Plan. Monthly work-sessions with the Planning and Zoning Commission have focused on development tools to assist in managing the rapid growth in the County. In particular, the Commission is reviewing a proposed Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) program. · The City of Fairfax has hired ECICOG to prepare an update to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Work will begin in June and is expected to last approximately eight months before the plan's adoption. _/__ · Johnson County has asked for a service proposal for the review and update of the County's Land Use Plan. · Jones County has begun work on updating their subdivision and Ag-land Preservation Ordinance with the assistance of ECICOG staff. The County's sign ordinance will also be updated. Work is expected to be completed this fall. · Linn County has asked for a service proposal for the creation of another City/County Strategic Growth Plan. · The City of Lone Tree has asked for a service proposal for the update of the City's zoning ordinance. · The City of North Liberty's update of their comprehensive plan has been completed. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended the plan on to the City Council. The Council will hold a public hearing in June before adoption of the plan. · The City of Springville's zoning ordinance is complete. The City Council adopted the zoning ordinance in February. Work on the subdivision ordinance is nearing completion. The Planning and Zoning Commission has set a public hearing date for June to gather final comments on the ordinance. In addition, a planning and zoning training session will be held after both ordinances have been adopted. · ECICOG staff prepared a grant application for the City of Vinton to fund the creation of a local pre-disaster mitigation plan. The grant was approved by FEMA. As soon as we recieve the proper paper work, ECICOG can begin work on the plan. Community Development Report May 26 Page 2 · ECICOG is providing site plan and development review services for the Cities of Bertram and Shueyville. Staff represents the City of Bertram on the Linn County Technical Review Committee when reviewing conditional use applications outside of the City of Bertram. There were no conditional use permit reviews during the month of April in Bertram. · The Economic Development Administartion (EDA) is currently reviewing our designation request. As you recall, ECICOG had requested to become designated as an EDA District. Staff has updated the CEDS and sent the required information to EDA. Staff will have a full report at the Board Meeting on the status of our request. Community Development Block Grants and other Grant Programs Proiects in pre-construction phase: City of Washington: Funded $329,500 for the construction of 5,000 sq. ft. building which will house the Lending Hands Adult Daycare. Start-up administration has begun. Benton County: Funded $109,000 for the installation of a sanitary sewer system for the unincorporated area of Watkins. The project has been submitted to the DNR for permitting. Jones County: Funded $131,000 for the installation of a sanitary sewer system for the City of Center Junction. The engineering report is currently being updated. CDBG Awards Community Facilities and Water and Sewer projects were awarded CDBG funds in early March. The City of Wellman, in our region, was awarded CDBG funds for their Community Facilities application. ECICOG Community Development Deparlment - 2005 Eric Freese I Grant Updates Ext. 24 None at this time. Lisa-Marie Garlich ~ Housing Rehabilitation Projects Ext. 33 Anamosa Rehabilitation :Il. The City was awarded funds to Amy Peterson rehabilitate 10 houses. Twelve homes are completed. One home is Ext. 21 being inspected. The City should complete a total of 13 homes once the project is done. Three homes were deemed ineligible. Lisa Treharne Grant: $379,850 Local Match: $10,000 T~F Funds: $52,120 Source Ext. 29 of Funds: HUD/IDED Housing Fund Upcoming Brighton Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 9 houses. Six homes are complete, one home is in construction, and one Grant home is going through the inspection process. More applicants were Deadlines: needed to fill the last slot. Advertising went out and applications are Alliant being ranked. Foundation Grant: $370,600 Local Match: $14,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED 6/1/05 Housing Fund CAT Fairfax Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 11 7/1/05 houses. These homes are complete and close-out paperwork will begin soon. REAP Grant: $273,990 Local Match: $10,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED 8/15/05 Housing Fund Lone Tree Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 8 houses. Fifteen applications were received. Five homes are complete. Upcoming Two are under construction and one is in the verification process. Workshops/ Grant: $320,312 Local Match: $8,000 Source of Funds: HUD/]DED Conferences: Housing Fund Iowa Gmat Places Forum Marion Rehabilitation. City of Marion was awarded funds to CR~CSPS rehabilitate 10 affordable single-family, owner-occupied units. Funds 6/:L/05 have been released. Three homes are currently under construction. The next three homes are being income verified. 23 applications were received. Grant Writing Grant: $396,790 Local Match: $40,000 Source of Funds: HUD/~DED Workshop Housing Fund Des Moines 6/9 - 6/10/05 Martelle Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 8 houses. Nine homes are completed. Close-out should be commencing Small City soon. Two homes were deemed ineligible. Workshop Grant: $307,986 Local Match: $8,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED CR-Kirkwood Housing Fund 6/20/05 c:[ Olin Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 10 houses. The City had additional funds to complete twelve homes. Twelve homes are completed. The 13th home is currently under construction. Eight homes have been deemed ineligible. A waiting list has been established. Grant: $379,850 Local Match: $10,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED Housing Fund Wellman Rehabilitation. The City was awarded funds to rehabilitate 10 houses. All ten homes are complete. There are funds to do another home. The application was accepted and is currently being inspected. Additional funds may be left to do more homes. Two homes were deemed to be infeasible. The other applicants are on file on a waiting list. Grant: $379,850 Local Match: $17,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED Housing Fund IFederal Home Loan Bank Projects 3ohnson County Federal Home Loan Bank III. ECICOG received a third round of funds on behalf of the Johnson County Housing Task Force for the rehabilitation of 20 homes. Applications are being accepted and processed. Thirteen have been completed, one is in the construction phase, four are in the bidding phase and two are in the verification stage. A 6- month extension has been applied for. A waiting list has been started for three applicants. Grant.'. $107,500 Local Match: $101,820 Source of Funds: Federal Home Loan Bank Washington County Federal Home Loan Bank T. EC[COG received funds on behalf of Washington County to assist 10 homes. There are 9 homes that have been completed and 1 that is in the construction phase. Grant: $53,750 Local Match: $50,910 Source of Funds: Federal Home Loan Bank Jones County Federal Home Loan Bank. ECTCOG received funds on behalf of Jones County to assist 10 homes. Appli~aUons are being accepted and processed. Three applicants are acquiring bids and one is in the verification phase. Grant: $55,000 Local Match: $50,000 Source of Funds: Federal Home Loan Bank IFlood Buy Out Projects Central City Flood Buy-Out I. All five homes have been purchased. All homes have been demolished. The financials are cleared. The Hazard Mitigation Plan is accepted by FEMA: the project will soon close out. Grant: $179,632 Source of Funds: FEMA/State of Towa/Central City Central City Flood Buy-Out TT. All homes have been bought out. Three homes are scheduled for relocation. The fourth home is going to be demolished or burned by the city. Another home was added to this project. The Hazard Mitigation Plan is accepted by FEMA: the project will soon close out. Grant: $371,547 Source of Funds: FEMA/State of :Iowa/Central City Linn County Flood Buy-Out T. The county was awarded funds to acquire four houses. All demolition is complete. The last home was disqualified for funding. Financials complete. ECICOG Hou$in~l R~Ro~{ I ~' Linn County Flood Buy-Out Phase T:Z. The county was awarded funds to purchase and demolish four homes. This project is now complete. FEMA is currently closing out the project. Grant: $118,169 Source of Funds: FEMA/State of ~[owa/Linn County Marion Flood Buy-Out, The City was awarded funds to acquire and demolish three homes flooded by the June 04, 2002 rains. The City closed on one home. The Demolition is completed. The second home was able to get an extension: the extension has been granted until August 2005. The City will be closing on the home within the month of rvlay. The third home chose not to participate. Grant: $ 264,117 Source of Funds: FEMA/State of Iowa/City Monticello Flood Buy-Out. The City was awarded funds to acquire and demolish two homes flooded by the June 02, 2002 rains. Both homeowners have closed on their homes. The Demolition is completed. The other home was sold by the city and relocated out of the floodplain. Close out is completed. Grant: $133,599 Source of Funds: FEMA/State of Iowa/City JRental Rehabilitation Project Village of Troy Mills/Linn County Rental Rehabilitation. The County was awarded funds for adaptive reuse of a vacant school to four units of senior housing. All grant funds have been expended and construction is still on-going. Grant: $122,807 Local Match: $98,633 Source of Funds: HUD/TDED Housing Fund I Homeownership Assistance Projects I Vinton Homeownership Assistance. The City was awarded funds to assist at least 10 applicants with homeownership. Six (6) applicants are complete. Three more are ready to go with one of them beginning new construction shortly. One is waiting to sell home and there are two others on a waiting list. There will be almost enough grant funds left over to assist an eleventh applicant. Grant: $317,573 Local Match: $10,000 Source of Funds: HUD/TDED Housing Fund Washington Homeownership Assistance TI:. The City was awarded funds to provide down payment assistance to 5 households. Five homes have been purchased and are completed. A sixth home will be completed, waiting list applicants are being contacted. Grant: $198,845 Local Match: $5,000 Source of Funds: HUD/IDED Housing Fund ECICOGHousingReport MINUTES EAST CENTRAL IOWA COUNCZL OF GOVERNMENTS Solid Waste Technical Advisory Committee (SWTAC) I PM, May 12, 2005 Cedar Rapids / Linn County Solid Waste Agency, Cedar Rapids, Iowa VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT NON-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT Benton County: Myron Parizek Iowa City/Johnson County: CR/LC SW Agency: Floyde Pelkey, Karmin Jon Thomas Bradbury 1Iowa Waste Exchange: John Koch, Rick ]C/Johnson County: Brad Neumann Meyers Tama County: Lyle Brehm STAFF PRESENT Iowa County: Rick Heller Jennifer Ryan Kristin Simon MINUTES: Minutes from the April 2005 meeting were approved. May meeting location changed to CR / LC Solid Waste Agency because Moor's facility was not complete. Local Updates- '-~ Iowa .lohnson Neumann and Thomas reported: City / County. · Chamness Technologies, an organic material processor, approached Towa City and .lohnson County about locating a facility locally. · The HHM mobile grant application was approved by the DNR. Staff is researching equipment. · Surveying Iowa City residents concerning changes to the program including commingled collection of recyclables. · Implementing downtown alley clean up program. Iowa County: Rick Heller reported: · Meth labs being found in the county. Discussion followed. · Marengo held a clean up day. · Moor's is providing frequent and regular collection of appliances. · Discussion about dental, vision, and health insurance issues for employees. Benton County. Parizek reported: · Contacted by a graduate student researching shingle grinding and its use for dust control. · Planning enforcement of recycling ordinance. · Discussion about closing time gate policies at area landfills. Cedar Rapids / Linn County Solid Waste Agency. Bradbury and Pelkey reported: · Foth and Van Dyke conducted an employee and operational assessment study. · Discussion about Workman's Comp and "light duty" policies. Tama County. Brehm reported: · :Investigating purchase of new dozer equipment. · Will attend the DNR workshops about Sub-title D and alternative liner issues. IP6 Marian Karr From: Doug Elliott [doug.elliott@ecicog.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 2:52 PM To: Teresa Meyer; Tamara Coleman; Sonya Love-Smith; MaryAnn Fanin; Marvin Trimble; Margaret Whitson; Kevin Kirchner; Kelly Hayworth; jeff schott; JackiMichael; Doug Kearns; David Plyman; Cloyce Hutton; Cityof Wyoming; City of Williamsburg; City of West Chester; Cityof West Branch; City of Wellman; City of Washington; Cityof Walford; City of Vinton; City of Van Home; Cityof Urbana; City of University Heights; City of Traer; Cityof Toledo; City of Tipton; City of Tiffin; City of Tama; City of Swisher; City of Springville; Cityof Solon; City of Shueyville; City of Shellsburg; Cityof Robins; City of Riverside; City of Parnell; Cityof Palo; City of Oxford Junction; City of Olin; Cityof North Liberty; City of North English; City of Newhall; Cityof Mt. Vernon; City of Mt. Auburn; City of Monticello; Cityof Millersburg; City of Mechanicsville; City of Martelle; Cityof Marengo; City of Luzerne; City of Lone Tree; Cityof Lisbon; City of Ladora; City of Keystone; Cityof Kalona; City of Iowa City; City of Hills; City of Hiawatha; City of Garwin; City of Garrison; Cityof Fairfax; City of Ely; City of Dysart; City of Durant; City of Coralville; City of Clutier; Cityof Clarence; City of Central Cibj; City of Center Point; Cityof Cedar Rapids; City of Brighton; City of Blairstown; Cityof Belle Plaine; City of Anamosa; City of Alburnett; City of Ainsworth; Cindy Pattee Subject: ILC/ECICOG Workshop Registration Form.pdf(30 KB) Dear City Colleague: On Monday, June 20, 2005, ECICOG and the Iowa League of Cities (ILC) will cosponsor a workshop for small cities. Workshop topics include sessions on community vitality and nuisance abatement. Although the agenda is geared toward communities of 1,500 or smaller, cities of all sizes are welcome and encouraged to attend. The workshop will be held from 7:00 - 9:00 p.m., in the Community Training and Response Center on the Kirkwood Community College campus in Cedar Rapids. A registration form is attached. Completed forms should be sent to the ILC offices. Registrations received after June 13 are not refundable. This workshop is just one of a series being presented through the months of June and July by the ILC and Iowa's Councils of Governments. Workshop topics vary among locations. To find out the dates and topics of other workshops that may be i~ your vicinity, visit the ILC website at www.iowaleague.org. Please share this information with others you believe would be interested. If you have difficulties opening the attached pdf file, contact our offices to have one faxed or mailed to you. Thanks, Douglas D. Elliott Executive Director ECICOG 108 Third Street SE Suite 300 Cedar Rapids, IA 52401 (319) 365-9941, x22 voice) (319) 365-9981 (fax) www.ecicog.org *** eSafe scanned this email for malicious content *** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders *** Small City Workshop 2005 Sponsored by COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS IOWA The Iowa League of Cities and LEAGUE East Central Iowa Council of Governments _of CITIES Monday, June 20th EOC Room: Community Training & Response Center, Kirkwood Community College 6301 Kirkwood Blvd. SW, Cedar Rapids 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Special Topics Include: 7:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. - Community Vitality_ What makes your community appealing? Hoxv is your community unique to others in the state? Community vitality places emphasis on enhancing your city's appearance and economic strength through the application of intangible policy stances along with physically noticeable improvements. This paneled Q&A session, with city officials from your region, highlights local methods for city-wide improvement through embracing community vitality. 8:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. - Nuisance Abatement Does your city have dilapidated housing, junk cars, animal disturbances, noise pollution or other problems considered nuisances? If so, this workshop is for you. Come with questions and we'll have answers for one of the most challenging issues every community in Iowa faces - nuisance abatement. *Iowa League of Cities' & Councils of Government Partnership The 2005 workshop is ,~7)onsored through partnership be/ween the Iowa League of Cities and EC¥COG The annual series of workshops is tailored to cities with 1,500 or fewer, but all ciO, and government officials are welcome to attend. *For more information contact the League at (515) 244-7282. ................. ~e~'r~s ~l~'ll-C~t~ ~vV~r-I~p', June 20th City Address Zip Phone ( ) Fax ( Please list names as they are to appear on badges Name Title Name _Title Name Title Name Title Registration fee x $15/person Contact Name Registration is due by June 13th Full refunds will be issued on cancelations made prior to the deadline. No refunds will be given after the registration deadline. Call the l,eague at (515) 244-7282 if you need special accessibility accommodations. Please return this registration form aud appropriate fees to: Iowa League of Cities PO Box 84 Des Moines, IA 50301-0084 or lax it to (515) 244-0740 Marian Karr From: Helen Burford [hburford@mchsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 2:13 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Channel 4 Schedule of Bob Yapp presentation Members of Council Friends of Historic Preservation is pleased to be able to advise you of the telecast times for the Bob Yapp presentation which was held at the Englert on May 6th as part of National Historic Preservation Month: Wednesday, May 25 11:00am, 11:00pm Friday, May 27 8:00am, 7:00pm Saturday, May 28 11:00am 5/24/2005 IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES March 22, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lisa Beckmann, Paul Retish, Jim McCue; Bev Witwer; Billie Townsend; Scott King; Sara Baird MEMBERS ABSENT: GeoffWilming, David Shorr STAFF MEMBERS: Heather L. Shank 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:05 P.M. 2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: McCue mentioned that on the first page 2/3rds of the way down, it is written that Scott King moved her- Sara Baird. (There is a period missing.) Quire is the name of the choir that King is a part of and the spelling is not an error that needs to be corrected. Townsend said the quote of her statement on page 10 needs to have the repeated phrase removed. McCue mentioned that the minutes were long and not focused. He would find shorter and more focused minutes more beneficial. Shank agreed and explained that she would not do another transcript of the minutes. It was necessary in this case only because there was a question as to the impartiality of the Commission and the only way to provide minutes that could not be interpreted as biased was to do a word for word transcription. This will not happen in the future unless circumstances require it. Motion: McCue moved to approve the minutes as amended, Paul seconded the motion. Motion approved unanimously. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: No 4. NEW BUSINESS: Scattered Site Housing Task Force issued its draft recommendations and Beckmann received them in an e-mail from Matt Hayek on Monday. The draft recommendations were handed out to each Commissioner. Beckmann stated that a public forum to discuss the recommendations was scheduled for March 28 at 6:30 p.m. Matt Hayek, in his e-mail, inquired as to whether the Commission wanted to have representation at that meeting. The last page of the Task Force document discusses the composition of the census tracts. Beckmann acknowledged that the Commission's group opinion that census tract 18 or as the Commission called it, "Southeast Iowa City", was "over-represented" was confirmed by the Scattered Site Task Force. Retish clarified that the "Scattered Site Housing Task Force Fair Share Matrix Table" is representative of only federally subsidized housing. It does not represent private housing. Townsend indicated that it represents the housing developed with the help of 1 ½ - 2 million dollars the City receives from the federal government for public housing. Retish believes the task force only addressed some of the perceived housing problem, if it didn't look at housing that was not federally subsidized. Witwer said she was pleased to see the Tenant to Ownership and Work towards Self-Sufficiency programs. McCue stated that he did not understand the second recommendation that called for the City to adopt a "residency preference" for Section 8 vouchers and/or public housing. Beckmann explained that this program allows a person/family to apply and receive a Section 8 voucher in a different state and use it when they move to Iowa. Shank informed the Commission that City Steps is a housing plan that is developed by City staff for HUD. In the plan, recognized barriers to housing are set forth and steps taken to address them are outlined. Beckmann asked whether members of the Commission wanted to attend the public forum. McCue volunteered and Retish said that he would try to go. Beckmann said Retish said that he would be more comfortable reporting back to the Commission rather than speaking for the Commission. McCue indicated that he did not want anyone on the task force to expect the Commission to weigh in and express their views. Shank stated that she has told persons that were wondering that the Commission had concerns and expressed them. It did not, however, intend to weigh in on the recommendations of the Scattered Site Housing Task Force. The DVD entitled "Bayard Rustin: Brother Outsider" will be shown April 5, ICPL at 7:00 p.m. and it is approximately 1 hour and 20 minutes long. Geoff Wilming will facilitate the discussion following the screening. Witwer & Baird will also be present. The Center for Human Rights indicted that it also would send someone to facilitate the discussion. This project was initiated by the U of I Center for Human Rights when a staff person contacted Witwer and asked if the Human Rights Commission would be willing to help with their film series by having the Commission's name on the poster. The DVD is about Bayard Rustin's work in Civil Rights. Rustin was an African American gay man. Retish said that Rustin was one of the great leaders of the Civil Rights movement. Shank asked Witwer whether the U of I Center for Human Rights had gotten written permission to show the DVD. She added that it was imperative that the Iowa City Human Rights Commission be cognizant of copyright laws. Witwer said that she would ask and get back to Shank and added that Amy Wisemann is the head of the Center for Human Rights and she is new to this. McCue asked whether the Center had sought African American co-sponsors. Witwer said that she would check on this as well. 5. OLD BUSINESS: February & March programs: Cultural Diversity Festival - Beckman, King, Baird and Wilming attended. Beckmann thought the event went well but the table location was a problem. The table ended up being in front of the men's restroom and was frequently mistaken for the Information Table. Despite the table location, people did come by, picked up materials and seemed interested. Shank expressed the Commission's concerns to the organizers of the event and the table will be located in a different spot next year. Let's Get Real - Witwer said that everything went very well and the audience wanted to express their thoughts on the issue and offer suggestions. Witwer wrote a letter to the editor about the event. Shank realized that she had forgotten to put it on letterhead but said she would the following day. Beckmann added that Witwer could e-mail her letter to the newspapers. Witwer praised Wilming and Baird for helping to make the event a success. Tenant/Landlord Program - Beckmann stated that Shorr was not at the meeting so he could not talk about this program but she and Shank attended. Beckmann thought the program was excellent and she really, really enjoyed it. Shank mentioned that the landlords she spoke with found the program exceedingly helpful and would love to see a repeat. Beckmann said that the manner in which the panelists dealt with the discussion was great in that they asked the audience hypothetical questions as to what they would do in this scenario or that scenario. The program was really informative and she would like to see the Commission do a follow-up program. Odd Girl Out - Witwer said that she recruited people to go but several did not attend even though they had a free ticket. The group that was the strongest in supporting this program and committed to attending were elementary counselors. They are dealing with aggression in girls every day and they have very strong feelings about this issue and it is very important to them. There are around 17 elementary schools. Shank said that she purchased five of the Odd Girl Out videos which taped the author and a video of the discussion that occurred afterwards with the panel of teachers and a principal. Retish wondered whether anti-bullying actions are the fad of the month. Building Blocks for Employment-- Shank indicated that she enjoyed herself immensely. For the first hour the tables were packed with volunteers and persons seeking assistance with resumes, cover letters, applications, etc. After the initial rush, things slowed down considerably as people returned home to put their kids to bed. The law students that volunteered had a wonderful time and they wanted to volunteer at another event as soon as possible. Retish said there are two things that are needed, (1) employers with jobs and (2) food. The group that provided the meal in the past has appeared to have lost its membership. Retish stated that ACT has committed to taking the lead in finding employers to participate in the next program. First, ACT is going to send letters to employers encouraging them to attend. The group that provided the food at the Pet Degree Building Blocks fizzled at the most recent event. Shank believes the group called itself the Broadway Vitalization Project. It was suggested that the Commission make sure that there is enough food to cover all of the kids that attend because it is a big draw to the event. Shank added that the pizza that the Commission did provide was quite good. McCue thought having an earlier more focused time frame would make the event more efficient and not result in volunteers sitting after the rush was finished with nothing to do. Shank suggested engaging in outreach of groups not usually represented. Beckmann suggested doing an application template so the information could just be typed in. McCue thought that there should be a table where the topic is temporary employment. As a volunteer at the Shelter, McCue sees that type of employment opportunity being accepted more frequently by persons that are homeless. The people at the shelter are usually being interviewed on the phone and they are not getting three letters of recommendation. Beckmann asked whether the Commission could take it one step further by having a job fair. Shank said that Pat Meyer was going to arrange for a job fair but Shank has not heard anything about any plans for awhile. Beckmann said that since the Education Committee is contacting ACT and other employers .... Retish interjected that he advised Committee meetings to contact a spectrum of employers that have available entry level, blue collar and professional positions. King believes that there needs to be a note included on the first page of the cover letter material advising people to have someone else proofread the document before it is sent to the employer. Retish also recommended teaching people how to