The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005-09-01 Info PacketI ,7. t ~ CiTY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org September 1,2005 I SEPTEMBER 6 WORK SESSION ITEMS IP1 City Council Meetings and Work Session Agendas IP2 Memorandum from Mayor Lehman: Zoning Ordinance Review IP3 Memorandum from the City Clerk: Joint meeting with P&Z on proposed Zoning Code I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IP4 Memorandum from the City Attorney: Attorney Assignments IP5 Memorandum from the City Clerk to City Council Candidates: Reminder of City Council Candidate Workshop IP6 Memorandum from the City Clerk: Opportunity IP7 Letter from JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner to Residents of property adjoining the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street: Potential Traffic Calming in the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street IP8 Memorandum from the Senior Planner to the Planning and Zoning Commission: Subdivision and Rezoning review processing time IP9 Memorandum from the Engineering Department to the City Manager: Agenda Items IP10 Email from Tim Boyle to the City Engineer: Civil Engineering Position [Staff response included] IPll ICAD Luncheon September 21, 2005 IP12 [Article] Facts about Universal Design [submitted by the City Manager] IP13 Agenda: September 6, 2005 City Council Economic Development Committee I PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES IP14 Human Rights Commission: August 23, 2005 IP15 Planning and Zoning Commission: August 18, 2005 IP16 Board of Adjustment: August 10, 2005 IP17 Historic Preservation Commission: August 15, 2005 ~ City Council Meeting Schedule and (~ITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas September 1, 2005 www,icgov.org · MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 5 Emma J. Harvat Hall Labor Day - City Offices Closed · TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 4:30p Special Council Work Session · Budget Review · Planning and Zoning Items Dinner · Zoning Code Schedule Provided · Agenda Items · Council Time 6:30p Special Formal Council Meeting (Separate Agenda Posted) · Executive Session 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting I TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS I · MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY, OCTOBER 3 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · MONDAY, OCTOBER 17 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18 Emma J. HarvatHall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting · WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19 North Liberty TBA Joint Meeting · MONDAY, OCTOBER 31 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session · TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting CITY DATE: August 30, 2005 TO: City Council FROM: Ernie Lehman, Mayor RE: Zoning Ordinance Review In this packet you will be receiving information on joint meetings with Planning and Zoning to discuss the proposed zoning code. We will be discussing this schedule at our work session next week. A couple of additional observations: · I would prefer not meeting on Wednesday, September 28, if possible. · It is my understanding that no changes can be made to the document before the public hearing commences (unless the changes go back to the Planning & Zoning Commission for its recommendation). Therefore, we could set the public hearing on the agenda of September 20 for a special formal meeting in October. Setting the public hearing early would allow Council joint sessions with Planning & Zoning for the discussion and education prior to the opening of the hearing. Holding the public hearing at a special meeting would also allow provide an opportunity for a longer period of time for the hearing and not have other agenda items dictating the time spent on this subject. The public hearing can be continued as many times as Council wishes. Please bring your calendars to the meeting Tuesday evening for scheduling future meetings. U:mayorzoning,doc CITY DATE: August 30, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~z~ RE: Joint meeting with P&Z on proposed Zoning Code The Planning and Zoning Commission has completed its draft of the new Zoning Code. At its August 18 meeting the Commission made a recommendation to the City Council that the code be approved. The Commission concurred with the Mayor's memorandum that it would be beneficial for the Commission, Council and staffto meet at informal work sessions prior to the Council holding a public hearing on the recommended draft. The Commission suggests the following schedule: # 1 General introduction and overview presentation September 19 - Monday Regular Work Session - approx. 1 hour # 2 Discussion of residential zones September 26 - Monday Special Work Session (6:30-8:30PM) # 3 Discussion of commercial and industrial zones and miscellaneous sections of the code September 27 - Tuesday Special Work Session (6:30-8:30PM) OR September 28 - Wednesday Special Work Session OR September 29 - Thursday Special Work Session Once these meetings have taken place, Council would then determine what additional meetings would be necessary prior to the public hearing. The Planning & Zoning Commission is available for additional meetings as needed. Cc: Bob Miklo Karin Franklin Steve Atkins Eleanor M. Dilkes U:zoning.doc. City of Iowa City IP4 MEMORANDUM DATE: August 30, 2005 TO: City Council, City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Clerk, Department Directors ~,4¢~,~/' FROM: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney RE: Attorney Assigments Attached for your information are the primary areas of responsibility for the attorneys in my office effective September 7, 2005. Attachment Cc: City Attorney staff ATTORNEY ASSIGNMENTS (Effective September 7, 2005) Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Supervision of and Consultation on all matters as necessary City Council City Manager/Assistant City Manager City Clerk Sarah Holecek~ First Assistant City Attorney City Council, City Manager, City Clerk Planning Dept. (including Transportation Planning but excluding Community Development and JCCOG Human Services) Board of Adjustment PCRB Police Department Personnel/Civil Service/Pension Litigation as assigned Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney Community Development and JCCOG Human Services Housing & Inspection Services/Code enforcement Public Housing Authority Cable and Cable Commission Human Rights Commission Airport Animal Control Magistrate's Court (1/3 Senior Center Deer Management Committee Litigation as assigned Mitch Behr, Assistant City Attorney Plan & Zoning Commission/Planning Dept (including JCCOG Transportation Planning but excluding Community Development and JCCOG Human Services) Property Acquisition Public Works and Engineering Magistrate's Court (1/3) Parks & Recreation Litigation as assigned Eric Goers, Assistant City Attorney Finance Department Library Fire Department Parking & Transit Cemetery City Assessor/Tax Assessment Appeals Magistrate's Court (1/3) Property Acquisition Litigation as assigned RANDUM DATE: August 31, 2005 TO: City Council Candidates FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk RE: Reminder of City Council Candidate Workshop A City Council Candidate Workshop will be held Wednesday, September 7, 2005, 6:30-8:30 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City. Materials will be distributed and staff present to answer questions regarding budget preparation and related financial issues. S :candidateworkshop.d oc RANDUM DATE: August 30, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk RE: Opportunity The National League of Cities (NLC) Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (TIS) meeting is to be held in Iowa City September 22-24. Council Member Dee Vanderhoefis a member of TIS and with NLC staff is involved in planning this meeting. The Committee events start Thursday evening, September 22 and conclude Saturday, September 24. Each one of you are more than welcome to attend any of the events and an agenda will be provided. In addition we are offering each of you the opportunity of a lifetime. On Friday evening, September 23, Committee members and guests will be visiting the Hoover Presidential Library. We are asking fellow Council Members and staff to help with the social hour. This is a great way to network with officials from across the country and "serve" as official City ambassadors. Steve and I will be there for this fun evening and hope you can help us as well. As if just the honor to "serve" isn't enough you can stay for dinner and a program if you wish. Please let me know if we can count you in to help put. "Serving" hours are 5:45-6:45, dinner at 7:00. TEAR OFF LOWER PORTION & RETURN TO MARIAN Name Yes I'll be there 5:45 pm, and will stay for dinner at 7:00 on Friday, September 23 Yes I'll be there at 5:45 on Friday, September 23, but can not stay for dinner No Sorry I can't attend either event on Friday, September 23 U:tisopporunity.doc IP7 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa $2240-1826 (319) 3s6-sooo August 25, 2005 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov,org Residents of property adjoining the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street Re: Potential Traffic Calming in the alley between Seventh Avenue and Bradley Street Dear Resident: Recently, the City received a petition from residents whose property adjoins the alley between Bradley Street and Seventh Avenue, parallel to Muscatine Avenue, requesting to be considered for the City's Traffic Calming Program. The City completed an evaluation and deemed the street qualifies for the program based on the 85th percentile speed of the traffic in the alley exceeding the speed limit of 10 mph by at least 5 mph. Due to geometric restrictions, it was determined that speed humps would be the preferred traffic calming device. Speed humps are not the same as speed bumps. Speed bumps are used to slow traffic in parking lots and must be driven over very slowly. Speed humps are 12 feet in length with a maximum height of four inches in the center as shown in the attached drawing. A speed hump is meant to be driven over comfortably at the posted speed limit. We are proposing to eliminate the step in the City's Traffic Calming Program that requires a public meeting of affected residences. At this meeting we would normally discuss the various traffic calming options available, but for your alley we believe speed humps are the only realistic option. So we will proceed to the next step in the City's Traffic Calming Program, which is a survey of the affected neighborhood. For this project the "neighborhood" is defined by the City Council as all residential dwelling units on property which is contiguous to this alley. This results in a survey of 9 affected properties. The enclosed postage paid survey card has been provided to you so that you can indicate to us whether or not you are in favor of the proposed speed humps in the alley between Bradley Street and Seventh Avenue, parallel to Muscatine Avenue. The City's Traffic Calming Program is not intended to have the City impose unwanted traffic calming devices on a neighborhood. It is intended to allow a neighborhood to determine if they wish to have traffic calming devices installed. The neighborhood survey must indicate that at least 60% of neighborhood residents responding are in favor of the proposed traffic calming installation. Otherwise, the proposal will not be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. To clarify, each residence receives one vote, not each resident. If the proposal receives at least 60% approval from your neighborhood, it will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The City Council will make the final decision. Comments we receive on the proposal from Iowa City Transit, the Fire Department, Police Department, Ambulance Service and Department of Public Works will also be provided to the City Council. If approved by the City Council, we will install the speed humps in locations shown on the enclosed diagram this fall. Signs would also be installed warning motorists of the speed humps ahead. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please return your survey postcard no later than September 9, 2005. If you have any questions, I can be contacted at 356-5254 or anissa- williams@iowa-city, org. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Attachments cc: City Council City Manager Marcia Klingaman, Neighborhood Services Coordinator jccogt p/It rs/7th-B radley, doc PRBPI3SEiD SPEiE]i) HUMP LEICAT]~BNS [[ey be~cween iBrool/ey S~,r~ee~c and 7Xch Avenue au9us~: 8005 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 4, 2005 ~7/~/,1 ~ ,/ To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Robert Miklo ,~ ~' Re: Subdivision and Rezoning review processing time The Commission recently requested an analysis of the time it takes to process subdivision and rezoning applications. We have attached a spread sheet that lists the zoning and subdivision applications reviewed in 2004. The spreadsheet contains the application number, the date when a completed application was filed with the City, the first and any subsequent dates when an application went before the Commission and, finally, the date on which the Commission voted on each application. During the 2004 calendar year the Commission reviewed 39 cases (5 cases included a combined rezoning and subdivision application). The average time span from the date when a completed application was filed with the City and the date when the Commission first reviewed a case was 3.2 weeks. The average period of time between the submittal of an application and the decision of the Commission was 3.8 weeks. The normal processing time is 3 weeks for a subdivision and 5 weeks for a rezoning. It has been the practice of the Commission to review rezonings at two meetings to allow interested parties to present information. If an application is not controversial the Commission sometimes chooses to vote after only one meeting - thus shortening the rezoning review process to 3 weeks. In 2004 there were only two cases that required more than 5 weeks for review. REZ04-000017 was a Planned Development Housing Overlay - Low Density Single-Family Residential (OPDH-5) zone to allow an additional 18 zero-lot line dwelling units in the Village Green South subdivision. The Commission deferred this application due to concerns about neighborhood compatibility. The Commission ultimately recommended approval of a plan that increased the dwelling unit count by 12 units. REZ04-00030/ANN04-00001 was the annexation and rezoning request for the Davis property, which will be the site of the new Menards and other commercial lots. The Commission deferred the application while waiting for a traffic study necessary to identify street improvements needed to accommodate the proposed increase in commercial development. August 26, 2005 Page 2 In 2004 the Commission recommended approval of all except one application. The Commission recommended the denial of REZ04-00019 a rezoning request form Medium Density Single-Family Residential (RS-8) zone to Low Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-12) zone for property located at 211 Myrtle Avenue due to non-compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission subsequently approved SUB04-00029 a three lot subdivision which allowed preservation of the existing single-family house and the construction of two new duplexes on the property. The Commission requested this analysis due to reports of complaints that the Planning and Zoning Commission takes too much time to review subdivisions and rezoning applications. This data indicates that these reports are more perception than reality. Last year the Commission acted on 95% of the applications that it received within 5 weeks of the projects having been submitted to the City. The average processing time was 3.8 weeks. Only 1 of 39 cases was recommended for denial for non-compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the applications that the Commission reviews are routine and are processed in just a few weeks. Other applications are quite significant resulting in major commercial and residential development that will have long-term consequences for our community. The data indicates that the Commission can be proud of the efficiency and speed with which you review even these complex and significant development applications. Cc. Steve Atkins Planning & Zoning Case Processing Time City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 26, 2005 To: Steve Atkins From: Stephanie A. Vaughn,~' Re: Agenda Items The following are costs :associated with the Capital Improvement Projects being presented for acceptance at the September 6th Council meeting: 1) 2005 Davenport Street Water Improvements Project Contractor: Lynch ' s Excavating o:o Project Estimated Cost: $ 127,000.00 o:o Project Bid Received: $ 146,945.00 o:o Project Actual Cost: $ 138,843.86 This project replaced water main along Davenport Street, between Dubuque Street and Linn Street. The water main along this area of Davenport Street had numerous leaks and breaks in the past and was in need of replacement. The project was funded by the Water Division. Marian Karr From: Ron Knoche Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 4:49 PM To: 'timothy boyle'; Ron Knoche Cc: *City Council; Sylvia Mejia; Rick Fosse Subject: RE: civil engineering position Dear Mr. Boyle: I appreciate your interest in the Civil Engineer position. The City had a very good candidate pool for this position and as you realize we can not interview all candidates. The selection process for interviews was based on meeting the qualifications for the position and experience which best fit the needs of the City and the Public Works Department. The decision regarding an interview was based on these reasons and was not a negative reflection on your qualifications. The candidate hired for the position met the qualifications and I feel her experience will be an asset to the Public Works Department. Best wishes in your future endeavors. Sincerely, Ronald R. Knoche, PE Iowa City Engineer From: timothy boyle [mailto:boyle42@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 12:06 PH To.' ron-knoche@iowa-city.org Cc: council@iowa-city.org Subject: civil engineering position Hello again, I still haven't heard back from you or anyone else about why I was unqualified for an interview for the entry level civil engineering position. I find it hard to beleive you had 3 candidates more qualified than myself. As in my resume I said I have 13 yrs of transportation civil engineering experience, a BSCE and an MSCE. I think at least you could let me know why I was not a viable candidate. I live in this town and pay high taxes to do so and like to think the officials are judicious in their use of funds. I am not encouraged by this encounter. Tim Boyle 8/30/2005 DATE: August 30, 2005 ~p~ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~ RE: ICAD Luncheon PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOU PLAN ON ATTENDING. , Area Development Group PRSRT STD 325 East Washington Street U.S. Postage Paid Wednesday, September 21, 2005 The Year of Public Engagement Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Iowa City, Iowa University Athletic Club Permit No. 268 1360 Me[rose Avenue, Iowa City atThe University of Iowa www.lowaCityAreaDevelopment.com Registration 11:30 a.m. Luncheon noon - 1:30 p.m. University of Iowa President David Skorton 319.354.3939 Guests may register Skorton, the Ul's 19th president and the first medical on-line for the lunch at doctor to serve in the Ul top post, has been part of the University's leadership in economic development efforts www. iowacityareadevelopment.com or by calling 354.3939. for more than a decade. Cost is $25. Skorton has a long and distinguished UI medical career, and has served on the boards and committees of many Tables of 10 can be reserved, as well national health-related organizations. An active community as vegetarian meals. No refunds after member, Skorton served on and chaired the lowa City Area September 16. Late cancellations and .. Development Group, served on the Cedar Rapids Chamber no-shows will be billed, of Commerce Priority One Advisory Committee and the Technology Corridor Committee. He currently serves on the Cedar Rapids Symphony Orchestra Board of Directors. The Iowa City Area Development Group connects He is also a member of the Iowa Business Council and has business with federal, state andlocalresources served on the Iowa Department of Economic Development Board, the Governor's Life Sciences Advisory Committee, to enhanceandstimulatearea economic growth and the Iowa Research Council, of which he was president through business retention, expansion and from 1999-200 I. attraction efforts, and to advance, develop and advocate for the area's workforce. Formed in 1984, our nonprofit organization services the And, updates on area development communities of Iowa City, Coralville, Kalona, activities. North Liberty, Solon, Tiffin, West Branch, West Liberty and Johnson County. Decorating: Universal Design: Facts About Universal Design: Home & Garden Televisi... Pagl~ Mak~ HOM~:PAG~ Program Guide Shows A - Z Decorating Remodeling Gardening At Home SEARCH DECORATING Facts About Universal Design Baskets / Containers By Scripps Howard News Service Books / Videos Candies / Holders Design Styles Besides Pima County, a southern Arizona county that includes Fabrics / Linens Tucson, there are four states and six cities that have adopted Faux Finishing various universal design mandates, even though they apply Fireplace Decor Floorcoverings only to publicly funded housing. They are Floral Displays Frames Furnishings / Accessories Furniture · Atlanta Holidays / Special Occasions · Austin, Texas Home Tours · Urbana, III. Lamps / Lighting · Naperville, III. Pillows / Bedding · Iowa City, Iowa Products / Trade Shows · Long Beach, Calif. Resources / Organizations Room Design · Texas · Georgia Bathroom · Florida Bedroom Children's · Kansas Colors Design Principles Dining Room Examples of universal design requirements: Ergonomic Feng Shui Foyer / Entryway Hall / Stairwell · The ground floor must have one accessible route, at Home Theater least 32 inches wide, through the entire floor, which Kitchen Living Area cannot pass through bedrooms or closets. Loft · There must be at least one no-step entry to the house, Office / Workspace whether in the front, back or garage. Porch / Sunroom · The entry should be at least 32 inches wide. Small Space · Interior doors must be at least 30 inches wide. Themes Tips / Techniques · Door hardware, such as levers, cannot require any Universal Design grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist to operate. Other · Bathroom walls must be reinforced for the option of Stamping / Stenciling adding grab bars. Tile · Light controls, electrical outlets and thermostats must be Trash To Treasure easily reached from a wheelchair. Window Treatments http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/dc_design_universal_design/article/0,,HGTV_3385_ 1963603,0... 8/12/2005 Decorating: Universal Design: Facts About Universal Design: Home & Garden Televisi... Page 2 of 2 --Source: Pima County Board of Supervisors Hi y~ S~ Other universal design features that are being used voluntarily Hi. in some new home construction, primarily in developments st marketed to people over 50: sc · Full bath and master bedroom on the main level · Windows that can be opened with minimal effort · Covered porches T~ · Wider hallways and interior doorways s( · Lower kitchen cabinets with roll-out and pull-down pi, shelving Yc · Multi-level counters in the kitchen Fr, · Extra lighting, especially in bedrooms and bathrooms w~ · Raised toilets co · Non-slip floors · Laundry chutes · Landscaped ramps to the front entrance · Raised garden beds that are reachable from a A wheelchair co · No-threshold, large showers with either built-in steps or da stools cc · Front-loading washer and dryer --Source: National Association of Homebuilders. Home About Us ' Newsletters Questions ~ Advertising Site HaD Privacy Legal D]Y Fine Living Food Network Shop At Home Great American Country HGTVPro LIwng . Video On Demand Comoarlson Shoo for Home Gifts & Patio Furnl[ure at Shopzdla & BizRate 2005 Scripps Networks, Inc. All rights reserved, http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/dc_design_universal_design/article/0,,HGTV_3385_ 1963603,0... 8/12/2005 AGENDA city of Iowa City City Council Economic Development Committee Tuesday, September 6, 2005 4:00 p.m. City Hall Lobby Conference Room 410 East Washington Street 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes - August 15, 2005 3. Consideration of a Request for Local Financial Assistance and CEBA Application to the State of Iowa - Loparex Inc. 4. Set Next Meeting Date 5. Adjournment M NUTES P R E L M IN ARY CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AUGUST 15, 2005 CITY HALL, LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Ernie Lehman, Bob Elliot, Regenia Bailey Members Absent: NONE Staff Present: Steve Nasby Others Present: Meredith Hay, Eric Higgins-Freese, Joe Raso CALL MEETING TO ORDER Chairperson Lehman called the meeting to order at 8:00AM. ' APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM JULY 19, 2005 Motion: Elliot moved to approve the minutes from July 19, 2005 meeting as submitted. Bailey seconded the motion. Motion passed 3:0. INTRODUCTION- MEREDITH HAY, VP FOR RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA Lehman said that nearly anything that City does regarding economic development would be enhanced through partnerships with the University of Iowa. Hay said that from the University of Iowa perspective "everything" is a two way street. She said that she would like to be engaged as much as possible with the City staff and City Council. She added that with the City's efforts recruiting companies to the area, or assisting existing businesses to grow, the University is willing to help. She mentioned that there are many different ways UI could help in areas like technology or advice. Hay said that the University will start a program to recruit new faculty to the area who have their own businesses. She mentioned that it will be an entrepreneurial faculty recruitment program, and she would need help with it. She added that if Ul finds these recruits they would need help from the City in terms of moving their business to Iowa City region. Elliot asked if the program is across the University, or is just in one specific section or department. Hay said that it is across the University. However, she mentioned that most of them would likely come from medicine or engineering. Hay asked how the University could help further Iowa City's plans. Lehman said that the City Council Economic Development Committee is thinking of the possibility of creating a full time economic development position. He added that they would need to formulate a good position description, and a vision statement that would not duplicate what currently is being done by other agencies, to be approved by the City Council. He said that if such a position will be created, anything that would be done would have to involve the University of Iowa. Lehman said that the University of Iowa does not to like to be addressed as an industry, but it is the biggest industry in the region. As such, he said that the City must work hand in hand with UI. Hay asked what the vision for the new position is. She asked what would be unique about the new position. Lehman said that it would be unique in the sense that it will be relative to only promoting Iowa City. He added that the City needs to create commercial development, jobs, and taxes for Iowa City. Bailey said that there are some gaps in economic development recruitment that no one covers, like retail. Nasby mentioned that there may also be a couple of firms a year that would be too small to go through other agencies, so the City will be able to provide help for those too. Lehman said that the new position Economic Development Committee Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 2 will not be created to compete against other existing agencies, but to fill in gaps and partner with the other agencies. Bailey said that the Committee discussed the need to create the sprit of entrepreneurship in the community similar to the existing spirit of writing in Iowa City. She mentioned that there are a lot of creative thinkers, and the City could do more for young people who are interested in starting their own business. Hay asked whether there can be a specific sector targeted, and then really go after achieving it. She said that they could not do it all. She said that they should pick one sector that Iowa City really needs and achieve that, and measure progress. Bailey said that creating the environment in which people believe that is possible to start their own business if they have an idea, they can check the feasibility and use the entrepreneur center. She said that people also have the opportunity to increase and expand their business if it is initially successful. She added that there were some small businesses that the City provided loans to in the past and that they've been around for two or three years, but certain types of businesses reach a plateau if they do not continue to ramp up, especially if competition becomes more active. She added that it has to be ongoing training in order to keep those businesses viable. Hay said that they are open to al types and sized of business. Bailey said that for entrepreneurship it is important to show young people that it is possible, to create an environment that makes it possible to start a business. Hay said that the University is consolidating all activities in economic development. She said that they have a faculty entrepreneurship program, a student entrepreneurship program, as well as a small business development center, an outreach program, and technical systems program. She added that she got permission to have these offices at Old Capitol Mall. She mentioned that they are setting up shops for small business development as well as entrepreneurial activities. Hay said that she will try to have resource foundation transferred there as well. She said that there will be a lot of signage, a lot of publicity. Hay said that they will start the technology transfer shopping, an annual activity, very public, to an entrepreneur of the year award, as well as a student entrepreneur of the year award. She mentioned that it will be a great place to talk about entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Elliot said that he feels strongly that they would need to be focused. He added that in the mean time they would also have to be flexible. He said they would have to be immediate flexible. Elliot mentioned that there are things going on in Iowa City and Coralville region that the committee is not aware of. He said that the proposed position could also inform the Council about new businesses and activities. Raso said that firms would try to delay as long as they can the announcement of anything public, not because they do not want the Council to know, but they do not want their competitors to find out, especially if the information is of competitive nature. Lehman asked Raso about his opinion about the creation of a full time Economic Development position. Raso said that they would have to lay out the purpose of the position and compare it with what is already out serving the community. He said that if there is a need of action that the existing agencies are not doing, it is the committee's role to figure out how to cover the gaps. Lehman said that there is one thing that the agencies could not do, and that is favoring Iowa City. Lehman added that the proposed position would promote the interests of Iowa City. Lehman said that it would need to promote Iowa City to businesses that might relocate here, in contrast with Raso's position, who tries to bring businesses in the area. Raso said that the best thing the community should do is to make sure they are prepared to deal with businesses, meaning having infrastructure in place, financial systems in place, acting quickly, and having available land. He said that companies look regional and not so much as specific cities anymore. Hay asked how communities communicate in attracting and getting businesses in their region. Raso said that each company has their criteria, and labor characteristics of the market, and based on the criteria the areas are limited down. Bailey said that s basically a process of elimination. Raso said that most of the time is not a choice between Iowa City, Coralville or North Liberty, but between one of these three regions already mentioned and others like Madison, for example. Economic Development Committee Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 3 Elliot asked Nasby how much need there is for someone to spend more time on just the issues discussed. Nasby said that they could first find out the gaps that exist in economic development plan and strategies. He said that one area that could use more attention is on creating and maintaining information on available lots and buildings for the Location One Information System and the City's web site. He said that a lot of the work had been done, but it could be a responsibility of a full time person. Hay said that the University of Iowa will need more wet lab space. She mentioned that she had heard the City talk about planning and designing a spec building. As this gets underway, they should take in consideration the need for more lab space and how that could be done along with the University. PRESENTATION ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Higgins-Freese said that what really matters when talking about WI-FI, and WI-MAX or other technologies is how fast they are compared to each other. He said that a megabit is 1/1000 of a gigabit. He added that the orders of magnitude are quite different. He said that gigabit is faster than megabit, and megabit is a lot faster than kilobit. WI-FI stands for wireless fidelity. Higgins-Freese said that there are 4 different versions available, each having different standards. He said that new standards appear to provide faster and better connection over a longer distance, but sometimes they are different enough that they will not communicate to each other. He added that they keep improving the system, but in the same time people will have to buy more stuff to keep up with the changes. Higgins-Freese said that WI-FI is intended mostly for personal use and to connect to the internet. He said that it is not meant for heavy data, like programs due to the fact that the connection is through air, which is slow for heave data, and the connection might drop at any time. He said that most of the time WI-FI will be used for internet connection. Higgins-Freese said that when someone connects wireless, they connect to an access point which is a machine that sends out the wireless signals. He said that it is mostly free, but there are businesses that provide wireless internet access for a fee. Raso asked how much is the cost of a hot spot. Higgins-Freese said that cost is minimal. Getting the connection, the fist gigabit, through the building is a big cost. Elliot said that that is why it is more expensive than estimated to provide wireless connection in downtown Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, or Coralville. Higgins-Freese said that the reason that it becomes more expensive is because you need to make sure that your connection blanket covers every area and there will be no spot in which the connection would be lost. He added that in order to achieve that you will need to install a big number of hot spots. Elliot asked if this is similar to radio waves that lower on the dial the longer they go, the higher on the dial the shorter they go. Higgins-Freese said that it is a great way of understanding it. Higgins-Freese said that the advantages of WI-FI are that there are standards. He said that these are open standards, so any company could make a device that will work with a specific standard, in contrast with propriety standards used by the police, which allow them to talk only to each other. He added that it is a global standard, so it works all over the world. Higgins-Freese mentioned that the disadvantage is that there are so many different kinds. Another disadvantage is that they are not secure; the information is flowing through the air waves, and people could pick up on the information. Elliot asked if it is private information as it flows in the air. Higgins- Freese said that the information is private. He mentioned that even taking someone else's signal and using it is punishable. He added that there was a case in Florida, when a person was accused of word driving, going around driving the car trying to find wireless access that someone's house emits. Higgins-Freese said that WI-MAX is faster than WI-FI, and has a wider range. He said that it is more reliable, and fast enough that would