write a resume or how to type one. In addition, it would be beneficial if people were informed of places where persons could receive assistance with drafting resumes/cover letters etc, during the time the Education Commission meeting is not having a program. Retish really wants employers that provide entry level positions like K-Mart & Wal-mart to participate in the job fair. Retish reiterated what he has mentioned several times before, that the Chamber of Commerce has been unwilling to assist with this endeavor. According to Retish, the people the Chamber do not seem to understand who the participants include at the Building Block events. When he went to the Chamber to discuss Building Blocks he was told that the Chamber does something similar at Hancher Auditorium every year. The Chamber representative wondered why persons attending the Building Blocks events have not gone to Hancher when the Chamber has held its job fair. Beckmann asked whether there have been job fairs in the past where entry level jobs have been offered. Shank said that she is not aware of a job fair that has assisted persons with the level of job skills usually found at the Building Blocks event. She added that a job fair was scheduled at the University of Iowa on March 23 but there has not, to her knowledge, been a job fair that has assisted persons the Education Committee usually assists. McCue said a good resource would be Leon DeBoar, the Program Manager at the Shelter House. DeBoar works predominately with agencies that place homeless people in available temporary positions. McCue also recommended talking to Karl Dixon. Beckmann said that she would like to have the Commission involved in the job fair. WHITE PRIVILEGE 101: Beckmann, Baird, Townsend and Wilming attended this event. Baird said that Eddie Moore actually viewed this event as training on how to present the information that they were going to provide at the bigger conference in April. Baird said that Moore showed the film that he, Annie Tucker, Valerie Garr and Adam Burke produced. The film included interviews with persons that attended previous White Privilege Conferences. The film documents the reactions of the participants. Baird said that persons in the film talked about getting past the feeling of guilt, becoming responsible for it, understanding White privilege and taking action. The audience engaged in discussion but there was not as much time as a discussion of that topic deserved. Retish added that he wanted to throw in a dissonant view. He has no problem with the concept of white privilege but it creates anxiety in the "group called White" and he does not believe the group called '¥Vhite" is homogenous. Secondly, Retish believes that it is more of an economic issue and privilege comes from money and this is equally as important and has as much of an impact as White privilege on people of color and everyone else in the country. Retish hands out the White privilege information in his class but he really would like to see the discussion open up and include the impact of socio-economic status on all persons. Retish agreed, 'however, that Moore and the panel did a really nice job with the film and the discussion. Townsend thought the presentation was good and their efforts were a good start. Baird expressed an interest in attending the conference on April 30th. YOUTH AWARDS: Beckmann stated that Shank had sent her the five or six nominations submitted so far. Shank expects additional nominations by the end of the week. Witwer took it upon herself to remind teachers of the nomination deadline. Beckmann contacted the principal at Weber and the principal thought the Commission had sent out the Youth Award information too early, (October), and she suggested the information be sent out in January. Retish wondered if the Commission could acquire a master list of all of the schools and youth organizations. The Commission could then ask that the schools and or organizations to nominate one youth or a group of youths. When Witwer recently talked to the principals, she asked, "Who will be the Youth Human Rights Award recipients from (Lemme) elementary." Beckmann reminded everyone that the deadline for the nominations was April I and the Commission was sticking to that deadline with no exceptions. KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Beckmann indicated that a keynote speaker had to be chosen that evening or at the May meeting. Beckmann liked the Harkin suggestion but King indicated that a backup would be necessary as Harkin could be called away at the last minute. Shank reminded the Commission that it had always had nonpartisan breakfasts and the time it chose a politician to win the award there was quite the backlash. It wouldn't have been quite so controversial if the award winner hadn't endorsed another candidate at the event. Townsend recommended Charlotte Westerhaus, Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity, (formerly Affirmative Action). Retish mentioned that the new director of the U of I Human Rights Center might be a possibility and McCue indicated that the new director was Ken Cmiel, a history professor. Witwer offered that Chivy Sok, the Deputy Director of the U of I Center for Human Rights, moved to California and her replacement is Amy Wisemann. Retish offered Len Sandier a professor at the law school as a possible speaker because of the extraordinary amount of work he has done in the community, especially with persons with disabilities. Townsend added that Sandier won a Human Rights Award last year. Retish also suggested another person that has done a lot of human rights work in the community - Kevin Burt, the musician. Retish said that Burr donates his time for all sorts of causes. Shank added that Burt did a great deal to help promote the Coralville library. He also provides harmonica instruction to the kids in Iowa City and Coralville. Retish said that what he liked about the idea was the fact that Burt was not connected to the University. Beckmann added that another positive factor with Burt as the choice was his recognizable name. Retish said that if he cannot speak, he can break into song. Beckmann offered that she had gone to high school with Kevin in West Waterloo. She thinks he would be great because she knew him then and she knows him now and he is a terrific person. Also people might find it intriguing that a musician was picked as the keynote speaker. Persons that have not come to the Human Rights Breakfast in the past might attend because of Burt. Beckmann asked Shank to contact Burt and if he is unable to attend, she will contact the Commission members so that they will be prepared to pick another speaker during the May meeting. 6. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: McCue: McCue said that it was interesting to watch what happened when the homeless shelter had a fire. The fire escape burned down and the people staying at the shelter couldn't use the second floor. The fire was on a Monday. The insurance, fire and construction people were in the Shelter on Tuesday and it was operational again by Saturday. The religious community provided additional shelter after the four weeks they provided earlier in the winter. King: No Townsend: No Baird: At the U of I Library there is a new group that is concerned with diversity and Baird has attended two workshops, one with Doty Simpson Taylor and the second with Carol Collier. The first was on race and the second was on disability. The workshops were 2 hours in length, really interesting and enjoyable. The Iowa Women's Foundation announced a 4K race entitled "Run like a Mother" that is scheduled for May 7. Witwer: She is still working with the child labor youth group and the kids recently spoke in front of the Council regarding their concerns about the proposed Super Wal-Mart. The Stanley Foundation provided money so that two of their members, Kendra Halter and Spencer Lundquist will be attending the "Leadership Today Conference" from August 7 -14 in Toronto which is run by "Free the children." The Free the Children organization has programs all over the world and they build schools and rehab programs. Witwer believes the youth in the Child Labor Project should be commended for their continued work in this area. The kids are a real benefit to the community and the world. Retish: Retish received an e-mail that there had been some swastikas at Cornell Campus and it happened before break. There are some questions regarding how the College has handled the situation. Secondly, tomorrow night Retish is going to show the film, "Bang, Bang You're Dead" which seemed appropriate given what just happened in Minnesota. If anyone is interested in attending, it is in room 53 at Van Allen Hall at 7:30 p.m. This is the same movie that will be shown by the Commission on May 10. 7. STATUS OF CASES: In the case that went to public hearing earlier this year, the judge's decision is due in May or June. The 2nd public hearing has been scheduled in June and the 3rd public hearing is in the process of being scheduled. Retish stated that Shank came to speak to his class and he recently read the comments. The students found the information fascinating. Retish, however, was amazed at the students' lack of knowledge regarding human rights and what enforcement meant at the local level and what it meant as it related to them. Perhaps the Commission could ask the University of Iowa Human Rights Center if it would encourage U of I students to receive an education as to local, state and federal human rights law in addition to international law. 8. ADJOURNMENT: 8:40 p.m. Board or Commission: Human Rights ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2004 i Date) TERM 1/27 2/24 3/23 4/27 5/24 6/22 7/27 8/2~ 9/~8 10/26 11/23 '12/28 NAME EXP. Lisa 1/1/07 X X X YA Beckman Paul Retish 1/1/07 X X X YA X Geoff 1/1/07 X X O/E YA Wilmin~p Sara Baird 1/1/05 X O/E X YA David Shorr 1/1/06 X X O/E YA James 1/1/06 X X X YA McCue Billie 1/1/06 X X X YA Townsend Bev Witwer 1/1/05 X X X YA X Scott King 1/1/05 X X X YA KEY: X = Present NMNQ- No meeting, no quorum O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting .... Not a Member MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING and ZONING PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 28, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Beth Koppes, Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks MEMBERS ABSENT: Dean Shannon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Buss, Dennis Nowatny, John Kammermeyer, Craig Dahlen, Glenn Siders, Gary Kleinfelder, Pam Ehrhardt, Steve Gordon, Ed Jones, Cecile Kuenzli, Scott Hochstasser, Dan Smith, Charles Eastham, Larry Svoboda, Gary Moore, Bob Welsh, Lori Dahlen, Larry Schnittjer, Joe Holland, Mike Pugh, Ann Bovbjerg, Mark McCalhon, Patti Santangelo, Mike McLaughlin CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the public hearing to order at 7:32 pm. OPENING REMARKS: Chairperson Brooks said the purpose of this meeting was to hold a public comment hearing on the new Zoning Code for the City of Iowa City. A draft of proposed changes to the Zoning Code had been made available to the public in February, 2005. Since that time, P&Z staff had attended numerous civic group meetings to present information on the proposed changes and three public informational open houses had been held during which time the public had been invited to attend to meet one-on-one with staff and Commission members to ask questions and discuss areas/issues that needed clarification. All of those comments along with any additional Public Review Draft Comment Sheets received would be entered into the public record and would become part of the Commission's deliberation process as they moved through the adoption of the new Zoning Code. A copy of the proposed Code was available on the City's web page as well as on a CD or in hard copy format from the Planning and Community Development office. Brooks said this would be the first of at-least two public hearings before the Commission. All commentary received would be considered and utilized in the process of developing the final Code which would be voted on by the Commission and then sent to City Council for their review. The Council would also hold a series of public hearings before the Code was adopted. This public hearing would go until 10:00 pm. Persons were requested to limit their comments to five minutes to provide everyone an opportunity to speak. If all persons had had the opportunity to speak, persons would be welcome to speak a second time for an additional 3-5 minutes. Brooks said the Commission had already received a large amount of public input in the form of letters, e-mails and comments during the public informational meetings. There were several items which the Commission would be directing staff to review further and provide suggested changes or revisions to the proposed Code for re-consideration by the Commission. Potential re- review items included the location of shelters in certain neighborhoods and ways to keep existing duplexes in certain zones conforming with the proposed changes in the Code. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 2 of 20 Motion: Anciaux made a motion to accept and put into record all correspondence received to date. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. PUBLIC COMMENT: Barbara Buss, 718 S. Summit, said she was there to urge the Commission's support for the proposed changes to the Code. She thanked Karen and Staff for the careful way the proposals had been made with special consideration for public input. She felt the specific proposals spoke to the common interest of the community. Two groups, homeowners and landlords, would speak before the Commission. Each would speak in its own self interest as property owners. It would be up to the Commission to decide which of those self interest's best coincided with the interests of the City. Homeowners were persons who owned property as their home, their largest financial asset was the equity in their homes. Their interests would be to protect the value of their investment by maintaining their property and the neighborhood in which it was located. The stability of Iowa City's neighborhood followed from the pursuit of that self interest. Landlords, who owned rental property but had little interest beyond the revenue from their property. This group did not include the many landlords with a sense of civic responsibility. They also had a significant investment in the property they owned. Their interests in maintaining the value of their investment did not extend to any interest in preserving the quality of the neighborhood of which their property was a part. Iowa City had a large population of short term residents who did not make significant financial or emotional commitments to the places they lived. This lack of commitment on the part of the tenants allowed landlords to disregard neighborhoods. This disregard furthered the self interest of the landlord group by devaluing the property in these neighborhoods for homeowners. Buss said it was often taken for granted that there was a presumption in favor of property rights as belonging strictly to the person who owned the property. It went without saying that you could not keep an elephant in your backyard just because you owned the backyard. She quoted from Eric Freifogal, Professor of Law, University of Law. "American's have largely forgotten the links between property rights and the common good. Dominant myths not withstanding, it has been clear for generations that the only sound way to justify private rights in land is to point to the contributions property makes for the common good." Buss said she felt the proposed revisions spoke to the common good. She, as a homeowner, cared very much about her neighborhood and about Iowa City as a place of neighborhoods and hoped that the Commission would act in support of the common good by supporting the proposed revisions. Dennis Nowatny, 511 Washington Street, said he lived in commercial property and had rental properties across the street from him. Goals for the Code had been to simplify the Code and get more affordable housing in Iowa City. The Code had doubled from 200 to 400 pages. CB-2 zoned property owners were notified that the two major CB-2 zoned areas would be split into six pieces. That would not simplify the Code. Pagglia Pizza and the old house on Bloomington Street would become non-conforming heights because they were higher than 37-feet. The R/O zoned area on Washington Street would also become nonconforming as they were more or less 35-feet in height. 35-feet seemed to be a suburban height limit and did not fit with some of the neighborhoods and homes closer to the downtown area. Affordable housinq. The east-side of downtown was zoned RNC-20 and were allowed to have 5- bedrooms in those houses. On P. 394, definitions, in the Code, only 4 bedrooms would be permitted which would cut away another bedroom and its use. 10-years ago when RM-12 had Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 3 of 20 been downzoned to RNC-12, four to three bedrooms, the use of one bedroom had been lost. City Council had provided assurances the change would be reversed, it had never happened. CB-2 to R/O reduced the usable lot size by ½. Currently CB-2 could build lot to lot, 100-foot height. R/O cut down to ½ lot build on and cut 2/3 of height from 100-feet to 37-feet. He'd prefer to see the R/O and CB-2 zones merged into the CB-5 zoning. Keep the older building usable as they had been in the past. John Kammermeyer, 116 Fearson Avenue, said he'd served on a committee in the 1970's-80's that had spent over 6-months revising the Comprehensive Plan. It asked too much of the Commission, Council and the public to comprehend the new Code. · The revision should have been done in stages looking at residential zones, commercial, etc. · Opposed to the design regulations that had crept into the Code. · Need' less zones rather than more zones, the zones needed to be more flexible. · Simplify not complicate the Code; pages doubled in quantity. · Less regulations rather than more. · Avoid at all costs making properties non-conforming or taking value away from property. Comprehensive Plan should be looked at as a broad brush overview document and not adhered to rigidly. Looked at and revamped every 5-years. One of their major principles had been with any change in zoning or Comprehensive Plan to minimize making a property non-conforming; to not take value away from property. He felt there would be major non-conformities arise with the proposed new regulations. Kammermeyer said his analogy was "For development in the City of Iowa City, we are slowly hemorrhaging to Coralville and North Liberty. They are more flexible in their regulations for development." Iowa City needed to look at that or they would be left in the dust. Craig Dahlen, 2018 Waterfront Drive, one of two current managers of the Hilltop Mobile Home Park. He felt it would be wrong to change the property from exceptional zoning to provisional zoning because that would be taking away the voice of the people. The shelter house wished to build on Waterfront Drive. Hilltop Mobile Home Park and thirteen businesses along Waterfront Drive did not wish them to build there. There were many voices opposing each other right now, he felt those voices needed be heard. If it went to provisional zoning those voices would be taken away. Dahlen read Shelter House Rules for Guardians of Dependents, Rule #8. It stated that the Shelter House might have occasion in which clients of Shelter House might be on the State's Sex Offender list. It was the guardian's responsibility to provide care and supervision for the well- being and safety of dependants. Dahlen said the potential was to have sex offenders staying at the Shelter House both day and night. Currently at the Mobile Home Park they had 85 children and there were 60 children across the street at Ha-Cap, which meant 145 children were also there day and night. The House of Representatives had passed a bill that sex offenders could not live within 1,000 feet of a school or day-care center. If they felt it was an important issue, why didn't the City give it the same consideration? Dahlen urged the Commission to keep the zoning as Exceptional Zoning. Glenn Siders, PO Box 1907, said he represented the Land Development Council (LDC), an organization conformed primarily of the development community in this area. Their membership expanded to include home builders, realtors, construction industry, financiers, suppliers and retailers. Their membership represented over 1,000 businesses. Their group had formed one- year ago when they learned that the zoning code was becoming more than what they'd anticipated it to be. Based on The Duncan and Associates Report issued 4-years ago, the LDC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 4 of 20 had thought that the Zoning Ordinance would be reviewed, critiqued, amended, some problematic areas changed and enhanced and see more flexibility. The current product was 423 pages of redesigned codifications. They were opposed to many things in the ordinance, it was impossible to read it page-by-page. They objected to the public hearing being the first opportunity which allowed them to have oral presentation before the Commission. Siders said the LDC had condensed their concerns to a few problematic areas. Desiqn Elements: It was their opinion that the market should bear the design of a home. When a homeowner purchased a lot and built a property, they should be able to build what they wanted. Siders said the argument was frequently heard now that there was not a flexibility that existed or the opportunity now for people to build what they wanted. There were different markets and neighborhoods available with different types of construction which documented what the people wanted to buy and at affordability that they would buy. Siders said if the City wished to incorporate standards for development of property, such as alleys, then the City needed to step up and take the responsibility to maintain those alleys. He did not think that that responsibility should be passed on to the homeowners. He didn't see that opportunity in the proposed ordinance, he saw the opposite. Siders said the LDC commentary would primarily be directed toward the residential and not commercial aspect of the proposed changes. Gary Kleinfelder, 1131 E. Washington Street. Approximately one-year ago he was considering redeveloping two properties in the RS-8 zone that were across the street from him. He'd spoken with Staff, who'd suggested that some changes would be proposed for the RS-8 zone. He'd been told that in the new subdivisions zoned RS-8 basically all that had been built were duplexes. The City wished more of a mix of housing so the Code revision would be changed. However under the proposed changes, duplex standards would be applied to all current existing RS-8 zones. His concern was with the non-conformity issue. He'd just completed two duplexes which under the zoning proposal would become non-conforming. Brand new buildings built as condominiums for future marketability, 3-bedroom units with the potential for a foudh in the basement. If they were sold to a family who wished to install the fourth bedroom or a bath in the basement, they would be denied a permit. Kleinfelder said currently there were probably less than 1% of duplexes in Iowa City in existing duplex zones that met the standards in the proposed Code. Kleinfelder said he was waiting to hear why a huge block of properties would be made non-conforming and why certain types of improvements could not be made to them and hoped that this situation could be addressed in an equitable manner. Pam Ehrhardt, 1029 E. Court Street, said she personally wished to thank each Commission member and the Planning Staff for the tremendous amount of work, the time invested and thoughtful considerations put into the proposed Code revisions. She said there might be a struggle now but for years to come citizens as well as developers would thank them for the revisions of the Code. She wished to speak in support of three areas. AIIowinq duplexes only on corner lots in RS-8 zones would encourage a good mix of single-family homes and duplexes in the development area. It would avoid what had occurred in the Longfellow Manor where all the homes were duplexes and unlike the rest of the neighborhood where all the homes were a good mix. Design standards for narrow lots. There seemed to be a trend toward increasing urban density by using narrower lots. She felt it was imperative that there be a design standard to avoid having blocks of a wall of 2-door garages which was not a welcoming entrance to homes. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 5 of 20 Good Nei.qhbor Policy mandatory. There had been many instances when the good neighbor policy had worked and the developer had met with the entire neighborhood. Listening to and discussing with each other had worked very well. There had also been instances where developers had ignored this policy and hostilities and mistrust had developed. Steve Gordon, 1718 Timber Hills Dr, Coralville. Land Development Council (LDC) representative. The proposed Zoning Code was a large document which covered many complex issues. A large part of the code as written would serve the citizens of Iowa City well, the LDC planned to focus on areas which they felt would place an undue burden on future homeowners and renters. One of their basic philosophies was that the market should drive individual housing choices. They were opposed to design standards. The concept of new urbanism or traditional neighborhood was a relatively new development philosophy which placed a large emphasis on architectural and design features of a dwelling and the placement of various structures within the development. The LDC felt the choice of design should market driven and not mandated. They felt that a lot of new urbanism concepts had been mandated within the Code. They also felt that a lot of the changes in the proposed code would decrease the availability and make it more difficult to provide market rate affordable housing in Iowa City. Residential Zones RS-5 Zone: Minimum lot size increased from 60-feet to 70-feet. Density bonus back to 60-feet if certain design standards are met. Don't feel is a bonus as 60-foot lots currently allowed in RS-5. Design standards, P. 18, #6 require an alley unless criteria are met. Proposed changes will mean that a lot of the current, attractive, comfortable housing designs will no longer be allowed. 50% requirement will be especially burdensome and eliminate many current popular house plans potentially forcing houses to be larger and more expensive. LDC recommends minimum lot size of 60-feet per current code and garage standards removed. There would be a second density bonus for 50-foot lots allowed if criteria met. LDC propose bonus be lowered to 45-foot lots if alleys or rear lanes are used. RS-8 Zone: Minimum lot size increased from 45-feet to 55-feet. Density bonus allowed for 40- foot lot. LDC propose minimum lot size remain at 45-feet per current code, density bonus be changed to allow 35-foot lot if alley or rear lane used. RS-12 Zone: Minimum lot size increased from 45-feet to 55-feet. Density bonus allowed for 30- foot lot. LDC propose minimum lot size remain at 45-feet as per current code. P18, #6 - Garage Desi.qn Standard. LDC propose this section be removed. P18, #3 - Sinqle Family Dwellinq will allow only one car to be parked in front setback area. Persons w/2-car garage can have only one vehicle parked in driveway. LDC feel in un-enforceable; should be removed from code. Minimum front yard setback reduced to 15-feet in all residential zones. Utility easements typically located in first 15-feet of front yard. All front yard landscaping and trees would be in easement and not likely to be repaired in event that easement space is needed for public repair. LDC feel 20-foot setback more desirable. They propose and support a minimum setback of 25- feet which would allow for larger front yards and enhanced landscaping. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 6 of 20 Proposed setback of 15-feet and required garage setback of 25-feet, not all persons will wish to design a home with a garage set-back 10-feet from front fa~;ade of home. Streetscape with some houses set back 15-feet and some 25-feet or further which would not make an attractive streetscape. Duplexes and Attached Sin.qle-Family [0-lot line] RS-8 Zone: In proposed Code would only allow on corner lots and must meet design standards listed on pp. 169 and 175-176. LDC feels the design standards are unreasonable and will drive the cost of construction and ultimately the price to the consumer up. LCD propose that the design standards be removed and that duplexes and O-lot line dwellings be allowed by right within the zone per the current code and not just on corner lots. These types of units have become a staple for quality, market-rate affordable housing in Iowa City and surrounding standards. RS-5 Zone: Same design standards and placement restrictions apply to duplexes and 0-lot line dwellings. LDC feels restricting these units to corner lots and having each unit a different street is acceptable in this zone. All other design requirements should be removed. RS-12 Zone: Duplexes and attached Single-Family are allowed anywhere within the zone. The same design criteria would apply. LDC feels the design criteria should be removed. P. 171 requires additional design criteria if there are 4 or more attached units. LDC feels these requirements should be removed as they would further drive up the cost of housing. P. 172 - Maintenance. It would be required to secure an access or maintenance easement for all lots that abut the 0-lot line side of a dwelling. This would be required to be recorded on the deed before the issuance of a building or occupancy permit. This would allow both sides of a 0-lot line unit to have an access easement to work on the side of their home that would be next to the other unit. It is not possible to deed over the property to the consumer before you build it; LDC feels this requirement can not be met. LDC propose the access and maintenance rights be secured in the covenants of the subdivision as is the current common practice and this requirement be removed. Multi-Family Zones parking would only be allowed behind principle buildings and concealed from view of fronting streets. The current Code does not allow parking in the front yard set-back area but allows flexibility to deal with lot topography and corner lots. LDC propose that parking be prohibited in front-yard setbacks but not required to be behind buildings as per the proposed code. P. 28 #3-C - requires that more than one building on a lot must be designed to preserve privacy. Proposed Code indicates this can be achieved by placement of windows to prevent direct views into windows of adjacent buildings and units. Are no criteria as to exactly what this means. Windows are dictated by safety standards and live-ability issues. If two multi-family buildings are parallel to each other, does this mean that one of the walls of one of the buildings can contain no windows? LDC feels this section needs to be better defined and would recommend that it be removed. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 7 of 20 The same section prohibits balconies and air-conditioning units from being located along a building wall that is within 20-feet of a building wall of an adjacent building on the same lot if that wall contains a window or door openings. By design, balconies or air conditioning units are within 20-feet of the walls or window or door-opening that they serve. LDC questions why is privacy more important for the adjacent building but not for the building the units are on and that they serve. LDC feels this is an unreasonable requirement and if balconies and air-conditioning units are truly a menace to privacy, they should be eliminated all together. LCD recommends that this requirement be removed. P. 40 #3-B requires an S-2 landscape screening standard between any parking areas where headlights will shine on a wall containing ground level windows. The examples used for acceptable parking configurations on P. 39 have entire building facades that would require the S- 2 screening which requires a landscape screen that ranges from 2-feet to 4-feet in height, and at- least 1/3 of the shrubs must grow to a height of no less than 4-feet. LDC feels having entire facades of buildings where tenants park and enter the building shrouded by 4-foot tall shrubs poses a serious safety concern. LDC recommends this requirement be removed. P. 41 #6 requires entrance doors to individual units located above ground level must be accessed from an enclosed lobby or corridor. There are many good apartment building designs that utilize covered stairways and landings to access upper level units. LDC feels this requirement is too restrictive and should be removed. P. 41 Section E - Desiqn Standards. These types of design standards lead to increased construction costs and ultimately higher costs for the residents. P. 42 - Central Plannin,q District Desiqn Standards are very restrictive. They take up five-pages. The Central Planning District is meant to preserve the historic character of the District, it is a wide reaching district that includes many acres of undeveloped land in the northern part of the city. LDC feels the established historic districts can accomplish the preservation and historic feel of their specific neighborhoods. To have such restrictive detailed design standards over such a large area including large areas of undeveloped land is unwarranted. Commercial Zones CN-1 Zone. The requirements on P. 68 do not seem feasible or conducive to commercial uses. The build-to line is set at 5-feet back from the front property line. At least 65% of the build-to line must contain a building which means on a 100-foot wide lot, at-least 65-feet of the lot will contain a building that is no more that 5-feet back from the property line. The first 15-feet of a front lot is usually reserved for utility easements. To meet this requirement in areas already developed, the utilities would have to be moved; in undeveloped areas they would need to be placed in a location different from current practices. The LDC question if the City Engineering Department and local utilities have been consulted regarding this issue. The requirement will force parking to the rear of the lot or behind commercial uses. The LDC feels that clearly would not be conducive to a small business trying to provide convenience to its customers. In most successful CN-1 zoned projects around Iowa City the building isolated on the side or rear of the lot and the parking is located so customers have convenient, easy access to the business. The LDC feels that the Code is trying to address a problem that does not exist. By definition in the proposed Code, a CN-1 zone has direct access to an arterial street. The proposed Code will put buildings 5-foot back from the right-of-way line on the City's busiest Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 8 of 20 streets. The opinion of the LDC is that this will jeopardize the safety of both vehicles and pedestrians and would not be aesthetically pleasing. P. 71 Section L - O, Building Architectural Standards. The LDC propose that these be removed or modified to be less restrictive. CB-5 and CB-lO zones have the same design standards found in the CN-1 zone. Certain design standards seem appropriate in these zones because of the unique nature of our downtown and the desire to preserve that nature. It needs to be certain that the requirements encourage and promote the revitalization and business health of these areas and are not a deterrent. Planned Development Overlay Zone. As mentioned in the description the OPD zone should permit flexibility in the use and design of structures and land. Flexibility is the key word. As with residential zones, the LDC feels that certain design standards are mandated which takes away from the flexibility and creativity that should be allowed. The OPD zoning process should be a tool where the City and developers have an opportunity to be creative and find new and innovative ways to develop property. Restrictions included: · Attached single family uses must comply with the design standards for an RS-12 zone. · Design standards limit housing to certain-craftsman neo-traditional look · Multi family & duplex uses must comply with design standards of multi-family zones, very limiting. · All commercial development must comply with CN-1 standards, not feasible in a lot of areas · Undue emphasis placed on pedestrian oriented street frontages with limited interruption from driveways. Design feature found in new urbanism but not necessarily a desire feature in all development design in all situations. · Alleys or rear lane access are ~equired on all lots if the lot dimension is reduced unless the garage standards met. P. 113 Section 2-C, #1, states that private streets are discouraged. Throughout the proposed Code the use of alleys and private rear lanes is encouraged and sometimes required. It is the assumption of the LDC that alleys and rear lanes are considered private streets as there is no provision in the Code for these to be dedicated to the City. Section 2-C, #3 The developer must submit legally binding papers setting forth the procedure for maintaining private streets and providing garbage and snow removal and how these services will be paid for. The proposed code requires rear alleys and lanes but makes the upkeep and routine maintenance the responsibility of the residents, thus further affecting the affordability of housing. The LDC believes at a minimum that if the City is going to require alleys they should also take the responsibility for routine maintenance and long term care of those alleys. Ed Jones, 1047 Scott Park Drive, said property rights are absolutely critical. It seems the City of Iowa City does not seem to care about the individuals who buy property and what they should be allowed to do with it. Jones said he very much resists the proposed changes to the Code. The design issue is so subjective that in a lot of cases the citizen does not know what his/her rights are and they are interpreted by the government. Jones said this is too cumbersome. He'd just finished a project and found the coordination with the City to be cumbersome to deal with. Sometimes City Staff's decisions were much more restrictive than the Code. There needed to be a rule of law that stated that both parties are aware of what the criteria are. That is not the case now; the proposed Code will make it more restrictive. Jones said The free market system is the most efficient way to supply the needs of the citizens. Government has not proven it can do that. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 9 of 20 Cecile Kuenzli, 705 S. Summit Street, thanked the Commission for having undertaken this project. She had done some reading and it seemed as if Staff were trying to simplify the process, consolidate things and put them in places where a person didn't have to flip through the Code book sixteen different places to find the information pertaining to a single topic. She felt that was a lot of work that had to be done, Staff had done it and she felt it was a wonderful job that Staff was doing for the public. She would be speaking in favor of adopting the new zoning code. Kuenzli said as she wandered around Iowa City, she found that too much of the new construction was both faceless and graceless. Construction where garages were the main feature, where concrete driveways dwarfed the lawn or sidewalk, where you had to look hard to find a front entry because it was recessed so far it could barely be detected. There was the same lack of landscaping, the same roof lines, the same neutral colors and the same building materials. Same, same, same meant boring. She felt there was not much choice when someone wanted to buy a new house in Iowa City. Much of it looked the same. In the last 10-years various family events had taken her all over the nation and everywhere she went she was interested in what was going on in terms of new construction. She frequently found herself saying, "That is so interesting, why can't we do that in Iowa City." Kuenzli said she felt the proposed Zoning Code would enable things that were more interesting to be done. Cities that were attractive had a lot of regulations that encouraged good design. Portland, Boulder and New Haven, CT, had made great comebacks. They were cities where there was a lot of regulation and regulation specifically concerning design. She didn't think we needed to fear change in Iowa City. She felt that the change the Zoning Code would represent might result in a better housing product and in a more desirable community for all Iowa Citians. Scott Hochstasse~, 3727 Forrest Gate Drive, said he didn't live or own property in Iowa City. He was a professional land use planner. He practiced planning on the west coast in the state of California. Hochstasser said he'd lived in Iowa City for eight years. He'd watched the development boom and the economy grow. Ours was an incredibly vital and incredibly amazing community. He felt that the consultant and Staff had done a fantastic job of trying to mitigate and mediate the issues that were being heard between the development community and the people who wanted to preserve or protect the City to keep a viable and sustainable community for the future. Hochstasser said a number of years ago, as an adjunct professor he'd sent a team of graduate students from the University to the City Council with a report of findings about barriers to affordable housing in Iowa City. He was very pleased to see that the proposed new regulations would actually lower some of those barriers and allow for future affordable housing development - - real affordable housing development. Hochstasser said he'd like to say that the planning process is just that, it is a process. A lot of discussion would be heard yet this evening. He'd been looking across the tops of heads searching for an empty chair to sit in and had taken note that many of the heads had less hair or graying hair. He felt that the way the process was going, most of the people in the room would not even see the Code implemented or feel the effects of it. However, the process would continue. He felt that the Zoning Code, by being more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, would take the City of Iowa City forward in a much more complete and well designed way. Dan Smith, 905 Wylde Green Road, representative of the Land Development Council. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 10 of 20 Chapter 8 - Review and Approval Processes and Procedures Smith thanked the Commission, Bob Miklo, Karen Franklin and all others in the Planning Department who'd been working on the Code for such a long time. Nei.qhborhood Meetin.q -Mandated, Chapter 14 8 B, #7, PP 352-353 Said the LDC felt this was an unnecessary provision for a variety of reasons including the significant delay that it would impose upon the development process. As everyone knew, time was money. Such a delay with such onerous uncertainty as to how the reporting requirements would be used and if they would be used in the future process of a planned development or for an up-zoning. It would be a significant cost and delay built into process from the start. The LDC encouraged neighborhood meetings. They felt it was the best practice and encouraged their members to do so. However as the Commission had seen on many occasions, numerous neighborhood meetings had been held and there was still contention and dispute. It would never go away. The State Code recognized that. That was why there was the public hearing process both at Planning and Zoning and at the City Council levels. Smith said the mandatory neighborhood meeting created the presumption of disapproval. The LDC wished to see the presumption that when a developer came to Staff or before the Commission that their proposal would meet the Code be built into the Code more often. The clearer it was in the Code, the easier it would be to read and therefore enjoy that presumption. Performance Guarantees, Chapter14 8 B, #9. Smith said it was unnecessary to include the performance guarantees in the Zoning Code as it was already included in the Building Code. It was problematic from a couple of different perspectives, the most important being that it could be nearly impossible to secure tl-ie money for a project from a lending institution. If a development loan was taken out, the City was asking a lender to securitize another loan on the same underlying assets which simply could not be done. The Building Department already had performance guarantees and they had the ultimate power to withhold building permits or to grant them. If there was something that needed to be done the City already had the authority to accomplish that. Chapter 14 8 D, #7, P. 378 Planned Development Rezoning and the language that talked about the character of the development. Once approval for a planned development had been received, if certain things were changed such as street-lay out and character of the development. Smith said reading the Code as someone who would be liable for that Code and responsible for it, the language was too arbitrary, too open for interpretation and far too subjective. It could easily lead to an abuse by making exactions of a developer that are not listed in the Code and thereby starting the whole planned development process over again anew. Smith said the LDC looked forward to working with the Council. Charlie Eastham, President of Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship. The Housing Fellowship was an affordable housing developer. They generally supported the efforts the City was making in proposing the revisions to the Zoning Code. They were particularly pleased about providing more flexibility in all residential zones for smaller lot sizes which would help the Fellowship to meet some of their goals in providing affordable housing in newer developments. He requested that the Good Neighbor / Neighborhood meetings be re-worked to provide for a greater possibility of participation by people interested in or who would be living in the proposed development. In his experience in two separate instances they'd tried to obtain rezoning for affordable housing development. They'd initiated neighborhood meetings in both re-zoning Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 11 of 20 requests and had found that there was a lot of opposition to the meetings. However, there had been participation in the public hearings before the Commission and the Council by persons who would be living in the proposed residential developments. Eastham said it might mean a few more hearings but there would be a lot to be gained by obtaining participation by people who would benefit from the proposed housing and/or who would be interested in living in the proposed housing. Eastham said generally he felt this was a good effort and a good start. He felt overall the comments and comments about the design standards were well taken, there were some things hopefully to be worked out over the long run. Eastham said he hoped Staff and the Commission would continue in their efforts. Larry Svoboda, resident of Coralville, property owner in Iowa City. When he'd first moved to Iowa City it had been going through the urban renewal process. The general housing and most construction in Iowa City was fairly unsophisticated, he thought the builders in Iowa City were also unsophisticated because everything being constructed was not too nice to look at. Over the years he'd built a building himself and had gone through a learning process, and decided that we needed more design and sophistication in the buildings being built in Iowa City. He'd recently served on a design review committee that had put together a proposed ordinance for Iowa City. They'd created a menu and list of building features whereby the builder could select from the menu certain building amenities. When a total of xx points was reached, the builder could get a building permit and proceed. Svoboda felt that had been a good approach as it gave the builder the choice of what he could do to improve the design of his building, based on the builder's choice - not the City's choice. Svoboda said it had been a start. He'd pushed for dental moldings, cross-heads, things to add to the building's design but he'd not been too successful on the committee design enhancements. Svoboda said it seemed that anything that was historic in nature had been over-represented on that committee. He'd watched this process become an ugly two headed monster which had gone from the ability of the designer and builder as to what they'd like to do to strictly what the City wished to see. He felt there was an over-emphasis on historic features on a building and nothing else counted. He felt there were other types of building features that were equally important which improved the value of the community as well. P. 44 , Central Planning District, as an example of being overly restrictive, "the exterior wall material of a building must consist of clap-board style siding, wall shingles, brick, stone or stucco." Svoboda said the proposed Code would make the new Tower building non-conforming as that building was constructed mostly of glass. He suggested if that was the approach the City wished to take, they should list certain items they did not wish to see instead of only items that they did wish to see which would give more latitude to the builder. Svoboda said he'd like to see this go back to a common ground. He felt there were two good arguments at hand. The homeowners had a legitimate argument that they didn't wish to see the City deteriorate with poor style and buildings. The building owner and developer had to have the latitude to pick their own design within a parameter that the initial Committee had tried to establish. Svoboda said he'd like to know what had happened to the proposal created by the Committee he'd served on. Gary Moore, 2018 Waterfront Drive, said many of his neighbors were very concerned about the situation. His was a unique perspective as he was a Salvation Army soldier and had also driven Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 12 of 20 school buses. Moore said within 50- or 60-feet of where people stopped for the shelter was the school bus stop where 85 children were picked up. The last 5 or 6 children who were picked up at the bus stop were special education children who would be very vulnerable to anyone from the homeless shelter. There was a need for a homeless shelter, his suggestion was to place it further down where there was more industrial development and no residential area near it. Of the homeless persons who ate dinner at the Salvation Army's site, currently there were six registered child molesters. That was his main concern; his neighbors were also upset about values. He felt that the proposed site for the shelter was a very dangerous and inappropriate place, too close to residential. It needed to be much further from the residential area. Moore said he was in a 'torn' position as he knew from his work with the Salvation Army that there was a need for a homeless shelter but the proposed location would be too risky for the children and the neighbors. Bob Welsh, said on P. I of the Code the purpose was stated. He hoped that everyone in the room and in the community agreed with those purposes. He suggested that was the place to start discussion. Were they valid purposes or not. He requested that every one of the specific suggestions received be reviewed and considered if it helped to carry out the purpose(s) or not. If it was not consistent with a purpose, then change it so it would be consistent with a purpose. When persons spoke of and/or requested that changes be made, that they would consider and identify with which purpose it was not consistent. Welsh said of the eight purposes, he'd guess the most difficult one would be the first purpose, to conserve and to protect the value of property throughout the City. He said the purpose did not say to preserve and protect the value of every piece of property in the City. He felt that was a significant difference and personally liked purpose #1 as it was stated in the proposed Code. Lori Dahlen, 2018 Waterfront Drive, said she lived and worked there. P.55 14 2 C, #1 Dahlen said this area of land was currently zoned as special exception. She'd spoken before the Commission on previous occasions. Their request was that the land not be zoned as provisional use. Dahlen said she'd brought a mother and her two children with her to the meeting. They were uncomfortable speaking before the Commission. The woman's husband worked part-time for the Dahlen's and pad-time evenings at another job. The husband was very concerned about the Shelter House issue and also wished to see the land remain zoned as special exception, it was a situation that needed to be talked about. If the zoning were changed to provisional use, the public in the surrounding area would have no say about it. Dahlen said it was a burden to her to think that she would need to be able to protect a women and her children in their home if the Shelter House were to be located across from the Mobile Home Park and that there might be sex offenders in the shelter, use the Shelter's services and/or be in the area. Dahlen said it was a great concern to the husband and to the resident's of the mobile home park. If the Shelter House were to be relocated to their area, then all of the emergency housing for Iowa City would be located in one area and that would not be an ideal situation for anyone. Larry Schnittier, 1917 S. Gilbert Street, member of the Developer's Council Group. Area of concern: Sensitive Areas Ordinance. This was an existing and had been some slight modifications to it. As currently written and proposed to be revised, this section of the Zoning Ordinance might become the greatest deterrent to growth and development that the City had devised to date. Schnittjer said nearly no one had Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 13 of 20 any serious argument about the necessity to preserve environmental features but they did not like the way it was currently regulated. Jurisdictional wetlands were currently under the control of the Army Corps of Engineers. He felt that was all that should be necessary as the Corps had requirements for identification of wetlands, requirements for how wetlands could be affected or not affected, reconstructed elsewhere, reporting requirements on how well the wetlands were surviving after they had been constructed. Schnittjer felt the whole section on wetlands was a duplication and sometimes conflicted with the Corps requirements. Stream Corridors: He felt there needed to be some rethought in the process. Buffers were defined based on character or how a stream was classified. The SAO section of the Code should be included in the Storm Water Management section and as such the buffers could be applied to a specific need of a stream corridor and not just based on where that line was on the map. Regulated Slopes - Schnittjer said he had a lot of reservations about the regulated slopes. He'd brought a demonstration to the meeting but would defer presenting it. If the SAO were to be kept in the Zoning Ordinance, he felt the following should be considered: · Remove any requirements for a level II review if the applicant does not wish to utilize cluster design or otherwise modify the underlying zoning requirements. · Paragraph C, Jurisdictional Wetlands - Wetland Mitigation Plan Required. This section needed to be re-captioned. There was nothing in the section that was relative to a mitigation as the terminology used by the Corps of Engineers or other wetland specialist. A more appropriate captioned would be Wetland Protection Plan. As such this paragraph should be located after the Wetland Delineation paragraph so that the process would be sequential and the procedures required to determine if a wetland existed. · Paraqraph E, Wetland Buffer Requirements. The opening paragraph needed to be modified to take into account the considerations relative to the constructed and/or altered wetlands where natural landscapes adjacent to a wetland that are required for the buffer probably would not exist. · Compensatory Wetland Mitigation. References to specific ratios should be eliminated and replaced with 'as required by the Corps of Engineers' to avoid conflicts and confusions. · Section G-4 E, Monitoring Requirements. The Corps of Engineers had specific requirements that had to be met. This