do voice which means taking the voice signal from phone and answering through the computer. Economic Development Committee Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 4 Higgins-Freese said that Broadband is a fast connection to the internet. If you have to use the phone line in order to connect to the internet you do not have broadband. Broadband can cover WI-FI, WI-MAX, cable modem, or DSL He added that DSL comes through the phone line, and cable modem comes from the cable company. DSL, he said, is like a road that you can go 55 miles an hour, but you are the only one on that road, and on the other hand, cable modem is like going on a road that everybody shares the road that can go up to 75 miles per hour; one day you could go fast, others slower. He said that DSL provides a consistent lower speed, while cable modem provides a faster variable speed. Higgins-Freese said that fiber optics is the fastest internet connection available. This is a more physical connection in the sense that it requires special wires installed throughout the building. It is more expensive. It is too expensive, and not feasible for household / individual users, and is predominantly used by businesses. Bailey asked from an economic development point of view, for high data fiber optics is what businesses go. She added that if the City plans to build a building for business, they would want to add in the infrastructure fiber optics. She asked if this would be the technology used in the future. Higgins-Freese said that the technology is developing very fast, but fiber optics would still be an existing/usable option in the future. Nasby added that as technology moves people will still be able to use fiber optics. He said that the same is currently happening with dial-up. People still use dial-up connections for the internet. Raso said that there would be huge advantages if the City could provide fiber optics in the future planned building, because companies will be very attracted by this option. He said that there are very few regions in Iowa City area that provides that type of connections. Bailey asked if regionally Iowa City is competitive in terms of technology in internet connections. Raso said that Iowa is not competitive with Cedar Rapids area, for example. Elliot said that it is disappointing to find out that Iowa City, with the University of Iowa is not the most technologically advanced in the region, or even in the State of Iowa. Bailey asked what are the possibilities for changing the existing situation. Raso said that companies like Liberty Communications need to feel that is economically feasible to come and develop. Bailey said that she would like to find what fiber optics currently exists under ground, and who controls it, to determine how to connect it and make it useful for the entire community. Raso said that they had a meeting in which a person from the University of Iowa explained the existing technology, advances, and usage. He said that it was then in his hand to set up a smaller meeting to determine what could be done, and he will do it. Elliot said that the meeting had been an eye opener. He said that he would like to find out what is the financial cost needed for improvements. BUSINESS VISIT UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF FUTURE ISSUES Bailey and Nasby will visit CEC, Communication Engineering Co. Elliot and Nasby will go to ACT. SET NEXT MEETING UPDATE Next regular meeting was tentatively scheduled for September 20, 2005 at 8:30 AM. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:37 AM. s :/pcdlminuteslecodev12005/08-15-05 doc MEMORANDUM DATE: August 31, 2005 TO: Council Economic Development Committee FROt4: Steven Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinato RE: Proposed Business Assistance for Loparex Inc. - Iowa City Plant ABN AIVlRO, a holding company with subsidiaries in commercial banking operations, investment banking and other related financial activities, is in the final stages of acquiring Loparex Inc. The Netherlands-based company has 97,000 employees in 60 countries, and coated-film operations in North Carolina, Illinois and Alabama. Loparex's Iowa City Plant currently employs 201 persons. The Loparex facility in Iowa City is competing for several new product lines. The product lines being sought are directly related to the creation and retention of 15 jobs (9 created and 6 retained). Loparex anticipates that approximately $6.32 million of new investment in equipment and site improvements to the Iowa City Plant will be needed. To assist them with this project, Loparex is asking the City to sponsor a Community Economic Betterment Account (CEBA) application to the State of Iowa for $75,000. The State of Iowa requires that local jurisdictions sponsor these applications and provide a minimum match of 50% for CEBA applications. In addition to the CEBA application, Loparex Corporation is also eligible for the State's High Quality .lobs Program and job training resources. The total request from the State of Iowa will be $217,500. Loparex's application to the City of Iowa City for financial assistance is for a grant in the amount of $75,000 to be used for equipment and machinery, which will enable them to create and retain at least 15 jobs. Through this expansion, Loparex will also be making some site improvements including a new 7,500 square foot addition. These new site improvements will increase the tax base of the Iowa City plant If this project is approved, staff is requesting that the Council Economic Development Committee make a formal recommendation to the City Council regarding an amount for the local financial assistance and the terms (e.g. Iow-interest loan, grant or forgivable loan). If you need additional information, please contact me at 356-5248 or via e-mail at Steven- Nasby@iowa-city.orq. APPLICATION FOR BUSINESS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE CITY OF IOWA CITY Economic Development Division 2005 Application for Business Financial Assistance Projects INSTRUCTIONS · An "Application for Business Financial Assistance Projects" should be completed when requesting financial assistance to directly assist a private business. An "Application for Economic Development Support Projects" should be completed for projects and programs that support economic development activities such as micro-business enterprise training programs, area business development programs, or specific area fa(;ade renovation programs. · Prior to completing an application, an applicant is strongly encouraged to contact the City's Economic Development Coordinator to discuss the project for which they are requesting funding. (See contact information at bottom of this page). · If this application is reproduced, it must remain in the original format and order in its entirety, or the application may be returned for correction. An electronic copy of the application is available in Microsoft Word or on the City's Web site (www.icgov.org). · Fill out the application completely. If any questions are left unanswered or required attachments are not submitted, an explanation for the omission must be included. · Only typed applications will be accepted and reviewed. · Application Deadlines: The City Council Economic Development Committee meets the third Thursday of the month. Completed applications for Business Financial Assistance projects should be submitted to the Economic Development Coordinator two weeks prior to the meeting at which the applicant wishes to have the Committee review the application. However, under special circumstances the Economic Development Committee will call special meetings to review Business Financial Assistance Applications. · Submit completed applications, with attachments to: Steven Nasby Community and Economic Development Coordinator City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone: (319) 356-5248 Fax: (319) 356-5217 t 2005 c:~docurnents and settings~snasby~Jocal settir~gs\temporary internet files\olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance.doc RUG 31 '05 11:25 FR LOPAREX INC 630 ?34 2693 TO 91319356521? P.02/04 City of Iowa City Applica. ti.on for Business Financial Assistance ~inanelal Assistance: ~: Loparex Inc. .Name of Authorized Person to Obliqate the Business: Paul Steigleder or Robert Sasso Business Address: Local - 2000 Industrial Park Road, Iowa City, IA 52240 Corporate - 7700 Griffin Way, Willowbrook, IL 60527 Business Co!~tact Person: Local - Paul Steigleder ~-~e: Operations Manager Business Conta~ Person_: Corp. Robert Sasso 'r'rtle: Engineering Projeot Manager Telephone: Local - 319-341-5015 Fax: 319-351-8977 Telephone: Corp. - 630-734-2867 Fax: 630-734-2693 E.mail Address'. paul.steigleder~ Ioparex.com _R~iness Federal ID: #:36-3029659 and Consolidated Tax ID #13-3651285 Date of Application Submittal: August 24,2005 Release of Information and Certification NOTE: Please read carefully bef°re 'igo~i:L I here we ermission to the City by g' p '~isci~) ' ' ion and erform other relateo · · , contaot the company's fin c~al ~nstitut , P .... /_.. ke credit checks ma. ........... L. ........hi,, evaluation of -- ' t confidentiality~ guaramee~. sentetions, warranties or statements made or furnished to the City in connection with this application are true and correct in all material respects. I understand that it is a criminal violation under Iowa law to engage in deception and knowingly make, or cause to be made, directly or indirectly, a false statement in writing for the purpose of procuring economic development assistance from a state agency or political subdivision. SIGNATURE OF C~R AUTHORIZED TO OBLIGATE BUSINESS: NOTE: The City will not provide assistance in situations where it is determined that any repre- sentation, warranty or statement made in connection with this application is inoorrect, false, misleading or erroneous in any matedal respect. If assistance has already been provided by the city prior to discovery of the incorrect, false or misleading representation, the city may initiate legal action to recover city funds. 2 u:Xw~rd',iowa ci[y ~,pl)llca§0n 10r city a.~sistence.~oc Section 1: Description of Business and Proposed Project 1.1. Describe in detail the proposed "project" (for example, company relocation, plant expansion, remodeling, new product line, size of building expansion, number of new jobs, amount of investment in machinery and equipment etc.): The release liner market is moving away from the current coated paper products and moving towards coated plastic film products. This is most notable in the current medical packaging and roofing material markets. In order to keep up with this current trend and allow the Iowa City plant to remain a viable production facility into the future, Loparex is proposing to add a new blown film line to its current production machinery. The first phase of this plan is to build an addition to the plant capable of supporting film lines, and purchase and install one film line with all of its required support equipment. Loparex currently has coated film operations in North Carolina, Illinois, Alabama, and Iowa. New company ownership, which will be completed in September 2005, will work with existing Loparex management to determine the most appropriate location for the new film line and future technologies. 1.2. Provide a description and history of business: · ' t Loparex ~s the world s larges manufacturer of siliconized release liner. Loparex is the industry's technology leader offering the broadest product line of single-sided, double-sided, and differential release papers and films. Products manufactured at the Iowa City facility are shipped to customers world-wide. The primary markets served by Loparex's Iowa City site are medical, graphic arts, automotive, label, tape, pharmaceutical, and industrial. Loparex has been operating in Iowa City since 1968. Primary competitors are: Akrosil, Douglas Hanson, Ehinelander, Assi, and Enterprise, with no competitive locations in Iowa. Annual Sales (Most Recent): Iowa City: $89,130,000 Corp. Total: $239,000,000 ( year 2004) Projected Total Sales: Iowa City: Year 1:$92,200,000 Year 2:$96,600,000 Year 3:$100,200,000 1.3. Describe the organizational structure of the business, including any parent companies, subsidiaries, sister companies, etc. Corporation. 1.4. List the names of the business owners and the percent of ownership held by each. Publicly held Corporation 1.5. List the business' five-digit and Six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes or the primary and secondary Standard Industrial Codes (SIC codes)). SIC: 2891 NAICS: 325520 3 2005 c:~documents and settings~snasby\local settings~temporaP/internet flles~olk2f43~iowa city application for city assistance.doc 1.6. Will the project involve a transfer of operations or jobs from any other Iowa City or Johnson County facility or replace operations or jobs currently being provided by another Iowa City or Johnson County company? If yes, please indicate the facility(s) and/or company(s) affected. No. Loparex has plants with similar capabilities and product lines located at Dixon, IL., and Eden, NC. These sites have sufficient land and facilities to support this planed expansion. Rockingham County in North Carolina has historically been very supportive, and given generous assistance to Loparex. 1.7. What date will the project begin? Loparex would like to start building construction and ordering of equipment during the early fourth quarter of 2005, and have this line in full production by early second quarter of 2006. The total project estimated investment would be $6.3 million. 1.8. Has any part of the project been started? If yes, please describe. No Section 2: Financial Contributions to the Proposed Project 2.1. What type and amount of financial assistance are you requesting from the City (for example, grant, forgivable loan, loan, property tax exemption, tax increment financing rebate, etc.)? Financial assistance from the CDBG Economic Development Fund or Council Economic Development Fund. Forgivable loan in the amount of $75,000. 2.1a. If Community Development Block Grant Funds are being requested; please describe how the proposed project addresses the priorities, strategies, and goals cited in CITY STEPS 2006-2010. The City Steps plan encourages the "expansion and retention of business and industry that meets the State's CEBA wage thresholds" (p, 124). This project will create employment that pays wages well in excess of the State's CEBA thresholds. Currently the CEBA threshold is $13.38 per hour. Loparex will be creating 9 jobs and retaining 6 jobs that average $19.56 per hour plus benefits. 2.2. Explain why assistance is needed from the City, and why it cannot be obtained elsewhere. (Specific supporting documentation evidenced by cash flow statements, income statements, etc., is requested.) If the City did not provide financial assistance, could the project proceed? This will be a new line of business for Loparex. Loparex is looking to become vertically integrated by having the capability to supply blown film products which are currently supplied from outside sources (outside both Loparex and the State of Iowa). This film will be used in our process for the manufacture of release liner, not only in Iowa City, but in our other three domestic locations as well. Although Iowa City is our preferred choice for location of this project, Loparex has two other plant locations that we have deemed suitable for this endeavor. Naturally with the large capital investment required to bring this expansion to fruition, the assistance offered by State and local agencies will play a significant roll in the final selection of the site. 4 2005 c:~documents and settings~snasby\local settings\temporary internet files\olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance.doc Loparex has facilities in Illinois and North Carolina that produce the same products as that found in Iowa City. With a new ownership team coming on board in September, local management would like to be poised to present an iron-clad proposal for why this new product should be manufactured in Iowa City. Loparex has similar facilities in Alabama, Illinois, and North Carolina. Illinois and North Carolina are also under consideration as viable sites for this expansion. Due to their sagging textile, furniture, and tobacco industries North Carolina has been particularly aggressive in offering incentives to attract new businesses and diversify their industrial base. As an example: for the 2003 expansion ($3.5 million total project vs. this project at $6.3 million) to Loparex's North Carolina plant, Rockingham county alone offered over $96,000 in cash. For the original 1996 plant construction and commissioning, North Carolina State, County and City governments provided Loparex with a 119,00 square foot building, 10.6 acres of land, 1.5 miles of rail siding, employee training for over 100 employees, and 10 years of tax incentives. The Business is deciding between a site in Iowa (site A) and a site in another state (site B) for its project. The Business argues that the project will cost less at site B and will require a subsidy to equalize costs in order to locate at site A. The objective here is to quantify the cost differential between site A and site B. What measures were analyzed to determine the amount and form of assistance needed? North Carolina's incentives as outlined above. Worker's Compensation Cost per 1,000 man hours worked: Iowa $58.35 vs NC $11.30 = $1,468 per year Average hourly wage: Iowa $20.57 vs. NC $16.35 = $131,664 per year Construction costs: Iowa is 16.12% higher than North Carolina (per RS Means) = $138,433 for the building. 2.3. In what form is the business contribution to the project? Please explain clearly (for example, sale of stock, equity investments, subordinated debt, etc.). Project financing will come from internal resources at Loparex or its parent company which may include cash\equity or the issuance of debt. 2.4. Identify all agencies or institutions involved in the project (financial and othervvise) and what their involvement is: · Loparex is the applicant and will provide financing for the proposed project. · Iowa Department of Economic Development (IDED) is being asked to provide financial assistance through the CEBA program and High Quality Jobs program in the total amount of $217,500 · Iowa City Area Development Group (ICAD) has provided Loparex with information and is currently assisting Loparex in the application process for CEBA, High Quality Jobs program and City funds. · City of Iowa City is being asked to provide financial assistance with the proposed project in the amount of $75,000. 2.5. What type and amount of security will the assisted business provide the City? If no security is offered, an explanation must be provided. Note: as a general rule, for those businesses not publicly traded, personal guarantees are required in addition to other pledged business assets. Mortgage $. What seniority or position?. $ 2005 c:~ocuments and setting$~nasb¥~ocal settings~ternporary internet files~o~k2f43~owa city application for city assistance.doc Lien on $ What seniority or position? Personal guarantee $. Other: A forgivable loan\grant is being requested from the City of Iowa City. The Company will issue a Corporate Guaranty. If necessary to secure the City's assistance the company would consider a security instrument, such as a UCC on equipment or letter of credit, for a term of up to three years. 2.6. Summary oT ~roje¢~ ~u~ ,:,,,u Proy,,sed Financin~ Sources Use of Funds Cost Source A Source B Source C Source D Land Acquisition :$ 0 $ $ $ $ Site Preparation ,$ 193i200 $ $ $ $193,200 Building Acquisition $ 0 : $ $ $ $ Bud ng Construction $ ~ 6i§~5~0 $12,500 $ $ $598,570 $ $ $50,000 Building Remodeling $ .: ;50~0~:I $ Mfg. Machinery & Equip. ; $~,ii:6~i~ .! $192,000 $ $75,000 $3,961,664 Other Machinery & Equip. ;~$ $ $ $ $181,009 Rack'n¢, Shelving etc.* ;$ ~i000; ;~: $ $ $ $50,000 Computer Hardware $ i $ $ $ $5,000 Computer Software $ $ $5,000 Furniture & Fixtures $ . $ $ $ $1,000 Working Capital $ 800i~ $ $ $ $800,000 Research & Development $ $13,000 $ $ $100,000 Job Trainin9 $20,000 $ $80,000 Start Up Expense $ §0',~i'!: $ $ $ $50,000 $ $ * Racking, Shelving and Conveyor Equipment used in Warehouse or Distribution Center Projects Does the Business plan to lease a facility? [] Yes X No If yes, please provide the Annual Base Rent Payment (lease payment minus property taxes, insurance, and operating/maintenance expenses) and the length of the lease agreement. PROPOSED FINANCING Source of Funds Amount Form of Funds Rate Term Conditions I Additional Information (Loan, Grant, In- Include when funds will be disbursed; if loan, Kind Donation, etc.) whether payments are a level term, balloon, etc. Source A: IDED $217,500 Forgivable Loan, Refund Requesting a grant and\or rebate of sales taxes or of Sales and Use tax, R&D tax credit refundable tax credits Source B: Kirkwood $20,000 260E job training with Job training to be provided by Kirkwood CC. Kirkwood Community College Source C: Local $75,000 Forgivable Loan With additional assessed value of roughly $700,000, the incremental tax paid by Loparex would be roughly Government $21,000, or a little over three years of 100% TIF on the new value. Source D: Business $6,075,443 6 2005 c:~ocurnents and settings~snasby~local settings\temporary intemet files\olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance.doc 2.7. Terms of Proposed Financing mFor example: forgivable loan, direct loan, grant, equity, tax abatement, etc. Loparex is requesting that the assistance from the State of Iowa and City of Iowa City be in the form of a forgivable loan based on job creation and retention. The assistance requested from the City of Iowa City is $5,000 per job (15 jobs created\retained x $5,000 = $75,000) a significant portion of these funds will be used as match for the State's CEBA program being requested for Loparex. In addition to the jobs, Loparex is going to be making capital improvements at the iowa City plant which will increase the tax base for the community. The additional tax base being created is estimated to generate about $12,250 in additional property taxes. 2.8. Generally a decision by the City on this application can be expected within 30 days of receipt of the application. If there is an urgent need for a more immediate decision on this application, please indicate the desired timeframe and the reason for the urgency. Loparex has an application for State of Iowa assistance (CEBA and High Quality Jobs Program) on file with IDED that was submitted on August 22, 2005. We are requesting that the City Council consider this request for financial assistance and approve a resolution of support for the CEBA application at the September 6, 2005 City Council meeting. Loparex would like to start building construction and ordering of equipment during the early fourth quarter of 2005, and have this line in full production by early second quarter of 2006. Section 3: Quality of Jobs to Be Created 3.1. How many employees are currently employed by the company worldwide (total employment including all locations, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, etc.)? Loparex, Inc. has approx. 635 employees with in the USA. The Loparex group with plants in six countries has a combined employment of over 1,000. 3.2. If an existing Iowa City business, how many total individuals have been employed by the company at the Iowa City facility during the past year? Iowa City - 201 employees 3.3. If awarded funds, how many new full-time employees will you add to the payroll at the Iowa City facility within 12 and 24 months of the award date? The business acknowledges if it fails to create the jobs pledged below by the end of the project period and maintains them for a period of time (usually 36 months from the date of the award), it may be required to reimburse City funds for the employment shortfall, if the loan~grant was based on job creation. Full-Time: 10 Part-Time: 0 12 months 12 months Cumulative Cumulative Full-Time: 4 Part-Time: 0 24 months 14 24 months 0 Cumulative Cumulative 7 2005 c:~ocuments and settings~snasby\local settings\temporal/internet fl]es\olk2f43~iowa city application for city assistance.doc Note: Jobs created or retained using Community Development Block Grant Funds must be to" "held by" or "available Iow- or moderate-income individuals. 3.4. What is the estimated annual payroll for the new employees resulting from this project? Average base wage for the new employees is $15.31\hour. (9 employees x $15.31\hr x 2080 hours per year) = estimated new payroll of $286,603 3.5. What is the starting average hourly wage rate (not including fringe benefits) projected to be: For the new employees? $15.85 to $22.21 per hour plus benefits. For existing employees? $15.85 to $22.21 per hour plus benefits. 