section did not add anything except another level of unnecessary bureaucracy and should be replaced with a requirement to provide duplicate copies of the Corps of Engineers required reports only if there was some reason the City thought there was a need for duplicate jurisdiction. · Regulated Slopes. The normal lay person did not relate to what the actual slopes were of the percentages. There was no correlation between degrees which most lay persons understood and percent of slope. A normal perception would be that a 50% slope would be a 45degree angle, which was wrong. A 50% slope was a one-in-two slope which was considerably less than a 50degree angle. A 40% slope, called a protected slope, had a 25degree slope angle. Schnittjer said he'd be willing to illustrate those with the props that he'd prepared for the meeting. Schnittjer said there were many things about the slope section that bothered him. He would like to see the Slope Section changed and completely re-written to correlate the slopes with degrees of protection. The greater the percentage of slope the greater the degree of construction protection. Current protected slopes could be modified as long as the resulting slope was less Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 14 of 20 than 40%. Created slopes in excess of 33% should have specific engineering to assure stability and erosion control. Schnittjer said if the City was trying to clean-up the current Code they should get rid of the steep slope requirement. There was nothing in the ordinance that said what to do with or not to do with Steep Slope. He felt it was just an extraneous piece of garbage in the Code. The only thing they had to do was to draw a line on the map which indicated where "steep" slopes were; no other requirement. Critical slopes requirements should coincide with the maximum allowable grading that could be done under the Engineered Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance that was in existence. A critical slope would be modified to be a 29% slope instead cea 25% slope. Protected slopes should be taken out of the ordinance except where a slope of some to be defined gradient was within a certain distance to be defined of an adjacent property where there was potential for damage to another person's property; Wooded Areas. Schnittjer said he failed to see the justification for applying different levels of protection to the different zones. RR-1 had a 70% retention requirement for woodlands, all the Residential Zones were 50% retention, Commercial zones were 20%. In his estimation a tree was a tree no matter what zone it was in. There was no protection at all for landmark trees. He felt that issue needed to be looked at. Joe Holland, 123 N. Linn Street, said he'd like to see common sense in the ordinance. He represented a large variety of persons coming from virtually every perspective in terms of what was happening with land use planning. He remembered attending the public hearings in 1982 and 1983 which were the hearings for the current ordinance. It had been the foundation of what the current ordinance was. He had a problem with the philosophical approach to the current ordinance in terms of how it had been rolled out. Holland said if he were going to try to push an agenda through he'd give someone a thick document that was so dense and had so many interrelated references that people would freeze up. The tendency when someone froze up was to pass the item as is. The Commission had heard from a variety of persons quoting from chapter, section, subsection and sub- subsection. Holland felt a public meeting was not a good forum to do legislative analysis and legislative drafting. He'd been professionally involved in those types of open forums and they typically were not very productive. Holland said he wished to focus on the design perspectives of the ordinance. He remembered the proceeding when it had become clear to him the agenda on the part of Planning and Zoning staff to take control of the aesthetics of buildings and their appearances in Iowa City. It had been a hearing on a variance before the Board of Adjustment, approximately 7, 8 or 10-years ago. The City Staff had indicated that they were going to require certain things as part of the variance. The Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission had asked if they could require those things, Staff had said no, but they thought it would look good. Holland said he didn't connect it at the time as it had been part of the typical give-and-take and ask for more than you think you can get as part of the process. Holland said he'd watched over the last few years as the whole concept of Staff designing buildings had unfolded. It came at a variety of levels; in the ordinance where there were detailed design criteria and bonus points granted for certain design elements, it was pervasive through out the entire ordinance. He'd been told that the word design appeared throughout the ordinance over 500 times. 3-4 years ago City Planning Staff had employed an architect on staff so that when a developer came in with a project the architect could design and re-design the appearance of the building. That had happened on a number of occasions on projects that he'd been involved in. Holland said he didn't think there was any ill design on the Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 15 of 20 part of City Staff. They genuinely believed in what they wanted to accomplish. They had a vision within the Planning Department as to what Iowa City should look like. The real fundamental question for the Commission and eventually for City Council to grapple with would be who would set that vision for Iowa City and how would it be implemented. Holland said he'd lived in a whole variety of residential settings in Iowa City from corrugated steel Quonset huts on the University's campus to residential houses. Housing had developed a culture of its own. Everyone's housing hut had essentially been identical and persons had each done their own thing to modify it and make it look different. When the barracks had been built at the end of World War II, they had been built without a tree in sight. He considered that organic architecture. Structures are constructed all over the world, all over the State and all over Iowa City that each individual person might not consider attractive. Whole neighborhoods might not be considered attractive but the people who live there infuse the properties with life. Holland said the majority of the Commission had been on the Commission when the issue of snout houses had come up with the Sand Hill Estates subdivision. He'd thought that the Council had sent the message that they were not interested in that sort of design standards but now they were back in the ordinance. In Sunday's Gazette there had been an article about how garages were becoming porches in people lives and how they were a place to socialize and to conduct activity. Holland said that was adaptation and culture developing out of the organic feeling where people took what a property was, invested themselves in it and turned it into something that the Planning Staff did not imagine, what he might not imagine, something that no one else might imagine. He felt there was a philosophical battle over what group of people would control how our neighborhoods developed and how they would look. The proposed ordinance vested that power in twelye or so people in the Planning Department because there were so many provisions in the ordinance where there were little bits of discretion given here and there, little bits of incentives that could be given and little bits of punishment that could be inflicted over design issues. It was not over if it would be a good land use proposition or did the structure fit with the integrity of an area. Holland said it was very interesting to hear people speak from the east side neighborhoods talk about how wonderful those neighborhood were because they could never be built under the zoning ordinance. Lots were too small, too big a lot ration, side yards were too small, there were all kind of reasons why the Longfellow and Dodge-Governor neighborhoods that people seemed to admire could never be built. They'd developed by and large without zoning ordinances. He had a copy of 1926 Zoning Ordinance, all six pages of it. Holland said he didn't disagree with the fundamental concept of zoning or disagree with reasonable regulation. People had great battles over what reasonable was. He urged the Commission to particularly look at the design issue and how much of a choke hold they would have over the organic development in Iowa City. Holland said there was a very famous Supreme Court Case which dealt with taxes. The quote was, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." Holland said he'd say, "The power to regulate is also the power to destroy." The proposed design specifications destroyed innovation and destroyed creativity. They put people into boxes in terms of what they could build. A person might not like what was built or might not like what it looked like but it was a creative innovation that had come about. No one knew what sort of organic culture would develop. Holland said he defied Staff and the Commission to say what a pedestrian friendly streetscape was. Why was it any less friendly for someone to walk into someone's garage, sit down and have a beer out of their mini-fridge than it was to sit down on their porch? Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 16 of 20 Holland said he agreed with the speakers who'd spoken in favor of removing the design criteria form the ordinance. Not to give people free-reign but simply to allow things to develop in a way that partially was driven by reasonable regulation and partially driven by market forces. Mike Puqh, 1. South Gilbert Street, current president of the local Homebuilders Association and member of the Land Development Council. The local HBA was comprised of 425 business members which constituted the second largest HBA in the state of Iowa. Neighborhood Open Space. Pugh said the LDC and HBA were generally in favor of the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance. It had been in existence since 1994. In general builders and developers liked to ordinance, they felt it added value to subdivisions and developments. There were items in the proposed draft that gave cause for concern for builders and developers based on 1) they had lived with the ordinance since 1994 and had seen some of the problems that could arise under the ordinance and 2) was driven in part by an Iowa Supreme Court case in West Des Moines regarding an ordinance that was almost identical to the one being considered in the proposed development code. Dedication of land in connection with the dedication of other public improvements and timing of the dedication. Currently the dedication of land happened two years after approval of the preliminary plat or when 50% of the occupancy permits for the subdivision had been issued, which ever occurred sooner. The payment of fees in lieu of dedication had to be done prior to the issuance of a building permit. The LDC and HBA would like to see some consistency there. They'd like to see parks be considered a public improvement and be accepted as a dedication when all the other public improvements were accepted by the City. They would also like to see more objective standards for what was required to prepare the site that was to be dedicated, i.e. prepared prior to dedication. Currently there were a lot of inconsistencies from one development to the next in terms of what was required such as grading, trimming of trees, seeding, etc. They'd like to have objective standards in the Code that really gave notice to the developer as to what was required; similar to the objective standards for installation of streets, water mains, etc. In connection with payment of fees in lieu of dedication they had several concerns. The current ordinance and the proposed Code required the City to use those fees for neighborhood open space within 5-years of approval of the preliminary plat and it could extend the 5-years in additional 5-year periods if less than 50% of the occupancy permits had not been issued for a sub-division. The LDC and HBA felt that was unreasonable. They felt that the City should use those funds for open space and green space within the subdivision within a more reasonable period of time such as 2-3 years. In the proposed draft those monies would not be returned to the lot owners unless the lot owners applied to the City in writing for a lot refund. There were two very limited windows for applying for the funds: at the expiration of the 5-years they had 180 days to apply in writing to the City in order to receive that particular refund. If the City's 5-year period was extended for additional 5-years, then the lot owners had 180 days from the end of the 10- year period in which to apply for the refund. The HBA and LDC believed that if those funds were set aside for a particular development, that there should be an automatic refund of those monies if they are not used by the City whether it be at the end of two or three years. The refund should not go to the developer but go to the citizens who've purchased lots in that particular subdivision. The refund should be automatic and pro-rata to each individual lot owner. Lanquaqe of the ordinance that discussed why or how funds are used when fees are paid in lieu of dedication. The current ordinance required that all payments be used to acquire or develop open spaces, parks or recreational facilities or greenway trails that would benefit the residents of Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 17 of 20 the subdivision or planed development for which the payment had been made. The HBA and LDC felt that was too vague and was not in compliance with the Iowa Supreme Court case which basically said that those fees, if permissible under Iowa law, had to be used for two purposes: 1) to cover the City's administrative expenses in regulating that particular development or 2) as compensation for services that were provided to the subdivision or to the property owner. It was not an administrative fee to cover expenses. The fees, if they are used, had to specifically benefit the residents of that particular subdivision. In the West Des Moines case, the fees had been used for neighborhood parks. The Supreme Court had said if there was any was any benefit at all to the general public by use of those fees that constituted an illegal tax. The HBA and LDC felt that under the current ordinance if fees are paid in lieu of dedication, language needed to be tightened in terms of how those fees were used. It should be that the fees are used specifically for that particular subdivision. Not for neighborhood parks. Refund monies - if the money is not applied for as a refund the presumption was that that money either trickled its way into the general park fund or found it way into the general fund of the City coffers. In either case, the HBA and LDC felt at that time it constituted a tax that was not permissible by the Iowa Legislature. Pugh said this was a great opportunity for changes to be made based on the history of having lived with the ordinance for 10-years and based on the guidelines that the Supreme Court had provided in connection with an ordinance that was almost identical to the proposed ordinance. Ann Bovbier,q, 1710 Ridge Road, said she'd seen the beginning of some of this and it was interesting to see it finished up. She said along with the previous speaker who'd spoken about the general purpose of the Code, the good of the City was and always had been the basis of it. The one that had been voiced over the years with the old zoning and the old Comprehensive Plan as well as the new one was that there might be consistency, might be predictability and that there might be usability. The Code should be something that people could use. Bovbjerg said as she'd looked over the draft she had been very pleased that instead of just saying maybe this or maybe that, the Code had been very specific. It might sound like over specificity or over regulation but sometimes too vague had been an issue. Persons would say they'd drawn a development or made a plan and they didn't know if it met Code because there was nothing specific enough. Bovbjerg said she was pleased with the specificity of the proposed code and was also pleased to see the diagrams and the pictures, it meant a lot of more than words. Bovbjerg said she also appreciated that the draft constantly referred to other parts of the Code or other parts of City Code which spoke very specifically to persons who said they didn't know where to go next. Bovbjerg said these kinds of things were useful; they were the kinds of things that citizens and builders had been asking for. Bovbjerg said if there were specific requirements or wording or things that didn't work or things that developers and/or builders told the Commission that they were hard to work with, then that should be where revisions were made. If something was not useful then you might as well not have it. What ever revisions were made, they should come from persons who had been affected, from people who had used it. She was very pleased that the Commission was having the public hearings for just that reason. Bovbjerg said the previous speaker had spoken about Neighborhood Open Spaces. That had been a hard slog. Persons on the Commission, the Parks Commission and City Staff had looked at court cases and other cities in other jurisdictions to figure what kind of connection must there be, what kind of vagueness can't you have. One particular aspect of that had been saying that Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 18 of 20 dedicated acreage must be relative to density of people not to just acreage. It had been a very good and almost a landmark part of the ordinance. Bovbjerg said she was very glad that the Commission was listening to the public, all of whom would be affected. It would be a useful ordinance. Mark McCalhon., 811 College Street, member of the Historic Preservation Commission and College Green Representative. P. 51 Historic Preservation Exemptions - Special Provisions Recently the HCP Commission had been discussing and looking at what could 'they do to 'make people do the right thing' with historic or key structures in lieu of some of the most recent unsuccessful historic districts that had not passed over the last year. Section A-2 was an improvement over what the Code currently had. McCalhon felt it was a good move in the right direction but further into Section A it said 'the exception was necessary'. He didn't understand why it could not be made as an acceptable use. A very select number of properties, 40-50 "Gems" within the City, would be affected. The creation of an added value for the adaptive re-use of those properties so the likelihood of that property surviving over time would be preserved. McCalhon said he had a problem with the word necessary. What was the standard, had a provision been put in that really would not have any application over the long term. He wondered if it even needed to be a special exception for those types of uses. He said this would not mean every old building, just those identified as key structures by Historic Preservation, Planning Commission and/or properties on the National Historic Register. Patti Santanqelo, 3035 Stanford, member of several Affordable Housing Boards and attendee of many Scattered Site Housing meetings. Santangelo said she knew they were thinking of recommending social urban inclusionary zoning. She wondered if Staff and the Board had thought about adding that into the Code, it might be better to include it sooner rather than later. She liked the smaller lot sizes as it would hopefully make it easier for affordable housing. Mike McLauqhlin, 614 Pine Ridge Rd, rental property owner in the near downtown area. Most of his properties were in RN-12, RNC-20, RNC-12 zones. In February he'd applied for and been granted building permits to add an addition to the back side of single family homes to duplex the properties at 512 and 514 S. Dodge Street. On March 30, 2005 he'd applied for a building permit to complete the same procedure for 530 S. Dodge Street. The last building permit had been issued at the same time the proposed Code had been introduced to the public in the open house sessions. He'd read through the proposed Code which stated that upon passage the new rental permits would be permitted according to essentially one less non-related occupant. What the proposed Code did not address was the situation he was in. He'd received building permits and had a significant financial investment in the three projects. All three additions already had the foundations poured, footings in place, slabs laid and plumbing in place. One was almost entirely framed. McLaughlin felt he was almost in a race between getting his additions completed and the potential passage of the Code. He might have to apply for new permits which would reduce the non-occupancy allowed by one tenant from what the intentions had been when the permits had been applied for and granted. McLaughlin requested that there be a provision added to the proposal that took into consideration when a building permit was granted, the significant investment that had been made with that permit and to allow the occupancy to be granted under current levels of the existing Code as opposed to potentially having it dictated by the proposed Code. Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page. 19 of 20 Glen Siders, Land Development Council, said the LDC had a very serious concern as the proposed Code was a very thick, complicated document which would have a significant impact on the City. He concurred with the comments made earlier that the revisions should have been broken down and analyzed via sections and then run through public hearings. A comment that the LDC had a particular concern with was with the grandfathering in of existing developments and approved subdivisions, many of those lots were less than 60-feet. The LDC did not feel that they should be obligated to come under the new ordinances that came about such as the design standards. They felt that should be a consideration. They did not agree with the philosophy that a 60-foot lot was a narrow lot; it could be reduced down. They did encourage Staff and the Commission to consider a new urbanism zone which would allow for the opportunity and flexibility to incorporate those criteria; they felt the trigger should be a 45-foot wide lot or less. One of the concerns they had with the design criteria was that they had heard frequently that some of it was imposed because the City had problems within in-fill development. In-fill development was different than new development and probably should be looked at differently than the ordinary standards. Scatter Site Housing Task Force forthcoming proposal. Consideration should be given to should the new code be adopted and then amended to incorporate the SSHTF recommendations or incorporated before passing the Code? Sensitive Areas Zone. In the new ordinance it was proposed that if a feature had a sensitive feature it then became a part of the OPDH Plan - they were opposed to that requirement. It was very difficulty to find any property that did not have some sensitive feature on that property. The feature might be a very small percentage on the property. A sensitive feature should not trigger an OPDH which would put the developer/builder into the OPDH design criteria and related regulations. Siders said if the City did have one thing that was available and one useful tool the SAO should be a stand-alone ordinance and not part of the OPDH. It should be a checklist as it was very clear in the ordinance what had to be done. If someone wanted to alter the standards, then that would be a different situation. The LDC thanked the Board for allowing them input during the public comment hearing. CLOSING REMARKS: Brooks thanked the members of the audience for attending and for their input. He said this public hearing would be the first of at least two public comment hearings. The Commission had developed a list of issues raised during the hearing, it was expected that additional items would be received. Brooks encouraged everyone to document their input on the Draft Comment Sheets and give them to the Planning and Community Development Office. Howard requested that persons who had very specific requests for amendments be sure to put a contact phone number or contact information in case Staff needed to contact them for a clarification. It was Staff's intention to compile a list of all suggested amendments and they wanted to be sure that they had the person's input correct. Persons were also reminded to sign- in on the Sign-In sheet at the entry to the room. Brooks said the next public comment hearing had not been scheduled yet as there had been no way to anticipate the amount of speakers and input received during this hearing. Staff and the Commission would now work through the input received and look for other options to get additional input and public involvement during the public hearing processes. If persons had Planning and Zoning Public Hearing April 28, 2005 Page 20 of 20 signed in they would receive notification of future public meetings. Notifications would also be placed in the local newspapers. Brooks said the Commission had hoped that by the end of the summer they would be through with their review of the Code and would be able to send it to the Council for consideration. He thought It was the Council's intention to have a series of work sessions with the Commission as well as hearings for public input. The Commission wished to move the process along as quickly as possible but acknowledged the importance of taking time to investigate and review potential problematic items and to review those concerns with various public groups. Brooks said it had been mentioned several times that the proposed Code was twice the number of pages as the current Code. The new Code was a single column format with larger print and more detailed illustrations where as the old Code format was double columns with small print. Brooks and Howard encouraged persons to contact Howard if they had questions, comments or concerns prior to the next public hearing. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Freerks made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 pm. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill M NUTES DRAFT PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION May 11, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Gustaveson, Judith Klink, Margaret Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Matt Pacha, Jerry Raaz, Phil Reisetter, Sarah Walz, John Westefeld STAFF PRESENT: Terry Trueblood, Terry Robinson GUESTS PRESENT: Jeff Harper, Bruce Titus, Bridget Titus, Mark Ramsey, Brad Milder, Kevin Stibal, Jack Gilmore, Craig Meacham, Kim McDonald FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Pacha~ seconded by Raa~,~ to approve the April 13~ 2005 meeting minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Pacha~ seconded by O'Leary~ to support the concept of the placement of an angel statue in a city park subject to approval of size~ script and location and subject to a legal opinion. Passed 7-1 with one abstention OvValz). Moved by O'Leary~ seconded by Raaz~ to authorize further investigation of an al}propriate site for the placement of a disc golf course in Iowa City. Unanimous. PUBLIC DISCUSSION No public discussion. ANGEL STATUE PLACEMENT IN CITY PARK Bruce Titus is proposing that a "Christmas Box Angel" statue be placed in a city park. Bruce stated that the angel is meant to reflect a celebration of life and to help heel the wounds from the loss of a child. Each year on "Children's Day", December 6, there would be a candlelight ceremony held around the statue. Titus feels this would be a great gift from the city as well as a wonderful addition to a park. This bronze statue is 4'3" tall, has a 5'2" wingspan and it's base measures 22" in diameter. Each statue has engraved text on it to be approved by the Christmas Box Organization and agreed upon by the Park & Recreation Commission in this case. Funds for the statue are raised by the Christmas Box Organization, a tax-exempt group. The total cost of a statue is $14,000. They have raised $3,000 for this particular statue. There would be no expense incurred by the city. Parks and Recreation Commission May 11,2005 Page 2 of 6 Titus agreed that at the Commission's suggestion he would be willing to place the statue elsewhere, however, his first preference would be City Park. He would like to see it placed in an environment where there is high visibility and where there are children present. Klink asked if it might be possible for the organization to look at private property to place the statue such as a church or possibly a cemetery. Titus stated that church property would be too exclusive and that placing this statue in a cemetery would give it more the appearance of a gravesite than a memorial and it would not have the visibility that it would if placed in a park setting. O'Leary asked about other provisions that may be necessary (lights, parking). Trueblood stated that parking might only be an issue during the annual Children's Day ceremony. Titus stated that one of the statues in the U.S. draws as many as 500 people on this day, but, of course, would not have any idea how many a statue here would draw. Trueblood has contacted five other cities in the Midwest that have erected such a statue: St. Charles, Missouri: No controversy at all. They feel it is an "asset to their community." Rockford, Illinois: Viewed more as a work of art than a religious symbol. One person raised a concern regarding the name of the statue ("Christmas Box Angel"), therefore changed the name to "Angel of Hope." No problems after that. Perham, Minnesota: No controversy or opposition. City provided undeveloped parkland. Park is named "Angel of Hope Memorial Park." Maple Grove, Minnesota: Did extensive research. Their City Attorney determined it was art, not a religious symbol. Belleville, Illinois: No controversy. Klink asked Titus how he would respond to those that would view the statue as religious in nature. Titus said that he would tell them that the statue is about lost children, not religion that it is to serve as a place for people to gather and give them hope and heeling. Commission discussed the text to be engraved on statue. Titus stated that it varies, but does have to be approved by the Christmas Box Organization. Commission asked that they approve it as well. Walz asked if this is the only type of memorial that this organization offers or if there are other options such as a bench etc. Titus stated they are all the same statue. Parks and Recreation Commission May 11,2005 Page 3 of 6 Raaz asked if this is something that would have to be approved by the Public Art Advisory Committee. Trueblood stated Public Art Advisory Committee does not have authority to make this decision, unless the Commission chooses to involve them. O'Leary stated that is he quite impressed with this organization and would suggest that the commission approve this request. Gustaveson feels this would be a great memorial for the people and that it needs to be placed where children are present and it would serve as a great place for people to unite. Reisetter stated his initial concern was that this might open the door for many others to come to the commission requesting more memorials be placed on city property. Gustaveson said that Commission needs to look at these on a case by case basis and make their decision based on merit. It was mentioned that there have been no complaints regarding the placement of the black angel replica in the ped mall. Westefeld stated that he feels the organization's efforts are very compelling, and the fact that 20 other communities have done this and after hearing that other communities have not met with controversy feels that he would support this request. Raaz would like to see more information regarding the wording on the statue and exact placement before he can support it. Klink stated that she feels it is inappropriate for the Commission to take action without more public input. Pacha asked why some members feel it is necessary for public input. Reisetter stated that because in this particular community there will more than likely be some controversy. Gustaveson stated that the next step is to get an opinion from the City Attorney and possibly to invite public input during the June or July Commission Meeting. Klink reminded those present that the Ten Commandments have been removed from many courthouses around the nation due to controversy. Gustaveson stated that Commission just needs to decide whether they support this "process" of placing the statue on city property subject to approval of size, text and location and also subject to legal opinion. Moved by Pacha, seconded by O'Leary to support the concept of the placement of an angel statue in a city park subject to approval of size, script and location and subject to a legal opinion. Passed 7-1 with one abstention (Walz). Parks and Recreation Commission May 11, 2005 Page 4 of 6 Moved by Pacha~ seconded by O'Leary~ to support the concept of the placement of an angel statue in a city park subiect to approval of size~ script and location and subiect to a legal opinion. Passed 7-1 with one abstention (Walz). PRESENTATION RELATIVE TO DISC GOLF: Jeff Harper, a Certified Disc Golf Course Designer was at the meeting along with several members of the Iowa City Disc Golf League. They are requesting permission to work with the Parks and Recreation Commission and staff to identify parks that could possibly support the placement of a disc golf course. Due to its popularity, the existing disc golf courses in the surrounding areas have become overcrowded. Parks he mentioned include Ryersons Woods, Scott Park, City Park and Peninsula Park, but they are open to all possibilities. Disc golf courses are typically placed in an existing park. Harper stated that this project would require approximately 20 acres for an 18-hole course. The approximate cost of a disc golf course is estimated at $18,000-$20,000 for an 18-hole course; $13,000 for a "no-frills" course. An 18-hole course is preferred due to erosion and general "wear and tear" with smaller courses. Disc golf is usually a no fee sport. Mr. Harper and his group are willing to raise money to help fund a course. Moved by O'Leary~ seconded by Raaz~ to authorize further investigation of an appropriate site for the placement of a disc golf course in Iowa City. Unanimous. DISCUSS POSSIBILITY OF RENAMING MESQUAKIE PARK Trueblood received a verbal request from a lady who would like to see this park renamed, or at least the Mesquakie name removed from the park. She indicated that she is the only remaining person of Mesquakie descent in the area, and because the park is not open to the public and is a previous dumpsite, she would prefer to not see the Mesquakie name associated with the park. Trueblood stated it is not listed in the Parks & Recreation brochure as a park per direction from the Commission a number of years ago. Trueblood asked her to submit a letter and/or attend the meeting--neither of which occurred. No action taken at this time. COMMISSION TIME O'Leary commended Parks and Recreation staff on the Kicker's soccer fields stating that the kids are having fun and it a great place that provides recreation and exercise for people. Reisetter stated that he likes what has been done with the north end of Napolean Park (i.e. north end of the park shop). Raaz commended the Commission for the good discussion that took place regarding the Angel Statue proposal. Parks and Recreation Commission May 11,2005 Page 5 of 6 DIRECTOR'S REPORT Iowa City Planning staff requested that the Commission discuss two NOS issues even though they were not on the agenda. Commission was asked to review and give general consensus on the projects without taking action at this time. In discussing the McCollister subdivision it was pointed out that it would require a very small amount of land to be dedicated as parkland. It is the consensus of the Commission, at this time, to accept fees in lieu of land. Trueblood then reviewed the Cardinal Ridge subdivision staff report with Commission. He stated that this one is a more difficult issue. On the one hand, the Commission may be inclined to accept fees in lieu because the developer is proposing a substantial amount of privately owned greenspace. On the other hand, this greenspace is technically not for public use, other than those who will live in the subdivision. The land dedication requirement for this development is about 2.5 acres. The proposed areas set aside for greenspace far exceeds this amount, but much of it is not usable for a neighborhood park. The amount for fees in lieu is not known at this time. After some discussion, Commission members indicated they need more information. Trueblood agreed and said he would talk with Plalming staff to get more detail, determine estimated fees, and consider whether or not trail connections might be a possibility. This issue will be discussed again at the June meeting. Trueblood reported that a group known as "Citizens for Public Power" will likely be attending the June meeting to inform the Commission as to the benefits for Parks and Recreation resulting from publicly owned utilities. He also reported that there may be some proposed Code changes forthcoming with regard to the Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance. He reminded the Commission about the ribbon cutting ceremony to be held at 11:00 a.m. Saturday, May 14, at Waterworks Prairie Park. Finally, he reported that neither he nor the Chair had received any response as yet from the Council relative to the letter the Commission sent with regard to fund raising ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission May 11, 2005 Page 6 of 6 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2005 TERM NAME EXPIRES 1/12 2/16 3/9 4/13 5/11 6/8 7/13 8/10 9/14 10/12 11/19 12/14 Craig Gustaveson 1/1/07 NM X X X X Judith Klink 1/1/07 NM X X X X Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 NM X X X X Ryan O'Leary 1/1/06 NM X X O/E X Matt Pacha 1/1/05 NM X X O/E X Jerry Raaz 1/1/08 ...... X X X Phil Reisetter 1/1/09 NM X X O/E X Sarah Walz 1/1/07 NM X X X X John Westefeld 1/1/06 NM X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum .... Not a Member DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ~ MINUTES - May 10, 2005 i i~-,-i~1 i CALL TO ORDER: Chair Loren Horton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Candy Barnhill, Beth Engel, Loren Horton, Greg Roth and Roger Williams MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Turtle OTHERS PRESENT: Captain Tom Widmer from the ICPD. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept PCRB Report on Complaint #05-01 PUBLIC DISCUSSION Captain Widmer arranged for Officer Kevin Berg and Naton to stop by'the meeting. Officer Berg gave a little background where Naton came from, the training they have had, and some of the jobs they've been on the last few months. Widmer commented on how happy the depadment was with the selection of Officer Berg and how he has transitioned into the position with Naton. Barnhill asked if Naton had his own bullet proof vest. Widmer explained that the department had a larger one that Gallo (a German Shepard) had worn, but since Naton (a Malinois) is smaller, they were going to trade with Linn County who had previously had a Malinois and now have a German Shepard. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Williams, to adopt the consent calendar as amended. · Minutes of the meeting on 03/08/05 · ICPD General Order #91-05 (Investigative Task Force) · ICPD General Order #92-01 (Infectious Disease Control) · ICPD General Order #99-02 (Alarm- Open Door Response) · ICPD General Order #99-03 (Prisoner Transport) ICPD Use of Force Report- February 2005 · ICPD Use of Force Report- March 2005 · ICPD Quarterly/Summary Report (Quarter 1)- IAIR/PCRB, 2005 · ICPD Department Memo 05-10 Barnhill requested some changes to the draft minutes Horton had a couple of questions of definition for Captain Widmer. The first being "less than lethal" projectiles. Widmer explained they used to use the term non-lethal, but even a pencil could be lethal, so they use the term "less than lethal" for those types of items. Like the bean bag, it's not designed to penetrate but to knock the area, but if it were to hit an eye there would be the possibility that it could penetrate. Horton also asked in the memorandum from Captain Johnson under the ICPD internal complaint 05-01 what "investigation closed" meant under the disposition? Widmer said due to the officer resigning, it terminated the investigation. PCRB - Page 2 DRAFT May 10, 2005 Barnhill had a question on ICPD General Order 91-05 (Investigative Task Force). Under the policy section, item B, there is a Commander, a Field Operations and Commander, she asked if there was a second Commander. This section give the Investigative Task Force Commander authority to assign a task force if the Field Operations Commander would be out of town/unavailable. Motion carried, 5/0. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS Horton alerted the Board to the draft of the annual report which is due the end of July. He made a change in the draft under Board members, dropping the month when Chair and Vice Chair were nominated. Also on the last page under Complaint Demographics, in the first sentence changed "eight complaints" to "five". The Board will discuss the draft more at the June meeting. The Board then discussed the timeliness of Complaint #05-01. According to the City Code, the complaint must be filed within 90 days of the alleged misconduct or will be subject to summary dismissal by the Board. Motion by Engel, seconded by Barnhill, to summarily dismiss PCRB Complaint #05-01 according to City code section 8-8-3(E) and directing staff to forward the Public Report to Council and the appropriate correspondence to the complainant and Police Chief. Motion carried, 5/0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION No fur[her discussion. BOARD INFORMATION Horton commended the Board on their attendance record. Second, he reminded the Board of the two upcoming vacancies on the Board. Greg's and Roger's terms will be expiring on September 1. He gave a little background of the past members who Greg and Roger had replaced for unexpired terms and how attendance plays a big par[. He strongly encouraged them to fill out applications for the next full term. The third item Horton had was to inform the Board of two University of Iowa students, Jennifer Mullins and Sara Conrad that were doing a paper for an Investigative Reporting class about the PCRB. Horton wanted the Board to know that he had no control over the content of the paper. Hodon met with them on two occasions and a number of phone calls. Engel added that she had met with one of them also. They were going to try to get their paper printed in the Daily Iowan and the Press Citizen. They looked at Board membership and minority, budget, why the Board didn't receive more complaints, why the number of complaints had dropped in recent years, etc. Horton had requested a copy of the report from the students after they were finished. The last item, Horton stated he had worked with Chief Winkelhake on a very cooperative basis for five years and the Chief is retiring as of July 1st. Horton is going to write a letter to him thanking him for the way he has worked with him on a reasonable and reasoning basis. Horton inquired whether the Board wanted him to write the letter as an individual or on behalf of the Board. The Board agreed that each individual could send a letter on their own behalf if they desired to do so. STAFF INFORMATION None. PCRB - Page 3 DRAFT May 10, 2005 EXECUTIVE SESSION No executive session was needed until the Board has the Chief's report for Complaint #05-02. Horton asked Widmer who would be taking care of the report in light of Chief Winkelhake's retirement and the due date of the report being August 3rd. Widmer speculated that he and Captain Johnson would probably do the review and then the replacement for Chief Winkelhake would be brought up to speed on procedure and the complaint process. MEETING SCHEDULE · June 14, 2005, 7:00 p.m., Lobby Conference Room · July 12, 2005, 7:00 p.m., Lobby Conference Room · August 9, 2005, 7:00 p.m., Lobby Conference Room · September 13, 2005, 7:00 p.m., Lobby Conference Room Engel will not be able to attend the July 12th meeting. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Roth, seconded by Williams, to adjourn. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 7:41 p.m. POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City IA 52240-1826 (319)356-5041 PCRB REPORT OF SUMMARY DISMISSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL PCRB Complaint #05-01, filed March 30, 2005, was summarily dismissed as required by the City Code, Section 8-8-3 D and 8-8-3 E. The complaint was not filed within 90 (ninety) days of the alleged misconduct. DATED: May 11, 2005 PCRB/Timeliness Report Form:4/13/99 MINUTES DRAFT HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 12, 2005-7:00 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, Michael Gunn, Jim Ponto, Mark McCallum, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Justin Pardekooper, Amy Smothers STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Roger Bahm, Dave Brost, Sr.; Dave Brost, Jr.; Pat Carroll; Sue Licht; Shelley McCafferty; George Wagner; Gloria Walsh, Bob from Melrose Avenue church CALL TO ORDER: Acting Chairperson Tim Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificates of Appropriateness: 930 Iowa Avenue. Sunil Terdalkar said that this is a contributing structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said the application is for repair and reconstruction of a small addition on the east of the house. Terdalkar said the applicant plans to use a metal-clad door and windows, and fiber cement board for siding. He said that the structure is not sound as the floor and walls are damaged by water. The applicant has not indicated demolition in the application. It appears that the structure is beyond repair or salvageable conditions. Gloria Walsh, the applicant, was available to answer questions about the project. She said the reconstruction would use the same fittings, but she would take out the bad boards and would pour new cement. Walsh said she would re-use as much of the old structure as possible. Weitzel asked if the project would retain the walls and the framing. Terdalkar said frame for the wall is badly damaged and so are the some support members of the floor. Weitzel asked if this would be a stud wall construction, and Walsh said that yes, she would be leaving the rest intact. Walsh said she would also use the same shingles as are on the main house. McCallum asked if this is essentially a service entrance. Walsh said it is a back entry and is used as a sun porch off the kitchen. Weitzel asked about the trim work. Walsh said she would be using Pella windows that are wood on the inside and metal clad on the outside. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the reconstruction of the small addition at 930 Iowa Avenue, as drawn in staff's proposal, with the rehabilitation of the existing structure and modification of the roof as shown, and with fiber cement board siding of a lap-width of three to five inches and double hung windows as proposed. Brennan asked about the stairs, and Walsh responded that they are sound and will be reused. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 12, 2005 Page 2 Ponto asked about the trim work. Weitzel said there is no brick molding on the house. Miklo said that historically, a wood addition to a brick house would have had wider trim work. McCallum pointed this out on the photograph of the house next door. Brennan said the owner may want to echo the dark strip in the trim. He said the windows have dark colored flat arch lintel and a sill. Carlson asked about the replacement door. Walsh said that it would be a metal door with full view glass. Gunn said that he felt it would be odd to have brick molding with wood siding. He suggested the use of cornerboards and a little bit wider trim and said it does not really add to the cost. Gunn said this should be consistent with the building techniques of the time. He also said that a hip roof might be more attractive and consistent with the house. AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: McOallum amended the motion to require the window and door trim to be consistent with a wood structure of the time period. Ponto seconded the amendment. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. 520 Brown Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. He said the application is to install a window in the basement of the house. Terdalkar said the proposal is to replace the five by two windows with a new window, and in fact, a vinyl-clad window has already been installed. Licht, the architect, said the window was installed because the owner needed to get things in and out of the basement. Licht said the house has had a lot of problems with water, including a wet foundation, and that is one reason she initially installed a vinyl window. She said the water comes through the wall and actually gets into the wall. Licht said that she needed this size of window for egress, and a double hung window will not work here. She said her choice was a casement window or a slider, and she used a slider because one can take both panels out and then have a full width opening. McCallum asked if there were a way to raise the grade to obscure this window. Carroll, the owner, responded that the area has been regraded numerous times. Licht said there are drainage issues here. She said that the owner intends to plant around the window so that passersby won't see much more of the window than was visible before. Licht said that the part that is above grade is only six or eight inches above the window. Weitzel asked if there is a casement window available with a removable center bar. Licht said there may be a French casement available, but that would make it harder to deal with the window well. Weitzel pointed out that this window has already been installed but is against the guidelines. Gunn stated that the guidelines don't allow vinyl windows on contributing properties in historic districts unless there are exceptional circumstances. He said that unless there are exceptional circumstances, it would be hard to approve this. Carlson asked if it is necessary to have an egress window here. Licht responded that an egress window is required for new construction but not for a remodel. She said that there will be a houseful of teenage kids sleeping in the basement, and having an egress window is just good safety. Carlson asked if an egress window could be installed on another part of the house that is not so visible. Licht replied that this is about the only location because of a laundry room and an addition and because the grade on the other side of the house is higher. She also said that there was already a window well at this location. Licht pointed out that the opening was not enlarged to install this window. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 12, 2005 Page 3 Licht asked if a slider could be approved here if it were not a vinyl slider. Weitzel asked how excessive the moisture is in the basement. Carroll said that she has lived in the house for 16 years and that at times, the moisture has been excessive. She said they have tried many remedies, including pumping the water out of the basement, regrading both sides, using a berm, installing tiles on both sides, and building in a trench. Carroll stated that they now use three sump pumps, and the basement has been dry for about four years so that it seems to now be dry enough to remodel. She said that her biggest concern is having an egress window. Weitzel said the guidelines make an exception for an egress window but almost no exceptions for vinyl. Carlson said the exception would be for a required window, but an egress window is not required here. He assumed the requirement exception refers to a requirement by City Code. Licht said that an egress window would be required for new construction. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve an application for a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of a window at 520 Brown Street, as proposed. McCallum seconded the motion. Ponto said he could be more lenient in this case, as he would be persuaded by the safety ramifications. He said, however, that he would not be in favor of the vinyl window. Licht said that the window that is there is just there to hold a space. She said she would have to look for a fiberglass or wood clad window. The motion failed on a vote of 2-4, with Brennan and McCallum votin,q in favor. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of a window at 520 Brown Street as proposed, but with a fiberglass or metal-clad paintable window. Ponto seconded the motion. Weitzel pointed out that the guidelines are very explicit about vinyl and using a paintable material. Carlson said he is still not convinced that an egress window is required here, which would allow the Commission to make an exception for the design. Brennan said that the term required could be construed to refer to the practical concerns of safety and livability so that the design could fit into the exception category. The motion carried on a vote of 5-1~ with Carlson voting no. 503 Melrose Avenue. ***Bob refers to the person who represented the church. His last name was never given.*** Bob introduced Dave Brost, Sr. and Dave Brost, Jr. who are the architects for this project, Roger Bahm, who is the regional manager for the church that owns this property, and Kerry DeArmand, who works for Merit Construction, the contractor. Terdalkar said that this is a landmark structure. He said the application is to replace the porch columns, with capitals and bases and also the balustrade that was removed in 2004 and replaced with aluminum columns, capitals and balustrade. Terdalkar said the Commission denied an application for the previous replacement. Brost Senior stated that the metal columns and railing installation were turned down by the Commission. He said the new proposal is to replace the existing with columns and capitals to match the original design. Brost said the columns will be an ionic fluted tamper empire with necking and will be painted redwood. Brost said the top of the columns, the capitals, will be cast plaster and fiberglass. He said these are structural supports, so that the redwood will go through the capitals and support the roof. Brost said the railing will be painted redwood and will be restored to have an early 20th century design. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 12, 2005 Page 4 DeArmand said [hat this project is simple if done slowly. He said the plan is to shore up the corners and have three of the columns out at a time. DeArmand said that he will measure the elevation first and do one corner at a time. He said the project needs to be done slowly and needs to be sensitive to the fabric of the historic structure. DeArmand said the important thing in such a project is to know when to stop, so that if any issues arise, they can be dealt with before moving on. He added that the handrails, columns, and capitals will be prepainted before they are installed. Bob stated that the church is a non-profit organization and has already spent $20,000 on the previous project that was denied. He said the church has limited emergency funds, and the estimated cost of the proposed project is $37,000. Bob said that the church plans to work on the roof next year and said that the soffit and fascia need work and the building also needs tuckpointing. He said that because of financial issues, he would like to move the project to the next funding year, 2006. Bahm said the church plans to do the work the first week in January 2006. Miklo said that technically this building is in violation of the guidelines. He said that if there is a good faith effort on the part of the applicants to come into compliance, the City would not take enforcement action. Bob said that his church wants to comply with the guidelines. Brost said that he would like to hire Charles Overton, a historic architect from Des Moines, for minimal consulting on the project. He said the intent is to put the project together and come back before the Commission to have everything reviewed. Miklo said that a building permit is good for six months. Bob said the church will come back and show the proposal as it becomes more complete. Weitzel said the Commission can review the project at that time as well. Miklo said that much of the work to be done does not require a permit. Weitzel said the Commission appreciates the work done on this historic landmark. Baum said that because the church's budget is due June 30th, he would like to plan ahead for January 2006 for the project. Bob said the church won't apply for the building permit until the funding is approved. Carlson asked if the capitals would be paintable, and the applicant confirmed this. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of porch columns, capitals, and balustrade at 503 Melrose Avenue, with the understanding that the work will begin shortly after January 1, 2006 and will proceed in due course. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. 4 Bella Vista. Terdalkar said that this is a contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. He said the applicant would like to construct a deck on the rear of the building, remove two stairs, and repair the screen porch. Terdalkar said the project includes installation of French doors to replace the double- hung windows in the bay window. McCafferty, the owner's architect, said that the house is at the top of a steep ravine and really has no functional yard space. She said the owners would like to build a large deck to have useable outdoor space. McCafferty said the owners plan to replace two windows on the bay with French doors and do repairs to the bay, as it is sunken. McCafferty said that the screen porch is probably not part of the original house, as it does not fit with the neoclassical character of the house. She said that the owners plan to add a pergola onto the deck, and the deck baluster will be wood with square spindles. McCafferty said that the deck columns would be pretreated wood and fiber cement board and will have a panel design. She stated that it would be nice to use brick here, but it is a difficult site. McCafferty said that the changes will not be visible from Bella Vista Drive. She said that the project will be seen somewhat from Gilbert Street in the winter, but the site is fairly secluded. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 12, 2005 Page 5 Ponto asked if the two side windows on the bay would be retained, and McCafferty confirmed this. Weitzel asked if this involves the demolition of a structure. McCafferty said the stairs will be demolished. She said that the porch deck and roof will be kept. McCafferty stated that the project will get rid of the square columns and screens. She said there will be a panel at the bottoms of the screens for safety. Carlson asked about the columns. McCafferty said that the house is classic revival and does not have many arts and crafts features. She said that it was built in the 1920s. McCafferty said that there is often a mix of square and round found on this type of house, and she thought it would be a nice counterpoint to have the round columns. She added that the rafter tails on the sunporch will be replicated. McCafferty said that the pergola is the same as the one that was approved for a project at 1102 College Street. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 4 Bella Vista, as proposed. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. OTHER: McCafferty stated that the date for the preservation awards has been changed to August 3, 2005. 1227 Sheridan Avenue. Weitzel said that the Commission previously approved a certificate of appropriateness for a project at 1227 Sheridan Avenue. He said that the owners are now asking to use a vinyl-clad wood, Andersen tilt-out window. Terdalkar said that this is a non-historic property in the Longfellow Historic District. Weitzel said that because this is a non-historic property, he would be inclined to approve the change, as it is not a major change in style. Carlson said that this is acceptable for a non-historic property as long as 1) it doesn't ........... 2) it does not give a false sense of being a historic property, and 3) it is compatible with the rest of the neighborhood. Weitzel said that all three of the criteria are met. The consensus of the Commission was that the change is acceptable. By-laws. Terdalkar said that the Commission will want to update its by-laws at some point. Weitzel said the issue of a member recusing himself and the impact of that will need to be addressed. Miklo said that for the Planning and Zoning Commission, if a member has a conflict, then he announces that conflict and leaves the meeting and is not allowed to speak. He said that it had been the practice of City Council members to leave the room if there is a conflict of interest, but lately the members have stayed to speak to the issue. Weitzel said that if a member owns the property, then he has a direct interest and so should leave the meeting so as to have no influence. Carlson stated that if the Commission member's interest is indirect, then he should be allowed to speak to the issue. Ponto said he feels that if someone owns the property being discussed, he should leave for the vote, but if the person's interest is of a different sort, then he should be allowed to speak as a public citizen. Terdalkar said that there are some other issues to be reviewed and added to the handbook. Weitzel said that balconies and non-new construction need to be addressed. He suggested just having an addendum to the handbook rather than making radical changes. Weitzel said the revisions will then have to go through City Council. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes May 12, 2005 Page 6 Gunn said that the guidelines should be worked through to make certain that everything is covered. He said it takes times to include everything, get to the issues, and write recommendations. Miklo said that because of past donations to the Commission, there is currently $1,400 available for the Commission to spend on a historic ~reservation-related item, such as a grant match or the production of a brochure. Miklo recommended that the Commission hold election of officers at its next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcd/minutes/H PC/2005/hpc05-12-05.doc listoric Preservation Commission Minutes 4ay 12, 2005 ~age 7 Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2005 WeFt'fl Name Expires 1/8 1/13 2/10 2/15 3/10 4/14 4/28 5/12 5/26 6/9 6/23 7/14 7/28 8/11 8/25 9/8 10/13 11/10 M. Brennan 3/29/08 .................... X X X R. Carlson 3/2§/07 ........ X X X X X X J. Enloe 3/29/06 X X X O O X X O M. Gnnn 3/29/07 O/E X O/E O/E X X X X M. Maharry 3/29/08 X X X X X X X .... M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X O X J. Pardekooper 3/29/07 O/E X X O O O/E O O J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X X A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E O/E X X X ............ J. Weissmiller 3/29/06 O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E T. Weitzel 3/29/08 O/E O/E X X X O/E X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E - Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES DRAFT HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 2005 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Tim Weitzel, Jim Ponto Members Absent: Mark McCallum, Justin Pardekooper, Jan Weismiller Staff Present: Sunil Terdalkar Public Present: Charles Hawtrey, Don Cochran, Mary Momson, Emerson Andrishock, Andrew Hackbarth Jeff Clark and Bryan Clark. CALL MEET1NG TO ORDER Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:05pm. Maharry recused himself from the meeting due to the immediate proximity of his house to the item discussed. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA NONE ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Certificate of Appropriateness 807 East Washington Street Terdalkar said that the first item is a non-historic apartment structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said that the proposed project is to change mansard faCade, to remove certain windows and install patio doors and addition of balconies as described in the application. Weitzel said that the issue is that over hanging balconies where there are single-family houses, are not allowed per the guidelines. Jeff Clark said that the apartment building does not face the street, and the single-family houses are not immediately adjacent to the building. He said there is a parking lot between the building and the closest single family house. He said that they are only planning on adding balconies to the side facing the parking lot. Ponto said that this situation would be a reasonable compromise because the balconies would not face the house directly the single-family house. Weitzel asked the applicant to give an architecture description. He added that the commission would need to be sure that a non-historic building like this would still fit in the historic neighborhood after the renovation process. J. Clark said they are trying to achieve a more friendly and modem look. He added that by putting the balconies the place would look better and friendlier, with a lot more light in the units. 2 Gunn said that it is not a new construction and that he feels comfortable of the building fitting in the neighborhood, and the proposed changes would help it fit even better. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 807 East Washington Street as proposed. Enloe seconded the motion. Enloe said that the proposal is acceptable in this specific case, and that the proposed modifications would improve the aspect of the neighborhood. Carlson said that he agrees, but does not feel strong enough about it to actually make a motion. Terdalkar said that the application does not mention material for siding on all sides, to be applied on the exterior surface once the lower pitch of the mansard is removed. He said that the staff recommends use of the same material on all faces. Weitzel said that a concern would be that front faqade would be remodeled with one type of material, while the other sides would be covered with different materials. Clark said that the mansard would be removed all the way around. He said that the vinyl siding would be all the way around. The motion passed 6:0. 924 East Washington Street Terdalkar said that the item is for approval of proposed work on a non-historic apartment structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said that the proposed project is to change mansard facade, to remove certain windows and install patio doors and addition of balconies as described in the application. Clark said that the building does not have any adjacent family houses. Weitzel asked what is the distance between the buildings on the East side. Clark said that the distance is about 10 feet. Weitzel asked the size of the proposed balconies. Clark said that they would be 18 inches wide. Carlson asked what kind of materials would be used for the siding. Clark said that he would like to propose vinyl siding on the sides and rear and stucco on the front. Clark said that the building has vinyl siding on the backside, and he would like to match that vinyl on sides too. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 924 East Washington Street as proposed. Enloe seconded the motion. Gunn said that due to the street faqade appearance he could accept something different on the street compared with other three sites. Brennan asked what would happen if in the next years someone would buy the building next door and transform it into a single family house, as its initial usage was. Clark said that the building is currently a rooming house. 3 Ponto said that from the pictures the building's driveway is immediately adjacent to the rooming house. Clark said that the driveway was not build right on the property line. Gunn said that he does not believe that the rooming house will be transformed in a single-family house, and he feels comfortable with the proposals. The motion passed 6:0. 932 East Washington Street Terdalkar said that the item is a non-historic apartment structure in College Hill Conservation District. He said that the proposed project is to change mansard facade on all sides, and addition of balconies, patio doors to replace the existing windows on three sides. Weitzel said that there would be 18-inch balconies on the West side, and on the East side there would be six 3-foot balconies overlooking a single family house. Gunn said that the house is a contributing building and would not be destroyed unless it has problem with foundations. Gunn asked if they plan on using the same material all around the building. Clark said that there is some space between the building and the single family house taking into account that there is a driveway separating them. He added that he would like to ask to be allowed to put balconies there, which would change the look of the building. Clark said that they would like to add a little nicer material for the street faqade, and in rest vinyl, which would be similar to the other items already discussed. Gunn asked how many balconies would there be on the east side. Clark said that there would be 3 balconies stacked above each other. He said that on that side there are three windows corresponding to three bedrooms, and then the living room. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 932 East Washington Street as proposed. Ponto seconded the motion. Gunn said that he would vote against because the logic seems to be that if it faces a single family dwelling there should be no balconies. He said that approving them is probably more against the guidelines than in favor of them. He said he doesn't have any problem with the other sides, but the east side concerns him the most. Enloe said that he is inclined to agree that facing the small house would be inappropriate. The motion failed 5:1, with Brennan in favor. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 932 East Washington Street as proposed with the exception that there would be no balconies on the east side of the building. Enloe seconded the motion. Gunn said that the problem is with the 2 upper floor balconies, because the ones on the ground floor will be patios. Ponto said that he would like to leave it up to the applicant whether he would like to create the patios at the lower floor, or if he would like consistency with the other levels and just add bigger windows. 4 The motion passed 6:0. 806 Eas,t College Terdalkar said that the item is a non-historic structure in the College Green Historic District. He said that the project is similar with the other items already presented. Gunn said that there would not be any adjacent neighbors. He added that on one side there is a street and on the other side there is a parking lot. He mentioned that the closest proximity to another property would be about 50 feet. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 806 East College as proposed. Brennan seconded the motion. Terdalkar recommended use of same material for exterior finish on all sides of the building. Clark said that the lower part is made out of brick, and they want to keep it that way. He mentioned that they would like to do the College Street side and Lucas Street side in stucco boards keeping it consistent on both those sides, and on the sides facing north and east they would like to use vinyl siding. Weitzel said that the property is visible from all 4 ways, and that staff recommends that there should be one type of material used all around the building. Gunn said that he does not believe that mixing the materials would not be detrimental. He said that the vinyl would be as appropriate to use as the stucco boards. Enloe asked why would they want to mix the materials. Clark said that there would be a time and cost factor involved. He said that the stucco boards are expensive compared with the vinyl siding, and it takes a lot more time to install them, and are more disruptive to the people living there. Carlson said that there should be three things to be taken into consideration. First, the building should not further detract from the historic character of the district. Second he said that it should not give a false historic character and is compatible in style and character as a non-historic property. He said that he does not believe that a mix of architectural material would invalidate any of the criteria. The motion passed 6:0. 917 East College Street Terdalkar said that the item is a non-historic apartment structure in the College Hill Conservation District. He said that the proposed project is to change mansard faqade on all sides, and addition of balconies, patio doors to replace the existing windows on three sides. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 917 East College Street as proposed with the exception of balconies on the west side. Enloe seconded the motion. Weitzel pointed out that the building is overlooking a single-family residence. 5 Clark asked if they put patio door on upper floors, and add a railing to match the fagade appearance of a balcony. Weitzel said that the patio doors imply large openings facing the single family, which would have the same effect as a balcony. Weitzel asked if the code would allow for a sliding door without a balcony. Gunn said that it would be acceptable as long as they can not open the door. Maharry resigned from the commission in order to express his perspective on the issue. Maharry said that the historic neighborhood could not be protected by approving overlooking balconies. He said that the intent of the guidelines is to prevent openings from overlooking something. He said that the adjacent single family house is his house. Enloe said that the guidelines have been written so that the commission's hands are tight, but the specific case is not clearly defined in the guidelines. The motion passed 5:0 with Brennan abstained. 923 East College Street Terdalkar said that the item is a non-historic apartment structure in a conservation district with similar proposed work as previous item. Clark said that they would like to use vinyl siding for the sides of the building and install 18-inch balconies. He added that there are no single-family houses on either side. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 923 East College Street as proposed. Gunn seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:0. 927 East College Street Terdalkar said that the item is a non-historic apartment structure in a conservation district with similar proposed work as previous item. Weitzel said that there is a historic contributing house on one side of the building. He said that it is a large apartment building that would probably not go back to the single-family status, but it is contributing building. Carlson said that because it is a contributing key building and could have a potential to become a single- family unit it should be treated as a single-family house. Clark said that there is a driveway between them, and the approximate distance is 30 feet between the buildings. MOTION: Gunn moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 927 East College Street with the exception of balconies on the east side. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion passed 5:1 with Gunn opposed. 505 Rundell Street Terdalkar said that the item is a contributing unit. He said that the proposed project is for the construction of a wood deck beside the existing screened in porch at the rear of the house. He mentioned that the deck would be 12 feet by 16 feet. Weitzel asked if they are planning on ending the deck on the north side of the door. Hackbarth said that would be true. He explained in more detail the construction of the porch by using the pictures provided. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 505 Rundell Street as proposed. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:0. 1501 Center Avenue Terdalkar said that the item is a non-contributing structure in a historic district. He mentioned that the proposed project includes the replacement of windows with metal clad windows. Mary Morrison said that the project would be an improvement. She said that they would like to add muntin bars to top sash. She said that there are other houses to match the description. She said that it would fit in the character of the cottage style house. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 1501 Center_Avenue as proposed. Enloe seconded the motion. Carlson asked if the windows are the original ones. Morrison said that the double windows are not original; the ones on the end are not, the rest of them are original, but are broken and need replacement. She said that it would be very expensive to try to repair them. Carlson said that they are trying to prefer repairing as much as possible instead of replacements. He said that he would vote against the application because he believes that they should try to repair windows before deciding to replace them completely. The motion passed 5:1 with Carlson opposed. 715 South Summit Street Terdalkar said that the item is a contributing structure in the Summit Street Historic District. He said that the proposal is for an addition to the new garage of the approximate size of 20 feet by 26 feet. He added that the addition would go in front of the existing garage. Gunn said that he is not the consultant for the case. He said they have discussed possibilities as a district representative and reported the ex p~tt6 communication. Hawtrey said that he misinterpreted the definition of a consultant, and he did not intended to put Gunn in jeopardy. 7 Ponto asked if there would be a door to drive from the new garage to the old one, or the old one would we used just for storage. Hawtrey said that is his shop. He said that the plan is to get rid of the cardboard covering that presently exists. He said that the~) would like to keep the shape of the garage. He added they would like to have single door at the garage. Carlson said that only one side of the garage would be visible from the street. Hawtrey said that from the street you would get to see something better than cardboard. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for 1715 South Summit Street as proposed. Enloe seconded the motion. Enloe said that it would be aesthetically pleasant and well considered. He added that he is concerned that it would be to closely matching in presuming false historical impression. Andrishock said that they would put windows in the same proportion with the opening sizes of the existing garage. He said there would be a distinction in the foundation and how materials would come together. Gunn said that he consider that there could be a very subtle distinction. The motion passed 5:1 with Carlson opposed. 2460 Gilbert Street Terdalkar said that the structure under consideration is part of a local historic landmark property. He said the historic barn was damaged in the storm last year. A few members of the commission visited the site last year to assess the situation. Since then the barn has further deteriorated. The application is for the approval of demolition of the barn. He noted that copies of the conceptual architectural drawings for the proposed structure on the site, submitted on 04/28/2005, have been distributed. Cochran read a statement explaining the project application. He said that the owners of the current property request a rezoning of the property to allow the new owners to subdivide the 10 acres property from its current 5 and 5 acres split to a 6 and 4 acres split. The plan development of the property would provide for the landmark home to be on a 4-acre lot and would be the focal point of the property as it has been historically. The remaining 6 acres include a structurally compromised barn. The area would be subdivided to create 7 lots with the barn being raised to allow for the future developments. Six of the lots would be single-family residential with the remaining lot to be a multi use property containing 4 town homes, a lower level commercial spa~e, and associated parking. The building will be designed in the vernacular of the historic property while still meeting the current market places design, standards and codes. The intent of the design is to mimic the barn in footprint in levels of scale to accomplish the Commission's goal of maintaining the historical nature of the property. Gunn said that the entire property is designated as historic landmark. Cochran said that his family is planning on living out there and they might start by building their own house first. He said that???? Weitzel said that the discussion is about demolition, and not about approval of the presented plans. Ponto said that he saw the barn and is almost close to being a safety hazard. Cochran said that he was not sure about the demolition process and he hired the Kalona barn builder to take it down. He added that they started a week ago and had to look down. He said there are still parts up because he stopped the demolition when he found out about the process. Weitzel said that it would not fall now. Cochran said that the walls are down. The barn is in critical condition of collapsing. He added that his goal would be to save some of the pieces from the barn to utilize for the building that would be rebuilt. Weitzel said that he does not believe that it represents a greater danger than a big pile of wood. Cochran said that he understands the fact that the commission did not have enough time to go over the submitted plans for the proposed construction. However he said that he would agree to postpone the building, but the demolition is a safety hazard. Enloe said that he does not think that demolition is inappropriate in this case, and that it represents a safety hazard. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve the demolition of the barn. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:0. 1111 Sheridan Street Ponto said that it is hard to visualize without having the applicant to explain. MOTION: Enloe moved to table the application. Gun seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:0. The commission discussed what would Mahan~y's situation be due to his intervention in the discussion. The staff would check on the issue and for clarifications on the guideline. Gunn said they should also have a meeting to go over the guidelines and determine changes if are needed. Consideration of March 10, 2005 minutes Carlson said the first page of the minutes does not make sense. He added that on page three the final paragraph, and then page 6 3rd paragraph from bottom, page 7th' 1st paragraph need to be rewritten. MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the minutes submitted with the necessary revisions. Enioe seconded the motion. Consideration of April 14, 2005 minutes Carlson mentioned page 6, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, page 8, 3rd paragraph, page 10, 2"0 paragraph, as well as 2nd from the bottom on same page, and page 11, 2nd paragraph, and also the second paragraph after the motion as needing revising. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the minutes submitted with the necessary revisions. Enloe seconded the motion. Adioumment The meeting adjourned at 10:20. Minutes submitted by Bogdana Rus. Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2005 TelRTI Name Expires 1/8 1/13 2/10 2/15 3/10 4/14 4/28 5/12 5/26 6/9 6/23 7/14 7/28 8/11 8/25 9/8 10/13 11/10 M. Brennan 3/29/08 .................... X X R. Carlson 3/29/07 ........ X X X X X J. Enloe 3/29/06 X X X O O X X M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E X O/E O/E X X X M. Maharry 3/29/08 X X X X X X X M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X O J. Pardekooper 3/29/07 O/E X X O O O/E O J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X A. Smothers 3/29/05 O/E O/E X X X ........ J. Weissmiller 3/29/06 O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E O/E T. Weitzel 3/29/08 O/E O/E X X X O/E X Key: X = Present O - Absent O/E - Absent/Excused NM - No Meeting ..... Not a Member I 05-26-05 ~ MINUTES ~ SCATTERED SITE HOUSING TASKFORCE APRIL 25, 2005 HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Jerry Anthony, Darlene Clauseu, Matthew Hayek, Jan Left, Jan Peterson, Sally Stutsman, Joan Vandenberg STAFF PRESENT: Steve Nasby, Steve Rackis OTHERS PRESENT: Amanda Cline, Maryann Dennis, Charles Eastham, Tracy Glaesemann, Luke Pelz, Patti Santangelo CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Hayek called the hearing to order at 4:35 pm. APPROVAL OF MARCH 28, 2005 AND APRIL 24, 2005 MINUTES: Hayek asked if there were revisions for the March 28 Minutes. Several typographical edits submitted for the Minutes. MOTION: A motion was made by Stutsman, seconded by Peterson, to approve the March 28, 2005 Minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously. Anciaux arrived. Hayek asked if there were revisions for the April 4, 2005 Minutes. Several typographical edits submitted for the Minutes. Hayek suggested a change on page four in the first full paragraph to say, "the project was still funded by IFA." Anthony agreed. MOTION: A motion was made by Stutsman, seconded by Left, to approve the April 18, 2005 Minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION OF DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM TASKFORCE TO CITY COUNCIL: Hayek reviewed the progress from the last meeting. He noted that several of the original recommendation points were revised or clarified, while some items were tabled for further discussion. The packets sent to the Taskforce members for the current meeting included a draft of the updated recommendations, dated April 19, 2005. He said that is the current working draft and asked whether the Taskforce would like to talk about the matrix first, or after reviewing the other points. General agreement expressed to discuss the matrix first. Vandenberg said she and Anthony worked on the matrix, and they both think it is important to evaluate the assisted units in a context containing all housing units, rather than just rental units. If the Taskforce would like more rental units to go into more neighborhoods, it makes sense for the comparison to be with all units in the block groups. However, using the matrix numbers with all units naturally leads to the percentages of assisted units being smaller. Stutsman asked for a definition of "all" housing units. Anthony said it is both rental and owner-occupied. Vandenberg agreed it would be all households, and noted that the data had been included on one of the earlier drafts of the matrix, but then was not used. Anthony said data included since January has been rental only, so changing to all units is a large shift from previous discussions. Vandenberg noted for example in tract 105 that the number of rental units is 109, while the total number of household units is 780. As such the percentage of the 75 assisted units in the tract is a very different percent when compared to 780 total units, versus on the 109 rental units. Vandenberg said she and Anthony were also looking at ways to evaluate the nature of the assisted housing units. There is a continuum in the community of emergency housing, transitional housing, and housing for the elderly and disabled. Additional columns on the matrix would indicate the numbers of elderly/disabled units, and emergency/transitional units in each block group. The idea is to have the total Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 2 number of assisted units, but also to have the data divided three different ways, to see the different housing types. Clausen asked for confirmation that the new columns would have data only from different types of housing, such as elderly\disabled. Vandenberg said yes, the first new column indicates the number of assisted housing units, excluding the elderly/disabled and emergency/transitional. The next column indicates how many emergency/transitional units are in an area, since those types of housing have a higher need for other services nearby. The third column has the total number of all assisted housing units. The block group would be flagged if any of those three columns were higher than the city average. Vandenberg continued by noting that block groups will vary in the number of flags in those three columns. If all three columns are flagged, that area would be a "low" priority for additional assisted housing. She said Nasby suggested block groups with two flags would be areas to encourage "home ownership". One flag would be "medium" priority for additional housing, while no flags would have a "high" priority. This goes back to gradations in incentives, rather than an either/or approach to future development of assisted units. The idea is to look at the different types of housing without being exclusionary. Vandenberg said another option for an additional column would be the "potential for development" in a particular area. She said that another column could be added to indicate an area's accessibility to other services and jobs, though that is not something for this Taskforce to evaluate. Peterson suggested including that column but leaving it blank, to keep that issue in mind for those who look at the matrix later. Stutsman asked if the matrix would be included with the materials given to City Council. Vandenberg said yes, after the Taskforce approves it. Vandenberg said the Taskforce needs to decide if the percentages on the new matrix should be flagged if they are above the city average, or if the city average numbers should be multiplied by 110 percent. Anthony added that the data for both the number of assisted rental units and the number of all rental units should be from the same year, which has not yet been adjusted. Currently the number of assisted units is from 2004, while the number of all units is from the 2000 Census (data collected in 1999). He also said the development potential and access to services columns have not been incorporated into the matrix yet. Not having those three things, he and Vandenberg evaluated the current data and shifted the focus from just rental units to include all units. Anthony said he and Vandenberg have not concluded yet how to construct the matrix. He agreed that a decision needs to be made whether to use the citywide average or something else. If something else, that method needs to be developed and explained. Hayek asked what led to the three new columns. Vandenberg said she thinks the elderly/disabled housing skews the data, since that type of assisted housing has a lower impact on the neighborhood. At the same time, emergency and transitional housing has a much higher impact because of the needs that accompany families at that level. The third column, including all units, might be redundant. Peterson said she likes having the three columns there, dividing the data into the different types. Anthony said the largest change was from counting only rental units to counting all units. Hayek asked what the rationale was for that change. Anthony said some block groups do not have many rental units overall. For example, tract 105 has 109 rental units and 80 of them are assisted. One of the recommendations said there should be a better distribution of rental units, both assisted and unassisted. Using data from all units will target the distribution of rental units. Stutsman asked what definition would be used for potential for development. Vandenberg said it would probably be new construction, but that does not address the potential for acquisition or rehab of current units. Peterson said rehab units were supposed to be discussed at this meeting. Hayek said that was more along the lines of not limiting funding for maintenance of existing units. Anciaux asked if "existing" meant a unit that is already a transitional housing unit, or an existing unit that would be converted into a new transitional unit. Hayek said it is not about changing the type of housing, but allowing funds to be put into maintaining an existing unit currently owned by HACAP. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 3 Peterson said she was unsure which rehab situation was being addressed at the public hearing. Anciaux said he understood the question to be about purchasing a dilapidated unit and renovating and converting it into a new transitional housing unit. Hayek said that he thought that was a separate issue. Peterson agreed that is another situation the Taskforce should clarify. Hayek said he understood it to be a question of funding current transitional units for maintenance. Anciaux said he understood it to mean buying and rehabilitating a unit, thus increasing the number of transitional units. Peterson agreed with Anciaux's understanding, that it was not a new building, but would be a new transitional unit. Hayek said he sees no difference between building a new unit versus converting an existing unit in an affected area. Peterson said that was the question. Vandenberg asked Nasby if he has anything to add regarding how to better define new versus rehab. Nasby said the City has funded straight acquisition with HACAP and Successful Living, mostly with transitional housing. They identify the unit and purchase it, and it becomes part of their stock, so it does not involve building or rehabbing. They have also done solely a rehab of property. Vandenberg asked if new construction or converting existing units is easier. Nasby said no way is easy, but there are benefits to both approaches. Dennis asked if an applicant for federal aid through the city generally knows where a new unit will be going. Nasby said not necessarily as the last few projects the City funded did not have sites. Dennis said when the Housing Fellowship applies for new units; they do not always know where they will be located. They have a budget and a general per unit cost. Nasby agreed that is how it usually works. Anciaux asked if the Fellowship is required to locate units in Iowa City. Dennis said yes, if the funding is administered by Iowa City, but they do have units in Coralville, and owner-occupied units in Lone Tree that were not City funded. Vandenberg suggested calling the column potential for new construction instead, since it would be difficult to evaluate areas for other types of construction so that might clarify things. Left asked if access to services refers primarily to transportation. Vandenberg said she was thinking about where jobs are and where transportation systems are. Peterson said they would be things that are necessary to sustain self- sufficiency. Clausen asked if it would include childcare. Hayek asked how the potential for development and access to services would play into the matrix. Vandenberg said she sees those as the second part of the process in identifying areas for development. This approach would identify the ideal place to develop, which has access to those services and a Iow concentration of existing assisted housing. Those things would not necessarily be part of the policy, but would be additional information to consider when looking at future development. Hayek asked if those columns would affect the preference column. Vandenberg said maybe. Peterson said even if that column is blank, she would like to include it in the materials given to the Council as items that should be investigated when pursuing future development. Anthony noted access to services was addressed several times at the public hearing, so it would be helpful to address it. Hayek asked if anything could be decided on at this meeting that would help the subcommittee with their next step. Stutsman said it appeared that all the Taskforce members were in agreement to add the new columns. Anthony said he has some concerns about the columns, most importantly the question of what the cutoff should be. He asked if the cutoff should be the city average or something else. Peterson suggested looking at both options, to see which most closely demonstrates what the Taskforce is trying to say. She does not know how the data will appear. Vandenberg noted that the data needs to be updated before it can be evaluated. Peterson asked how 110 percent is different from "more than 10 percent above the city average." Anthony said for example if a tract has 20 assisted units and 1000 total units, assisted units comprise 2 percent of the total. If the city average is .5 percent, 110 percent of .5 percent would be .55 percent. With the CITY STEPS approach, adding 10 percent to the city average, the percent would instead be 10.5 percent. So the difference is between .55 percent and 10.5 percent. Anthony noted that any cutoff except the CITY STEPS approach would have to be explained and justified. He said a third option would be to use the city average, and a fourth option is to use two times the standard deviation, which is fairly common in statistical analysis. Any value that is two standard Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 4 deviations on either side of the mean would be considered an extreme case. Peterson asked for confirmation that CITY STEPS adds 10 percent to the city average. Anthony said yes. Nasby said that as an example, in CITY STEPS, the citywide average is used in showing Iow and moderate-income concentrations. The City average of Iow-moderate income household is 53 percent, so anything higher than 63 percent is concentrated by that definition. He noted that the 10% approach in CITY STEPS deals with larger percentages. Vandenberg added that the percentages of assisted units are very small now that all housing units are figured into the data. Anthony said that CITY STEPS percentages are small as well. Anciaux said that even though the percentages are small, problem areas could still be identified. Anthony agreed. Hayek asked if the Taskforce could decide the statistical question at this time. Anthony said a judgment call should be made on which method to use, and then see what the results look like. Stutsman suggested going with the CITY STEPS option, since it has been used before. Anthony agreed that would be the easiest approach as far as the easiest to defend, since it is already established, but others might disagree on whether it would reflect what the Taskforce is saying. Hayek said that without the elderly/disabled unit numbers, a 10 percent rule would not flag any block groups. Peterson agreed that she is concerned that the number would be so big that all the work up to this point would be useless. Anthony said that with total assisted units, the citywide average is 4.07, and there are block groups with greater than 14 percent. Anciaux asked which ones. Anthony said 4.1 and 21.2, but 18.2 is not flagged using the citywide average, though it would be flagged with transitional housing. Hayek asked what the citywide average of emergency/transitional housing is. Vandenberg said that with the current numbers, the average is .5 percent, which would then translate to 10.5 percent as being the threshold. Hayek noted that nothing in two of the three new columns would be flagged using that method. Peterson said, as such, she is concerned by that approach. Hayek said in the third column, only two block groups are flagged. Anciaux asked which two are flagged. Hayek said 4.1 and 21.2. Anciaux noted that 21.2 would include student populations. Hayek said he does not know specifics about the standard deviation approach. Anthony said he has not applied it to this issue, but it is a fairly common statistical measure. Peterson agreed. Hayek asked if it would be difficult to explain, and asked for an explanation of how it would work. Anthony said if the city average for all assisted units is 4.07, and the standard deviation is 1 percent, then any value above 4.07 plus two times one, or 6.07, would be concentrated. Vandenberg asked how the standard deviation would be calculated. Anthony said the software would calculate it. Vandenberg asked approximately what it would be. Anthony said it depends on the distribution and there is no way to know ahead of time. Vandenberg said she is concerned that whatever method used will catch all the nuances of the data, considering the very small percentages. Peterson said that seeing all the results of the different methods would be helpful. Anthony said the data can be calculated using all the methods very easily, but defending the method might be more difficult. Peterson asked for confirmation that, in terms of explaining and justifying it, the method applying 110 percent would be the most difficult to use. Anthony agreed. He asked if the data should be calculated using all four methods. Hayek agreed. Hayek asked if there was consensus to use data from the same year for consistency's sake. Anciaux agreed, if the data is available. Peterson asked which way the data should be adjusted, and if the census data can be updated. Anthony said city staff has provided the total number of new units constructed since 1999, though that does not include the block groups where they are located. Nasby said building permit information could be used from 2000-2004. It does not indicate whether the structure was actually built, but it would give some idea on the number. That information can then be geocoded to give the block group locations. He said the other method would be to discount assisted housing built since 2000. Peterson said she would prefer not to discount the assisted housing built after 2000. Anthony agreed that if data on units built since the census is available, it should be used. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 5 Rackis said that a much larger number of unassisted rental units have been built since 2000 than assisted units. Out of 2000 units built in that time, only 75 are assisted. Anciaux asked how many of the 2000 units are in the Lodge. Nasby said about 220. Hayek asked how long it would take to gather that information. Glaeseman said it is done and would be available for the next meeting. Hayek asked if there was consensus to update the census data to include new construction since 2000. The Taskforce members agreed. Hayek asked about the "access to services" and "potential for development" columns. Anthony said the subcommittee has yet to come up with some measures for those two. Vandenberg said she thinks those items are in the implementation phases, which are included only as topics for consideration while developing an overall plan. Peterson agreed. Hayek said the Taskforce could suggest the city consider those aspects. He asked whether the columns should be included. Peterson said she would like them to be included, even if they are blank. If it is only in the narrative, it might get lost. Dennis noted that there are not any services available where land has not been developed. Rackis said that there are no bus routes in the peninsula area yet. Vandenberg asked if a route would be put in that area. Rackis said it is a matter of supply and demand. Hayek asked about the three new columns. Vandenberg reiterated that they would be the percent assisted without elderly/disabled, percent of emergency and transitional, and percent of all assisted units. Peterson said she already stated her opinion. Anthony said he and Vandenberg have not discussed the new columns. Anciaux asked if a heavier weight could be put on emergency and transitional housing. Anthony said yes. Anciaux asked if that could be justified because of the heavier reliance on services. Anthony said that is unknown. Stutsman asked if that is an unfair assumption. Peterson said no, because a family in emergency or transitional housing would by definition have high needs. Anciaux said in terms of the high percentage of transitional housing in block group 18.2, a transportation service program should be developed to allow transitional housing to be located in other areas. Peterson asked if that would be provided by HACAP. Anciaux said yes. Left said the intent of the question regarding rehab housing is not clear from the minutes from the hearing. Hayek said that building a new unit and converting an existing building are the same. Peterson agreed, but noted the important thing is that the Taskforce members are in agreement about what is being discussed, and the recommendations are clear as well. Anciaux said that if the question is about converting existing buildings into new transitional housing, there are buildings in other parts of Iowa City that can be converted. Hayek said the minutes from the last meeting say, "Hayek noted that a point raised at the hearing was to insure that the policies do not impact the ability to maintain and rehabilitate existing housing." Anciaux said he does not object to maintaining current transitional housing. However, as 45 percent of transitional housing is located in block group 18.2, something needs to be done to spread it out in the future. Left said the minutes from the hearing say, "He foresees possible difficulty with the rehabilitation of older housing in the prohibited areas. Buying and renovating helps revitalize neighborhoods and keep them from getting run down." Peterson and An¢iaux agreed that sounds like buying new units and converting them. Peterson said what Axeen was saying is that this is good for the neighborhood. Anciaux said there are other places outside of 18.2 where that can be done. Left said the minutes from the hearing go on to say, "There should be a process to allow rehabilitation projects to take place in prohibited areas...." She added that she could understand Peterson's and Anciaux's interpretation. Peterson asked if all of the Taskforce members are in agreement that what is meant by rehabilitation of units needs to be clarified in light of this. All agreed. Vandenberg asked about Anthony's reservations regarding the three new columns. Anthony said the matrix refers to specific policy objectives 2 and 3. However, specific policy objective 1 already explicitly refers to transitional housing. He is not sure having it also in the matrix is necessary. He also asked for clarification from staff whether it is okay for elderly to be specifically identified and removed from the data. That is permissible with emergency/transitional, but is it permissible with elderly housing asked Anthony. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 6 Nasby said that it did not appear the elderly\disabled are being singled out as a separate group, since they are included in the data. He said it was also his understanding from the attorney that emergency and [ransitional housing can be specified, and said he would check with the attorney regarding elderly\disabled. Anthony said he would like to know for sure. Peterson said she thinks having the column information available is about looking at each block group and understanding what is located there. There is a difference in the kinds of impacts from different types, and it is helpful to see what is in the neighborhoods. Stutsman agreed, and noted that having the information available would assist with the educational aspect. Peterson said that it would be helpful also to have student housing information. Clausen asked for confirmation that the column with assisted units excluding elderly and disabled does include emergency and transitional. Vandenberg said yes. Hayek said it seemed there was nothing else to discuss on the matrix until the new data has been gathered. Anthony said that he would like to define what high, medium, and Iow preferences mean. He said one way to define them would be to assign a dollar amount to each level. Peterson suggested letting the city decide on the levels. Vandenberg said that her understanding is high would have incentives and Iow would not have incentives. Medium would therefore have some incentives. Anthony said once the development potential data is available; the preferences could be fine tuned. Hayek suggested moving on to the other discussion points. He said he would like to cover everything else and leave the matrix as the only unresolved issue at the end of the meeting. He suggested quickly reviewing ti0e objective points in order again. All agreed. Hayek said the only change to general objective 1 was Crom "maintain" to "strengthen." General agreement was expressed for that change. Hayek said the change to general objective 2 was from "without reducing" to "while increasing." Peterson said she is not sure what housing is being referenced in objective 2. She said that increasing the supply of housing for her would mean affordable housing rather than only assisted housing. The absence of affordable housing is why there is such a high demand for assisted housing. Increasing affordable housing would decrease the pressure for assisted housing. Peterson said her concern is that general objective 2 is recommending an increase in assisted housing, when she would like to increase affordable housing. If it becomes impossible to scatter assisted housing and increase the stock of assisted housing at the same time, linking those two objectives together might result in both being lost. She said there is a difference between affordable and assisted housing that should be clarified. Anthony said that general objective 1 asks for an increase in affordable housing generally, and then the second objective talks about assisted. So he views that as asking the city to primarily increas~ the supply of affordable housing, and if not, then increase assisted housing to help make up for the shortfall. Peterson asked if Anthony thinks the city can scatter and increase at the same time. Anthony said if one assisted unit is built next year outside of 18.2, then both objectives have been met. Peterson asked if the objective says "maintain," and 18.2 is not available for development, then it would have to be scattered. Anthony said yes, but the potential is that the city could scatter without increasing and addressing the need for affordable housing. Peterson asked if he meant affordable or assisted, since this objective refers to assisted. Anthony said assisted. Anciaux said the Taskforce would have to rely on the elected officials to evaluate the recommendations versus their budget, and do the right thing. He thinks that if the money is available, they would do it, but if the money is not available, then they cannot do it. Hayek said he shares Peterson's concern. He said he is worried that with this set of recommendations, the Taskforce might be overreaching. He would like to strike a balance between challenging the city to take bold steps, but still make the recommendations practical. Anthony said he believes specific objective 2 is more demanding than the general objective 2. Hayek said those are two different concepts. Specific objective 2 talks about spending money to bring the same supply on board in a scattered fashion. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 7 Peterson said the original general objective 2 asked for maintaining the current supply. She asked if it would be over reaching to recommend the city strengthen its commitment to assisted housing while increasing affordable housing, and also recommending the city increase the supply of assisted housing while scattering it. Anthony said the city could then say the current supply is all that is needed, which he is not comfortable with. Unless affordable housing is available for everyone, the supply of assisted housing should not be blocked. Also, asking for an increased supply will protect the recommendations from challenges of exclusionary effects. Anciaux said there are ways to incent developers to help with the recommendations without costing the city extra money. Vandenberg agreed, and asked whether the Taskforce would prefer more units or scattered units, assuming the city has a limited amount of money to spend. Anthony said that is a public policy question, whether the benefits of scattering outweigh the negative aspects of not having enough affordable housing. Peterson asked if Anthony meant assisted housing. Anthony said assisted, but only if enough affordable housing is available for everyone. If that is the case, then the amount of assisted housing can be reduced. A significant portion of the population in Iowa City does not have affordable housing, and the numbers are not changing significantly. Anciaux said if assisted housing is primarily located in one area, the property values will decline in the area, allowing more to be purchased there. Anthony said he does not agree, since property values in tract 18.2 are higher than many other places. Hayek confirmed that all the Taskforce members agree that a scattered site policy is a worthwhile endeavor, and most agree it would cost money to adopt the policy since a reduction in the available assisted housing is not a desirable outcome. He said that the general objectives staded out saying that if the supply can be maintained while extra funds are made available to scatter, then scattering is desirable. However, asking also to spend additional money to increase assisted housing might take the recommendations beyond the realm of practical consideration. Peterson suggested leaving general objective 1 as currently stated, to strengthen the commitment and increase opportunities, and then change general objective 2 by adding a period after "community" and deleting the final clause. Vandenberg said she agrees. Anciaux agreed with removing "increasing" and "spend money" as much as possible. Peterson asked Anthony if that would be agreeable, even though it sidesteps the issue. Anthony replied that he would like a commitment to affordable housing in each of the objectives, so that if the city adopts any one of them, affordable housing would be part of it. Hayek said he agreed with Peterson's suggested edit. Left agreed as well. Clausen said she shared Anthony's concern. Peterson said that any part of the recommendations could be ignored by the city. Anthony agreed, but said it should be there, allowing the city do the editing. Hayek noted the Taskforce members are not in agreement on whether the clause should be in the objective. Vandenberg said including the end clause dilutes the commitment to scattering. Anthony said the issue really is as Vandenberg said a question of whether the benefits of scattering assisted housing outweigh the potential negative impacts of reducing the amount of assisted housing that is available. Anthony said the question is whether such a policy would benefit the public good, and if it cannot be proven to benefit the public good, the Policy can be challenged at any time and struck down. Hayek said there is a diversity of opinion on what constitutes a benefit to the public good. Anthony agreed, and said if the policy cannot be proven to be a benefit, it will be struck down. Vandenberg asked who could strike it. Anthony said anyone who challenges it, if it goes to court, it would be struck down. Stutsman said she would like the city legal staff to respond to that, and give their opinion about the issue. Hayek said that scattered site policies have been adopted in many communities already. Anthony agreed, and noted that those communities have been able to demonstrate the benefits of the policy. He said that usually those policies are accompanied by additional funding and inclusionary housing policies, as well. Hayek said the three options are to leave the statement as written, stop the sentence after the word "community," or change the statement back to as it was originally written to say "maintaining the supply." Peterson said she does not agree with the third option to change back to "maintain," wh!le ending the sentence after"community" asks for an increase in stock in conjunction with scattering. Stutsman, Left, and Vandenberg agreed. Anthony and Clausen said they would like to keep the final clause. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 8 Stutsman asked if a minority opinion could be noted. Hayek said yes, consensus is not needed for every objective. The narrative can indicate that complete consensus was not reached for certain points. He suggested taking a vote on the issue. Peterson confirmed that the reason for the lack of consensus on this point could be explained in the narrative. Hayek said yes. Rackis noted for clarification that the primary source of funds for assisted housing has been HOME and CDBG funds, which are primarily used as financial assistance to build affordable housing. The funds are not used to provide direct housing payment assistance. He suggested recommending CDBG and HOME funds continue to be used for that purpose, but then also recommend increased commitment to find ways to build affordable housing throughout the community. Anthony suggested a fourth option for general objective 2, to say, "Iowa City should adopt a scattered site policy to ensure a fair share distribution of assisted housing in the community without using CDBG and HOME funds for scattering." Peterson asked how that would be accomplished. Anthony said by putting in additional resources. Peterson asked for confirmation that this would mean funding for scattering would mean new funding, rather than CDBG and HOME funds. Anthony agreed. Hayek said that is already being requested. Nasby questioned if Anthony's suggestion would put CDBG and HOME funds into housing only in the tracts that are already concentrated. Anthony disagreed, saying if a new affordable unit could come into the housing supply using CDBG funding; the easiest option might be for it to be located into one of the concentrated areas. Putting it elsewhere would require additional funding to pay the land price differential. Nasby said the assumption is then development would only occur in the over represented tracts. Anthony noted that if land was available in under represented tracts, and the land was zoned for it, a lot of the developments in 18.2 would have been located in those other areas. Assisted housing does not locate in 18.2 by choice, but for purely financial reasons. So he is suggesting funding from somewhere other than CDBG and HOME funds to pay for the land price differential. Peterson asked if both types of funding, both CDBG/HOME funds as well as additional funding, could be used to locate assisted housing outside of the concentrated areas. Vandenberg asked if this should be addressed as a specific objective instead of a general one. Hayek said the general policy objectives are designed to express the global findings. Peterson agreed, noting that otherwise both the general and specific points number 2 would say the same thing. Hayek suggested voting on the proposed change to general objective 2, adding a period after the word "community," and deleting the final clause. MOTION: Peterson moved to edit the general policy objective 2 to say, "Iowa City should adopt a scattered site policy to ensure a fair share distribution of assisted housing throughout the community." Left seconded. Anthony objected to the revision, saying that the original change to "increasing" was reached after much discussion at the previous meeting. He still agrees with the reasoning for the original edit, which was a widespread concern expressed at the public hearing that the policy statement would result in a reduction of affordable housing. Everyone at the public hearing said scattering is a good thing only if affordable housing is protected from reduction. Eastham asked Peterson to explain why the motion for the current revision was proposed. Peterson said her concerns from the previous meeting were twofold. First, there is some confusion between the terms assisted and affordable. She said she feels strongly that the community needs to increase the availability of affordable housing, and it is the absence of affordable housing that creates a great need for assisted housing. Second, since general objective 1 asks for an increased commitment to assisted housing as well as an increase in affordable housing, and general objective 2 asks for scattering, adding a clause to request an increase in assisted housing while scattering might be over reaching. The final clause seemed redundant and excessive. Anthony said the entire scattering policy could be discarded for reasons unrelated to what it says, and that he would address that point later. Hayek asked if anyone else would like to address that issue. Stutsman said that looking at it from a policymaker perspective, the first two general policy statements should not contain too many specifics, but only address the overall goals the Taskforce would like the city Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 9 to pursue. Peterson noted that specific objective 2 does ask for additional funds beyond CDBG and HOME funding. Left said the phrase "strengthen the commitment" implies supplying additional resources. Hayek asked for a vote. The motion was passed with a vote of 5 in favor, and 3 against (Anthony, Clausen, Anciaux). Hayek addressed the narrative at this point, suggesting that once the recommendations are finalized, the subcommittee comprised bf Anthony, Hayek, and Vandenberg would draft the narrative. Then, instead of having the Taskforce meet to go through the entire document together, give each member an opportunity to write an additional supplemental piece to attach to the narrative document. That would give all members an opportunity to express their individual opinions and note the issues they are particularly concerned about. Anthony asked that the Taskforce have an opportunity to read and vote on the narrative, and asked that it be sent to the members in their meeting packets. Hayek asked for confirmation that Anthony is not recommending a line-by-line evaluation. Anthony said no, to vote on whether to accept the entire document. Hayek said he raised that point now because of the close vote on general objective 2. Hayek suggested reviewing the specific objectives. He reviewed changes to specific objective 1, to move one sentence to the beginning of the statement, and deleting the final sentence. Stutsman asked for clarification of what the phrase "make land available" means in this objective. She said that could be interpreted as the city needing to buy the land and make it available for emergency housing, rather than through zoning or other means. Anciaux said in this situation he thinks the city should buy the land, using CDBG or other funds. Hayek asked if Anciaux says that because of the difficulty of finding land for that type of housing anywhere in the city. Anciaux said yes. Anthony noted that there is land available in several places, such as the land now committed to the Super Wal-Mart. Anciaux said yes, but while there is still land available in that area, it is not located close to schools or downtown services such as the recreation center and library. Hayek said the original specific objective 2 was deleted, so all the other objectives have changed numbers. He suggested tabling discussion on specific objectives 2 and 3 until the matrix has been finalized. All agreed. Hayek said there were no changes to objective 4. The only change to objective 5 was to change "almost all" to "most." Hayek said that objective 6 had substantial changes, including the addition of the word "additional." Stutsman asked if the hyphenated "low-moderate" could be changed to "low or'moderate." Clausen suggested changing it to "low to moderate." Nasby suggested specifying the income level, such as "under 80 percent area mean average." Ail agreed with that Nasby's suggestion. Hayek confirmed the statement would read, "The City should take additional steps to increase sustainable home ownership among its population under 80 percent area mean income." All agreed. Hayek asked Vandenberg for the revision to objective 7. Vandenberg distributed copies to the Taskforce members. She said she is not sure who is being referred to in the statement, since she is thinking about the high-end needs population, such as the homeless and near homeless. Peterson said the discussion was for the broader continuum, because even families that have recently moved into home ownership will not be able to sustain it without access to additional services. Hayek said the discussion about services was broad, but noted that the bulk of the needs are at the lower end. Vandenberg said there are different levels of need, so defining terms and containing the spectrum could be difficult. Clausen asked about adding the word "creative", and deleting the word "other." Peterson said the original idea was for creative collaborations. Anciaux asked what Human Services does for families who are homeless or near homeless. Peterson said the department hardly gets involved unless there is a substantiated child abuse situation. Stutsman said she would prefer not to use the word "creative," and to leave "low-income" in as a preventive measure. Sometimes if Iow-income families have help, they will not become homeless or near homeless. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 10 Hayek asked for confirmation that "homeless/near homeless" should be deleted from the statement. Stutsman said yes, change that to "low-income." Peterson confirmed that the statement currently says, "The City should work collaboratively with private and other public partners to develop comprehensive support services for Iow income families." Hayek asked about the second sentence. Left said it is important to specifically state some of the services the Taskforce is talking about, to give examples of what is being referenced. Vandenberg said skill development could refer to either students or adults. Left agreed. Dennis suggested changing it to "low income households," to be more inclusive. The Taskforce members agreed. Peterson asked about including job opportunities. Stutsman said that is included in the phrase, "among the many needs," otherwise the list could be very long. Hayek said that objective 8 had a change to say, "The policy should offer effective incentives for developers to include a percent of affordable housing in new developments." All agreed. Hayek said the change to objective 9 was "perils" to "impact." All agreed. Hayek said objective 10 had the word "local" deleted. All agreed. Hayek said objective 11 asks for "vigorous enforcement" of the nuisance law, and clarified the second sentence to indicate that neighborhood opposition to assisted housing is often caused by insufficient management of housing that is not assisted. All agreed. Hayek said objective 12 had no changes, and objective 13 had the first clause removed. All agreed. Left asked if a disclaimer statement should be written to specify that "City" throughout the document refers to Iowa City. Unless "City" should stand for Iowa City, it should not be capitalized. Peterson said it should stand for Iowa City. Left said a statement at the beginning should specify that. Anciaux suggested saying, "Iowa City, hereafter referred to as the City." All agreed. Peterson asked to review the order of the objectives. Vandenberg said that considering the education aspect is important, she would put that point as specific obj.ective 1. Then objective 2 would be collaboration with other municipalities, so the current number 9 would be 1 and the current 10 would be 2. Anciaux said he would prefer keeping the current number 1 in its current place. Vandenberg said that would be fine, but would like to put numbers 9 and 10 higher in the list. Clausen said she would like to move number 7 higher on the list as well. Vandenberg said her rationale is that the education and collaboration are important for getting the work done. Peterson asked for confirmation that Vandenberg is beginning the list by saying the public needs to be educated about why this is important, the whole county needs to be enlisted because this is a wider issue, and then the others are specific things that Iowa City needs to do. Vandenberg agreed. Clausen said the current number 7 should be moved up, perhaps after the other points. Left asked if these are being ordered chronologically, or according to importance. ©rdering them with education and enlistment first might imply that those things need to be done before any of the other objectives could be met. Anthony suggested organizing the specific objectives according to the related general policy objective. So the specific objectives that would help to achieve each general objective would be organized together. Hayek said that two umbrella headings, which are the two general policy objectives, could each be put on a separate page with their supporting specific objectives. Vandenberg noted that some specific objectives would fit under both general objectives. Rackis suggested grouping them according to things Iowa City has absolute control over versus those things that would require collaboration. Stutsman said they could be ordered according to priority. She said to her a list of recommendations would have the most important points first. Peterson said that was what prompted the group to reconsider the order, and put 9 and 10 higher on the list. Hayek said those two statements are more positive from a marketing perspective. Peterson agreed, noting those statements do not leave Iowa City as solely responsible for improvements. Hayek said he agrees with moving 9 and 10 up to 1 and 2, and 7 up as well. Anciaux said he would like the current number 1 to stay near the top, because it addresses both 1 and 2. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Minutes April 25, 2005 Page 11 Clausen confirmed that the new order is as follows: 1 is 3, 2 is 4, 3 is 5, 4 is 6, 5 is 8, 6 is 9, 7 is 7, 8 is 10, 9 is 1, 10 is 2, and 11, 12, and 13 remain the same. Hayek confirmed there were no other comments regarding the order. None were raised. Stutsman said she would like to discuss what the Taskforce members want in the narrative, in order to give the subcommittee some direction. Anthony agreed, and said it should be done during this meeting. Hayek said the narrative starts out with a general explanation about the Taskforce, including a discussion of the process, how the Taskforce was formed, when it met, who presented, and other general information. Then it goes into the core findings, which is not fully developed because it was begun before the objectives were written. Vandenberg suggested e-mailing the outline to the Taskforce members, and allowing each person to respond. Hayek said the open meeting policy is not violated if people respond individually. Stutsman asked if Hayek plans to have the narrative written for the next meeting. Hayek said yes. Next meeting scheduled for Thursday, May 26, 2005 at 4:30. Hayek confirmed that he would e-mail the basic outline of the narrative out to the Taskforce members, who then should email back individually any additional notes or issues that should be addressed in the narrative to any of the subcommittee members. Nasby asked if a deadline should be included for responses. Hayek said he would include that in the e-mail message. Anthony asked if the subcommittee could look at other communities' matrices for comparison purposes, if they find that information. The Taskforce members agreed. ADJOURNMENT: There being no other business to come before the Taskforce, Anciaux moved to adjourn, and Vandenberg seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Scattered Site Housing Taskforce Attendance Record 2005 01/03 01/24 01/31 02/14 02/28 03/28 04/04 04/25 D. Anciaux X O/E X X X X X X J. Anthony X × X X X X × X D. Clausen X X O/E X X X X X M. Hayek X X X X X X X X J. Left X X X O/E X X O/E X J. Peterson X X X X X X X X S. Stutsman X X O/E O/E O/E X X X VandenBerg X X X X X X X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES PRELIMINARY IOWA CITY PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, MAY 5, 2005, 3:30 P.M. ~ 05-26-05 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Members Present: Rick Fosse, James Hemsley, Emily Martin, Mark Seabold, Terry Trueblood, Emily Carter Walsh Members Absent: Charles Felling Staff Present: Karin Franklin, Marcia Klingaman Call to Order Seabold called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. Public discussion of any item not on the agenda No items were presented for discussion by the committee members. Consideration of the Minutes of April 7, 2005 Meetin.q MOTION: Fosse moved to accept the minutes as submitted. Helmsley seconded, and the motion was passed unanimously. Tour of parks for Art in Parks project Upper City Park Trueblood said that Upper City Park was on the list of suggested parks because Lower City Park is already busy, and also already has a sculpture. Upper City Park has a lot of green, open space and mature trees. It is also possible to put a piece close to the street, which would be visible to passing traffic. Franklin asked if the open space is used as play areas. Trueblood said yes, but no particular area is set aside or sees heavier play traffic. Sycamore Greenway Fosse explained the Greenway is a linear park which is used for regional storm water management. The focus is on both quantity and quality of the water, which percolates into the ground and eventually feeds into the nearby wetlands. The Greenway is supported by development fees. Trueblood added that an additional park might be built as the area becomes more developed. Klingaman suggested an educational series to explain the water management project. Kicker's Soccer Park Fosse said putting a piece on the island at the entrance to the parking lot would be an eye-catching location. Trueblood said the park consists currently of five mini soccer fields for younger age groups, five medium fields, and five full-sized fields. There is also an open area, which accommodates temporary soccer fields as needed, but there are development ideas for the area, including a pond, extra soccer fields, and a baseball/softball field. The space beyond the mini fields is also planned for development, with additional shelters, trees, etc. Seabold suggested a sculpture that captures the mood of the park and occupies a large space, such as the one near the entrance to the Eastern Iowa Airport. Franklin and Klingaman said a previous sculpture proposal for the Pedestrian Mall had a playful feel that might be appropriate to the setting. The Committee returned to City Hall. Trueblood left at this point. Benton Hill Park Project Franklin reported issues have developed with the artist regarding performance. The contract deadline for the project originally was June 1, however it is unlikely that deadline will be met. The artist has been Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes May 5, 2005 Page 2 asked to submit a detailed schedule of activities with benchmark dates by May 6. She said it is possible the project may be pushed back to next fiscal year. Seabold said that no work has been done on the project since the clay pieces were brought in for the committee to view. Also, the artist has not addressed some issues of concern regarding the arch. Walsh asked if the concerns are related to the structure. Seabold said no, they are related to the fabrication of the pieces. Franklin said she is working to achieve positive progress on the project. She said Seabold has been helpful in working with the project. Seabold noted the artist has not been through the fabricating process, so is not familiar with all that needs to be done. Rotating Sculpture Proiect for Peninsula Park Franklin reported that Goddard will be done with the sculpture soon, and the park area is not ready. Goddard plans to complete the sculpture on site, so Franklin would like to discuss ideas for alternate locations. She suggested the intersection of the access road and the north-south well access road in the peninsula area. Fosse asked if this location would be temporary or permanent. Franklin said Goddard is concerned about the probable fragility of the completed piece, and the potential of damage if it is moved, so it would be a permanent location for this piece. Seabold suggested putting the piece in Willow Creek Park. It is an intimate piece, so having it tucked away and somewhat secluded among the trees would be fitting. Fosse asked how long Goddard would be in Iowa City. Klingaman said Goddard plans to leave in August, and would like to see the installation. Franklin noted that this piece is intended to be a temporary piece in a rotating series. Seabold asked what would happen to the piece after a year since the artist would be leaving town. Franklin said the possibility always exists that one of the rotating sculptures could become part of the permanent collection, if the Committee and the City Council want it to be, If that happened, the artist would be compensated. She said it would be a good idea to pick a location with that in mind. Wa~sh asked if there were any locations comparable to the original. Seabold suggested putting it near the original location. Franklin said that with all the construction and traffic in the area, the piece might be damaged. Fosse asked where the original location is. Walsh said it was just off the pedestrian bridge, on the opposite side of the pathway from the river, by the marshy area. Klingaman said the artist would like people to see the piece. Franklin asked if the dog park would be built this summer. Fosse said that is the plan. Franklin said that park might generate traffic and allow more people to see it. Franklin asked about the grove of trees in Willow Creek Park, with the figures set in the woods. Seabold said he believes Goddard would like that location. Fosse asked if that would become the permanent location of the rotating piece. Some questions of accessibility to place the sculpture were raised. Fosse said the Willow Creek idea is fine. Seab01d asked about locating it in Hunter's Run. Franklin noted that park is farther out and has much less traffic. Seabold said he preferred the Willow Creek location. Walsh agreed there are many suitable areas for the sculpture in Willow Creek. Seabold asked if the piece would be installed first, and then discuss the option to purchase it later. Franklin said yes. Walsh said she believed Goddard would like to have it purchased. Hemsley asked how the piece is constructed. Seabold said rebar is bolted onto the base, and bent into the shapes of the figures. He said Goddard plans to sculpt and mold the cement onto the rebar on site. Klingaman suggested asking Goddard which location he would prefer. Franklin agreed. Klingaman noted that a pad needs to be installed in either location. Franklin said once the location is decided, she would ask the City Council for approval to change the location. She said she does not anticipate a problem with that aspect. Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes May 5, 2005 Page 3 Klingaman said she would talk to Goddard. Fosse left at this point. Follow-up Discussion of Parks Tour Walsh said she suggested a project-based piece on the Hunter's Run shelter because it is very bare and functional. She said Kicker's needs a piece that speaks to the people who are there for sports. Martin suggested putting "Ties That Bind" in Kicker's. Franklin said it is currently slated to go into the Pedestrian Mall, though it could be located anywhere. She noted it is a small piece, however, and suggested that a more noticeable piece in the same theme might be appropriate. Franklin also suggested looking at the slide registry to see if any proposals there would be suitable. Martin said the space across from the pool in on the east side of Upper City Park is a possible location. A piece there could also be visible from the street. She said there are no impediments to visibility, but it would have to be sizeable. Franklin said it is possible to commission a piece for a specific site. She said the budget is currently approximately $30K. Walsh said it seems like the Greenway does have traffic. Martin said the marsh area was interesting. Franklin suggested a kinetic piece. Seabold agreed that a piece that moved with the wind or a bird feeder is a possibility. Martin said the space is very open, but not all pieces need to be visible. Franklin noted that vandalism is a concern if the piece is not in the open. Seabold suggested looking at slides at the next meeting. Walsh asked for clarification why these parks were chosen for art. Franklin said that park staff suggested them based on the park's usage, and that these parks currently do not have art. Walsh asked about the status of the other neighborhood projects. Franklin said she expects proposals to be submitted for the Creekside and Melrose neighborhoods. Klingaman added that a proposal from Wetherby is also possible. Franklin said one or two of those projects are planned for next year, and there are additional funds in the allocation to use on the parks. Franklin announced that the dedication ceremony for "Politically Purple" is scheduled for June 4 at 11:00 at the showcase site in the Pedestrian Mall. Adiournment There being no further business to come before the Committee, Walsh moved to adjourn and Martin seconded. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. s:lpcdlminutes/PublicArd2OO51adO5-O5-O5.doc Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2005 TerlTl Name Expires 1/06 2/02 3/02 4/07 5/05 6/02 7/07 8/04 9/01 10/06 11/03 12/01 Emily Carter Walsh 01/01/08 CW X O X X Charles Felling 01/01/06 CW X X X O/E James Hemsley 01/01/06 CW O/E X X X Emily Martin 01/01/08 CW X O/E O/E X Mark Seabold 01/01/07 CW X X X X Rick Fosse CW O/E X X X Terry Trueblood CW O/E X X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting CW = Cancelled due to Weather ..... Not a Member