3.6. In the following table, list positions and hourly rates for each job classification to be created and retained. List of Positions and Hourly Rate for Created and Retained Positions (use additional ~,,==~ if needed) Job Title Skills, Education, °r Experience I Number °f Retained (R) °r I Starting °r Current Wage Required Jobs Created (C) Rate Year 1 of the Project Primary operator Web handling and extrusion experience 2 C $22.21 * Machine Helper Web handling, machinery operating 2 C $15.85'* expedence 2 R $22.21 * Coater Operator 2 R $15,85 ** Coater Helper 2 R $19,32 *** Roll Wrap Operator Year t Subtotal 10 ~ ~ Year 2 of the Project Primary operator Web handling and extrusion experience 2 C $22.21 * UachineHelper Web handling, machinery operating 2 C $15.85'* experience Year 2 Subtotal 4 ~ ~ Year 3 of the Project Process Engineer 1 C $26.44 Year 3 Subtotal 1 ~ ~ Total Number of Retained Jobs: 6 *average base rate is $17.16, can go to $22.02, However because Total Number of Created Jobs: 9 employees work 12 hour shifts 36 hrs. one week and 48 hrs the next, employees work 84 hours Bi-weekly and get paid for 106 hours. ** average base rate is $12.56, can go to $15.48, as above' employees work 84 hours but get paid for 106.***average base rate is $15.31, can go to $19.17, as above' employees work 84 hours but get paid for 106. The 15 positions retained and created have an effective average wage of $19,56. 8 2005 c:~ocuments and settings~snasb~ocal settings\temporary intemet files~olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance.doc 3.7. Will any of the current employees lose their jobs if the project does not proceed? If yes, how many? Explain why: Yes, six existing positions will be displaced should this project not occur in the Iowa City facility. The reason for the loss of jobs has to do with the release liner market moving away from the current coated paper products and moving towards coated plastic film products. 3.8. Please describe the types of worker safety programs that would be available for your employees. The Iowa City Plant is home to Loparex's Divisional Safety & Health Manager. He directs over 26 different programs for the Iowa City employees. These include all State of Iowa, IOSHA, and federally required programs. Employees receive regular training in; Energy Control Program, Powered Industrial Trucks, Bounding and Grounding, Personal Protective Equipment, Blood Born Pathogens, Confined Space, Hazardous Chemicals, Hot Work, Contractor Safety, Hearing Conservation, Fire Protection and Fire Extinguisher training. Additionally, Kirkwood Community Collage administers training in; first aid, CPR, and AED. 3.9. Does the business provide standard medical and dental insurance for full-time employees? If so, what percentage of the standard medical and dental insurance package expense does the company provide? Plan Provisions Employee Benefits Total Annual Cost Portion of Total (Include deductibles, coinsurance %, Provided by the (show on a per Annual Cost Paid office visit co-payments, annual out-of- Business employee basis) by the Business* pocket maximums, face amounts, ~ ~~~ Famil~~ -$3707 $7786 $1988 $5383 John Deere HMO Zero deductible Medical/Health $20 co-pay Insurance $10 co-pay Prescription card $318 $784 $162 $530 100% for Checkup exam; $50 deductible Dental Insurance for all other services; then 80120 for )rimary services and 50~50 for major services $1000 maximum per year, NA NA NA NA Vision insurance $162 $162 $50,000 + AD & D for each employee Life Insurance $1000 $1000 13 weeks @ 100% of base wage Short Term Disability(estimate) 13 weeks @ 66.7% of base wage (STD) plan is self insured. $136 $70 After 26 weeks of disability plan will Long Term Disability provide 66.7% of base wage until age 62 (LTD) 9 2005 c:\documents and settings~nasby~ocal settings\temporary internet files\olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance,doc Section 4: Economic Impact 4.1. Please document how much of your operating expenditures (raw materials, supportive services, machinery, equipment, and labor) will be spent within Johnson County. The payroll of this project (15 jobs) will exceed $570,000 annually, or more than $19/hr. Supporting this project also provides additional security for the existing jobs because if this new production line is successful it will help to secure the viability of the entire plant. Loparex pays approximately $200,000 in taxes to local taxing bodies annually. This project will provide for additional tax base. Shoemaker and Haaland - iowa City engineering firm contracted to design the building. Additionally: $858,770 is budged for construction work; building and remodeling that will be done by yet to be selected local Iowa contractors. 4.2. What Johnson County companies do you expect to sell to that currently buy from non-eastern Iowa companies? What percentage of your sales will fall into this category? None 4.3. What other Johnson County companies could be considered to be your competitors? None 4.4. How will this project benefit the City/County? Increased tax base for the City and County along with the creation or retention of high paying jobs. Through this project a local, major employer, will be able to vertically integrate its processes which will help keep the plant viable and provide future opportunities for expansion. The impact of Loparex's operation to Iowa City and the surrounding area is substantial, given the company currently employs 201 people in our market. The payroll of this project (15 jobs) will exceed $570,000 annually, or more than $19/hr. Supporting this project also provides additional security for the existing jobs because if this new production line is successful it will help to secure the viability of the entire plant. Loparex pays approximately $200,000 in taxes to local taxing bodies annually. This project will provide for additional tax base. Estimating a 6% individual state tax liability, this project would provide the state of Iowa with more than $28,000 in annual individual tax income from the 9 new and 6 retained positions. Given the better than average state and local wage for these positions, it is also appropriate to estimate that the state would receive considerable revenue from the sales and use taxes these individuals will be paying to the state of iowa. Finally, income paid to individuals working on the construction of their proposed expansion will also provide a one time increase in state income taxes. in addition, the impact the proposed project will have on current employees, including the potential for increased skills and wages are also a benefit to the community. With new technology proposed to come to the plant, existing employees will have the opportunity to increase their skills by work ng on this new production line. Loparex believes strongly in promoting from within their organization. The company will also have to backfill existing positions that were vacated as existing employees move into this new 10 2005 c:~documents and settings~snasby\local settings\temporary internet files~olk2f43~Jowa city application for city assistance.doc operation. Loparex continues to work with its vendors and organizations like Kirkwood Community College to maintain and improve the skills of its workforce. 4.5. How will this project grow the property tax base of Iowa City? Construction of an 7,500 square foot addition to the existing plant, remodeling of existing buildings and other site improvements (e.g. parking lot). 4.6. Beyond the present project, what future growth potential is there for the Iowa City operation? The investment will provide the Iowa City facility with the ability to expand, upgrade, and modernize its capabilities. The sole purpose of this investment is to begin the process of positioning the Iowa City facility to expand its capabilities and cement itself as a center of excellence within Loparex's release liner business. Section 5: Environmental Impact 5.1. Please describe the energy and resource efficiency programs, waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs at your Iowa City operation. The Iowa City plant has an extensive waste reduction program that makes pay outs to its employees based on reducing production waste. Loparex is continuously looking for ways to reduce its energy consumption and waste stream levels. Loparex is just this month entering into an agreement with MidAmerican Energy to reduce our electrical lighting load through the replacement of plant lighting with new high efficiency fixtures. This will result in reducing our electrical consumption by over $55,000 per year. This plant has recently installed automatic hatching equipment that reduced the hazardous liquid waste by over 35% on one of our coating lines. This has proved so successful that we are in the process of expanding this system to our other lines. The facility currently disposes of its plastic and paper wastes through a local recycler. 5.2. Do you use recycled materials in the production of any products or through the provision of any services at your facility? If so, please describe. Over 2,700,000 pounds of the paper products coated annually at this facility come from a recycled source. The proposed new plastic film line will have the latest state of the art recycling equipment installed which will allow for up to 10% of the final product to come from internal recycling that would otherwise have to go to a landfill. 5.3. Will you be treating, transporting, storing, and disposing above ground, on or about your business premises, in tanks or otherwise, for any length of time or for any purpose: petroleum products, agricultural or other chemicals, waste oil or other liquid waste, or any other inflammable, corrosive, reactive, or explosive liquid or gas? If yes, please specify. 2005 c:\documents and settings~snasb~ocal settings\temporarY intemet files~olk2f43~Jowa city application for city assistance.doc Loparex currently keeps solvents and flammable chemicals in an approved solvent storage building. This project will not increase any solvent or chemical requirements above the present day level. 5.4. Will the Iowa City operation develop renewable energy resources or products that conserve energy? If so, please describe. This plant is not an energy producer, however every effort is made on an ongoing basis to reduce our energy consumption. Our products do get used by our customers in the medical and building materials markets, that in some instances are utilized by them to make modern more energy efficient building materials. Section 6: Community Involvement; Compliance with Law; Repayment Agreement 6.1. Please describe your business' history of contributing to the community through volunteer work, financial contributions, or other means. If a new start-up business, please describe commitment to becoming involved in the community. Loparex is a significant annual contributor to United Way, as well as other local organizations. Loparex is an investor in the Iowa City Development Group. 6.2. Has the business been cited or convicted for violations of any federal or state laws or regulations within the last five years (including environmental regulations, Occupational Safety And Health laws, Fair Labor Standards, the National Labor Relations Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act)? If yes, please explain the circumstances of the violation(s). No 12 2005 c:',documents and settings~snasby\local settings\temporary internet flles\olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance,doc 6.3. Financial assistance from the City of Iowa City requires a repayment clause in the loan agreement with the City. The repayment clause requires a prorated repayment of the financial assistance if the company does not meet its job attainment obligation and other obligations of this agreement. Is the company willing to enter into a loan agreement that contains a repayment clause? Yes Section 7: Required Attachments Check off each attachment submitted. If not submitted, explain why. N/A Business plan (if new business) [ X ] Profit and loss statements (3 year historical and 2 year projections) [ X ] Balance sheets (3 year historical and 2 year projection of Cash Flow) [ ] Letters of commitment of project funds (from banks, applicant, etc.). Project will be funded between Loparex and its parent company, approval of funds is dependent upon receiving a favorable response from the City and State on this application. [ X ] Description of fringe benefits provided to employees (see question 3.9) [ X ] Copies of the company's quarterly Iowa "Employer's Contribution and Payroll Report" for the past year and a copy of the most recent monthly payroll register [ X ] Map indicating the location of the project within the community [ X ] Cost estimates for construction, machinery/equipment, permanent working capital, and purchases. (see section 2.6 above) [ ] Certificate of Good Standing from the Iowa Secretary of State or an authorization to conduct business in Iowa. Sent to Secretary of State for Certificate to be forwarded. 13 2005 c:~documents and settings~snasby\local settings\temporaP/intemet fi~es~olk2f43\iowa city application for city assistance.doc [ X ] Certificate of Incumbency listing the current board of directors and current officers if a corporation or a listing of the general partners if a partnership Corporate resolution authorizing the application for City funds To be forwarded. Corporate signatory authorization naming an officer to execute the City application and City loan documents, if approved To be forwarded Other Explanation/other comments: Upon review of a submitted application, the City reserves the right to request additional information in order to assist the City with its evaluation of an application. '14 2005 c:\documents and settings~snasby\local settings\temporary internet files~)lk2f43~owa city application for city assistance,doc Loparex Inc. Review of Financial Statements December 31, 2003 and 2002 Loparex Inc. Review of Financial Statements December 31, 2004 and 2003 Backing Your Products, Backing Your Business. To Whom It May Concern, Regarding our Iowa City manufacturing facility, we have had no OSHA violations since 1999. The main issues we have had with the IDNR have related to discrepancies in the wording of our permit. Those have been mutually addressed with the state agency. However because of their current backlog the permit resubmittal has been in their hands for almost a year now. They are just this month beginning to give it a final review. Since we worked together to develop it, I suspect approval will be granted in the next month or so. Other than that we have had a few minor violations which have been addressed. Robert Brownlee Member of the tJl~M.l(O~rnene Orot{~ LOPAREX INC. vnvw. lopa~ex.oom 7700 GdfflnWay Tel: 6~0-7~4-2700 WlllovForook, IL 60521.5623 Fax: 6~0-734-2690 MapQu~st: Maps 2000 Industrial Park Rd Iowa City IA 52240-2400 US Notes: ¢~zo~ i~i~t,o~m, i~, ~ o2005 N'AVT~ All riqhts reserved. USa Subject to License/Copydgh~ This map is informational only. No representation is made or wam~nty given as to its content. User assumes ail risk of use. MapQuest and its suppliers assume no responsibility for any loss or delay resulting from such use, http://www.mapquest com/maps/print.adp?mapdata--sN3vkVrtUeCZgx3BDKqRuiZUyxySEXStFNgtrBBm-.. 8/25/2005 AUG 2G ~05 17:47 FR L_OPARE× INC G30 734 2693 TO 913193565217 P.01×04 MapQuest: Maps ZOO0 Industrial Park Rd Iowa City IA 52240-2400 US Notes: ~ 21:~5 Mal~u~;t~m, Ine, ~ 02005 All fights reserved. Use SubJecl' to License/CoJp. v,riqht This map is informational only, HO representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assu~nes all risk of use. MapQuest and its suppliers assume no responsibility eot any loss or delay resulting from such uge. htlp://www.mapquest.com/maps/print.adp?mapdata--sN3 vkVrtUeCZgx3BDKqRujZUyxySEXStFNguBBm.,. 8/25/2005 AUG 29 '05 18:40 FR LOPARE× INC 6~0 ?~4 269~ TO 91~193565217 P.02/02 AUG, 29.2005 4:IOPM SECRETARY OF STATE NO. 272 P, 3/3 C~TIFICATE 0~ AUTHORI~ATION Nan: LOPAREX INC. Authorized date, 07/11/2001 Duration: pERPETUAL State of Incorporation: Illinois cr~wgTE~ j, CULV~R, secretary 0% State of ~he State 05 Iowa, custodian of ~_ke reoords of info.oration, c~ify ~t ~h~ o~ora~ion ~ on t~ ~er~i~ica~e ~s authorized to Iowa B~i~s Co~oration A~ ~ ~ said ~y co~oration, ~d that the ~st ~cen= bfe~ial co.orate re~i~d has been filed ~ t~ Secreta~ o: State. ** TOTAL PAGE. 82 ** '05 1'7:49 FR LOP~REX IblC 630 ?34 ~ly ~e~ D~-~j~ ~.) A~I 30, 199~ Issued 1~ comm~ p~o~y Esu~ h ~e~ ~ ~ n~me ch~nSe tom D~b~ ~s, ~c. ~ ~hja ~c. A~ 27, 2001' Iss~d l~ common ~s ~ ~M-K~m~e ~a~ ~c. ~d ~d 100 ~h~res ~ly issu~ to Lohj~ conne~on ~ B, A~O~D ~ ~S~ Au~o~d sh~s 100 common $10 p~ ~ue e~ h~ ~d ~~ Shes 100 comm~ .~M-K~m~e ~s~ Inc. (~) . . C. ~CO~~ON S~ of ~~ ~]inois l~e 29, 1979 Sm~s of~o~ ~ 1979 C~lif~s 1983 D. D~CTO~ ~ O~E~ 'D~ ~ussi V~ ~a~ L. Taylor ~g~ E. B~e ~c~-~ ~a~ L. T ~lor Rog~ E. B~e ~c ~si~ CMefF~ Office, Se~ l~cs ~ Mi~ S~or V~e Dc~ Holb~ ~ S~ 18 i:MJG ~ '1~5 17:49 FR LOPAREX INC 630 ?34 :L:~93 TO 913193565217 P.I~4/I~4 UNANIMOUS WRITTEN CONSENT OF Tm~ D]RF.L-~ORS OF LOPARNX GROUP TOTAL PAGE.04 ..... "'~" , RING I., ~.:. ~ ~ ---. ~ ~ LEGEND ~ 6" PCC PAVING ~.,.,~ o, m, .~:~ .¢t-o~..~ to..~ ~,: ...... , ..... C1 AUG 31 '~ 11:2~ FR LOPAREX INC 630 73~ 2693 TO 91319356521'7 P.03x04 3t-99-~ 10:5E) ~ BU I~XEC,FP,~ P,iili,,q~ ............... * .............. UNANIMOUS.WRI'I~N CONSI~k'T O1~ THI~.D!RI~CTO.RS OF : LOPAREX INC.' an l}iinois corporation . The ulldel~i~llP, g, being mil of Llle d' .u!~u~ of LOPARBX INC. (rig "Corpomdo.~?,;in Ilea of hoMin$ a formal meefini,: hereby.core,hr t~ the adoption of, ~nd sdcpts, in with (he lfllnols ausinm~ Coq)oration Act, the fnllowtn8 resolutio~ with the same ~ a~l.' aff-~t u if su~h, re'SOlution had t~n adop~d at a. duly ~onv~nod me~ing of the dlr~-,tors~. ' W!~,i~'AS, the City oF Iowa City may provide 'economic development a~ia~anl:e .to ~, Loparex Inc. is applying for financial assis~ from th~ City of Iowa City Sta~oflOVra.' '/. ....... :..... ~$, Lol~rex Inc. authorizes Ro~. Sink~, V~ Pr~id~nt & CFO, for LOparex, l~.. to ne~otl_n_~ on hell, If of the oompany; ~ NOW, ~n~Rlil, BE IT RR!IOL _V!en BY TI~ BOARD OF D~ORS THAT: Roscr B!_~ke, or his designc~, i~ hereby autho6z~l to approve and exeo~e all rglui~,.d do~unenis Fchting to tim aPPlic4~tion ~,~' finanoial ns~ismn°~ from the S~M of Iow~ and City'of. lov~ City, IN ~ ~F, this Wri~n Consent of the Directors of the Board o~ Dircqmr. s'of lite Corpormion bas _t~ee__n duly executed:as of the August 30, 2005. Mihel ~ Jack L. T~ylor .. AUG 31 '0S ll:2G FR LOPAREX INC 630 ?34 2693 TO 913193565217 P.B4Y04 UNANIMOUS WRrITEN CONSENT OF TIlE DIRECTORS OF LOPAREX INC. an Illinois corporation The undersign~l, bein~ all of the direotors of LOPAREX INC. (the "Corporation"), in lieu of holding a formal meeting, hereby consent lo gle adoption of, and adopt, in sc~ordsnce with thc Illinois Bllsilless Corporation Act, the following resolution with the same force and cffect as ff such resolution had been adopted at a duly convened m~*ting of the directors: W~r~.REAS, the City of Iowa City may prov/dc economic d~v¢lopmcnt assi,sta~cc to busincss~; and WHERe, AS, Loparex Inc. is applying for financial assistance from thc City of Iowa City and Sta~e of Iowa. Vin~.REAS, Loparex Inc. authorizes Roger Blake, Vice President & CFO, for Loparex, Inc. to negotiate on behalf of thc company; and NOW, TW~,REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT: Roger Blake, or his designcc, is hereby authorized to approve and execute all required documents r~lating to the applicaQo~a for financial ~.~istance from the State of Iowa and Cily of Iowa City. Paul VanPinxler~ TOTAL PAGE.04 ** I O\.NA Mary Lawyer, Acting Director /!;/~ ! changing,. Iowa Depadmen, of Economic Development Application for Financial Assistance Section A - Applicant & Project Information Business Development Division Iowa Department of Economic Development 200 East Grand Avenue Des Moines, Iowa 50309 www.iowalifechan.qin.q.com 8/4/2005 Instructions 1. All applicants shall complete Section A of the Application for Financial Assistance and attach only those section(s) for the program(s) to which the applicant is applying. Pro.qram Download and Complete Community Economic Bettermeant Account (CEBA) Section B Enterprise Zone Program (EZ) Section C High Quality Job Creation Program (HQJC) Section D Entrepreneurial Ventures Assistance Program (EVA) Section E Value Added Agricultural Products & Processes Financial Assistance Program (VAAPFAP) Section F Economic Development Set-Aside Program (EDSA) Section G 2. Please visit the IDED Web site, http://www.iowalifechan,qqin,q.com/applications/bus dev/index.html or contact IDED at (515) 242-4819 to see if this version of the application is still current. 3. Before filling out this application form, please read all applicable sections of the 2005 Iowa Code and Iowa Administrative Code (rules). http://www4.1e.qis.state.ia.us/IAChtml/261.htm 4. Only typed or computer-,qenerated applications will be accepted and reviewed. Any material change to the format, questions, or wording of questions presented in this application, will render the application invalid and it will not be accepted. 5. Complete the applicable sections of the application fully; if questions are left unanswered or required attachments are not submitted, an explanation must be included. 6. Use clear and concise language. Attachments should only be used when requested or as supporting documentation. 7. Any inaccurate information of a significant nature may disqualify the application from consideration. 8. Upon completion of the application, please submit the following to the Business Finance Team at IDED: · The original, signed application form and all required attachments · One copy of the application form and all required attachments from which additional copies can easily be made. If electronic copies of the application and required attachments are available, please e-mail these documents to businessfinance@iowalifechan.qin.q.com in addition to submitting the original plus one copy. Business Finance Team Iowa Department of Economic Development 200 East Grand Avenue Des Moines IA 50309 Application Due Dates IDED Board Meeting I Application Due Date September 15, 2005 I August 22, 2005 October 20, 2005 September 26, 2005 November 17, 2005 October 24, 2005 December 15, 2005 November 21,2005 EVA applications will be acted upon every other month starting in March. Section A- Applicant & Project Information 2 Public Records Policies Information Submitted to IDED. The Iowa Department of Economic Development (IDED) is subject to the Open Records law (Iowa Code, Chapter 22). Treatment of information submitted to IDED in this application is governed by the provisions of the Open Records law. All public records are available for public inspection. Some public records are considered confidential and will not be disclosed to the public unless ordered by a court, the lawful custodian of the record, or by another person duly authorized to release the information. Confidential Records. IDED automatically treats the following records as confidential and they are withheld from public disclosure: · Tax Records · Quarterly Iowa Employer's Contribution and Payroll Report prepared for the Iowa Workfome Development Department · Payroll Registers ,, Business Financial Statements and Projections · Personal Financial Statements Other information supplied to IDED as part of this application may be treated as confidential under Iowa Code section 22.7. Following are the classifications of records which are recognized as confidential under Iowa law and which are most frequently applicable to business information submitted to IDED: · Trade secrets [iowa Code §22.7(3)] · Reports to governmental agencies which, if released, would give advantage to competitors and serve no public purpose. [Iowa Code §22.7(6)] · Information on an industrial prospect with which the IDED is currently negotiating. [Iowa Code §22.7(8)] · Communications not required by law, rule or regulation made to IDED by persons outside the government to the extent that IDED could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to the Department if they were made available for general public examination. [Iowa Code §22.7(18)] Information supplied to IDED as part of this application that is material to the application and/or the state program to which the applicant is applying including, but not limited to the number and type of jobs to be created, wages for those jobs, employee benefit information, and project budget, ara considered open records and will not be treated as confidential. Additional Information Available. Copies of Iowa's Open Record law and IDED's administrative rules relating to public records are available from the Department upon request or at http://www.iowalifechan.qin.q.com/downloads/chap169openrecords.doc. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 3 Applicant Information 1. Local: Corporate: Name of Business: Loparex Inc. Loparex, Inc. Address: 2000 Industrial Park Road 7700 Griffin Way City: Iowa City State: IA Zip: 52240 Willowbrook, IL 60527 Contact Person: Paul Steigleder Title: Operations Manager Robert Sasso Engineering Project Manager Phone: (319) 341-5015 Fax: (319) 351-8977 Ph: (630) 734 - 2867 fax: (630) 734 - 2693 Email: paul.stei.qleder@loparex.com Email: Robert.sasso@loparex.com 2. SIC or NAICS Code: 2891; 325520 3. Federal ID Number: 36-3029659 Does the Business file a consolidated tax return under a different tax ID number? X Yes [] No If yes, please also provide that tax ID number: 13-3651285 4. Is the contact person listed above authorized to obligate the Business? X Yes ~']No If no, please provide the name and title of a company officer authorized to obligate the Business: 5. If the application was prepared by someone other than the contact person listed above, please complete the following: In addition to Robed Sasso from Loparex, the following provided preparation of this document: Name: Joe Raso Title: President Organization: Iowa City Area Development Group, Inc. Address: 325 E. Washington Street, Suite 100 City, State, & ZIP Code: Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Phone: 319-354-3939 Fax: 319-338-9958 Email:JRaso@ IowaCityArea.com Sponsor Information Please review the following table to determine who needs to sponsor this application. Depending on the programs being applied for, more than one sponsor may be necessary. Program Acceptable Sponsor CEBA City or County or Community College in which the Project Site is Located EZ Local Enterprise Zone Commission HQJC City or County in which the Project Site is Located EVA City or County in which the Project Site is Located; Local Development Entity; John Pappajohn Entrepreneurial Center; a Small Business Development Center; Business Accelerator; or similar entity VAAPFAP City or County in which the Project Site is Located or Local Development Entity EDS^ City or County in which the Project Site is Located 1. Sponsor Organization: City of Iowa City Official Contact (e.g. Mayor, Chairperson, etc.):Steven Nasby Title: Economic Development Coordinator Address:410 East Washington Street City, State & ZIP Code: Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Phone:319-356-5248 Fax: 319-356-5009 E-mail: steven-nasby@iowa-city.org 2. If IDED needs to contact the sponsor organization with questions, should we contact the person listed above? X Yes [] No, please contact the following person: Name: Title: Address: Section A - Applicant & Project Information 4 · City, State & ZIP Code: Phone: Fax: E-mail: If necessary, please list information on additional sponsors in an attachment. Section A - Applicant & Project Informalion 5 Certification & Release of Information I hereby give permission to the Iowa Department of Economic Development (IDED) to reseamh the Business' history, make credit checks, contact the Business' financial institutions, insurance carriers, and perform other related activities necessary for reasonable evaluation of this application. I also hereby authorize the Iowa Department of Revenue to provide to IDED state tax information pertinent to the Business' state income tax, sales and use tax, and state tax credits claimed. I understand that all information submitted to IDED related to this application is subject to Iowa's Open Record Law (Iowa Code, Chapter 22). I understand this application is subject to final approval by IDED and the Project may not be initiated until final approval is secured. (High Quality Job Creation Program applications may be submitted up to 12 months following the completion ot the project.) I understand that IDED reserves the right to negotiate the financial assistance. Furthermore, I am aware that financial assistance is not available until an agreement is executed within a reasonable time period following approval. I hereby certify that all representations, warranties, or statements made or furnished to IDED in connection with this application are true and correct in all material respect. I understand that it is a criminal violation under Iowa law to engage in deception and knowingly make, or cause to be made, directly or indirectly, a false statement in writing for the purpose of procuring economic development assistance from a state agency or subdivision. For the B~S~,,~,~/:/ Signature Date Name and Title (typed or printed) For the Sponsor(s): Signature Date Name and Title (typed or printed) Please use the following if more than one sponsor is required. (For example, use this ifa signature from the local Enterprise Zone Commission is required in addition to the signature from the Mayor of the sponsoring city.) Signature Date Name and Title (typed or printed) IDED will not provide assistance in situations where it is determined that any representation, warranty, or statement made in connection with this application is incorrect, false, misleading or erroneous in any material respect. If assistance has already been provided prior to discovery of the incorrect, false, or misleading representation, IDED may initiate legal action to recover incentives and assistance awarded to the Business. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 6 Project Information 1. Provide a brief description and history of the Business. Include information about the Business' products or services and its markets and/or customers. Loparex is the world's largest manufacturer of siliconized release liner. Loparex is the industry's technology leader offering the broadest product line of single-sided, double-sided, and differential release papers and films. Products manufactured at the Iowa City facility are shipped to customers world-wide. The primary markets served by Loparex's Iowa City site are medical, graphic arts, automotive, label, tape, pharmaceutical, and industrial. Loparex has been operating in Iowa City since 1968. Primary competitors are: Akrosil, Douglas Hanson, Rhinelander, Assi, and Enterprise, with no competitive locations in Iowa. 2. Business Structure: [] Cooperative X Corporation [] Limited Liability Company [] Not for Profit [] Partnership [] S-Corporation [] Sole Proprietorship 3. Identify the Business' owners. The business, currently owned by UPM-Kymmene Group, Finland, is being sold to ABN AMRO, Netherlands. Does a woman, minority, or person with a disability own the Business?[] Yes X No If yes, is the business certified as a Targeted Small Business? [] Yes [] No 4. List the Business' Iowa Locations and the Current Number of Employees at each Location. Iowa City, Iowa 201 Employees 5. What is the Business' worldwide employment? (Please include employees of parent company, subsidiaries, and other affiliated entities in this figure.) Loparex, Inc. has approx. 635 employees with in the USA. The Loparex group with plants in six countries has a combined employment of over 1,000. The parent company ABN AMRO has over 97,000 employees with over 3,000 locations in more than 60 countries. 6. Briefly describe the proposed project for which assistance is being sought. (Include project timeline with dates, facility size, infrastructure improvements, proposed products/services, any new markets, etc.) The release liner market is moving away from the current coated paper products and moving towards coated plastic film products. This is most notable in the current medical packaging and roofing material markets. In order to keep up with this current trend and allow the Iowa City plant to remain a viable production facility into the future, Loparex is proposing to add a new film line to its current production machinery. This equipment will allow Loparex to manufacture the plastic film base stock used in our down stream processes. The first phase of this plan is to build a 7,480 square foot addition to the plant capable of supporting film lines, and purchase and install a blown film line with all of its required support equipment. Loparex would like to start building construction and ordering of equipment during the early fourth quarter of 2005, and have this line in full production by early second quarter of 2006. The total project estimated investment would be $6.3 million. Loparex currently has coated film operations in North Carolina, Illinois, and Iowa. New company ownership, which will be completed in September 2005, will work with existing Loparex management to determine the most appropriate location for the new film line and future technologies. 7. Project Address: 2000 Industrial Park Road, Iowa City, Iowa 52240 8. Type of Business Project: [] Startup X Expansion of Iowa Company [] New Location in Iowa Section A - Applicant & Project Information 7 [] Relocation from another State 9. Please identify the management at the project location and his/her/their experience. Paul Steigleder- Iowa City Operations Manager: 15 years with Loparex Iowa City, 6 years as Operations Manager. Intimately involved with all operations at the Iowa City location. Robert Sasso - Engineering Project Manager: 30+ years engineering experience, 10 years with Loparex. Has been involved in building numerous plants, additions, and installation of machine lines. Including the 1996 building of Loparex's NC plant, 2003 NC addition with new machine line and 2002 relocation of machine line to Iowa City. Robert Brownlee - VP of Engineering: 35+ years experience, 23 years at Loparex. Oversees all of Loparex's major capital projects and long range planning. Recently involved with the building and start up of Loparex plants in Indiaand China. Jeff Turner - Engineering Manager Iowa City: 20+ years experience, 5 years with Loparex. Jim Walker - Process Engineer: 30+ years experience, 20+ years with Loparex. History of successful machine start ups and installations in Iowa, North Carolina and Wisconsin. Oliver Zoellner - Business Development Manager, 20 years experience in silicones and films, recently involved with the started up a film line similar to this project. Shoemaker and Haaland - Iowa City engineering firm contracted to design the building. 10. Has any part of the project started? [] Yes X No If yes, please explain. Section A- Applicant & Project Information 8 11 Proiect Budget: AMOUNT BLID~ETED Use of Funds CoSt Source A Source B Source C Source D Source E Source F Source G Source H Land Acquisition $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Site Preparation S! 93,200; $ $ $ $193,200 $ $ $ $ Building Acquisition $ :0 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Building Construction $ 6~15,570 $12,500 $ $ $603,070 $ $ $ $ Building Remodeling $ 50,000 $ $ $ $50,000 $ $ $ $ Mfg. Machiner7 & EquiP. $4,169;664: $192,000 $ $75,000 $3,902,664 $ $ $ $ Other Machine~ & Equip. $ 181,009 $ $ $ $181,009 $ $ $ $ Racking, Shelving, etc.* $:50;000 $ $ $ $50,000 $ $ $ $ Computer Hardware $ $ $ $ $5,000 $ $ $ $ Computer Software $ $ $ $ $5,000 $ $ $ $ Furniture&Fixtures $ t000 $ $ $ $1,000 $ $ $ $ Working Capital $ 800,000 $ $ $ $800,000 $ $ $ $ Research & Development $100000 : $13,000 $ $ $87,000 $ $ $ $ Job Training $ 100~000 $ $20,000 $ $80,000 $ $ $ $ Start Up Expense $ 501000 $ $ $ $50,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ TOTAL $6;320,443 $217,500; 1 Racking, Shelving and Conveyor Equipment used in Warehouse or Distribution Center Projects Does the Business plan to lease the facility? [] Yes X No If yes, please provide the Annual Base Rent Payment (lease payment minus property taxes, insurance, and operating/maintenance expenses) and the length of the lease agreement, PROPOSED FINANCING Source of Funds Amount Form of Funds Rate Term Conditions / Additional Information (Loan, Grant, In-Kind Donation, etc.) Include when funds will be disbursed; if loan, whether payments are a level term, balloon, etc. Source A: IDED $217,500 Forgivable Loan, Refund of Sales and Use tax, investment tax credits, R&D tax credits Source B: Other State (e.g. $20,000 260E job training with Kirkwood Community College, DOT, etc. Community College Source C: Local Government $75,000 Either local CDBG or City of Iowa City With additional assessed value of roughly $300,000, the Economic Development Funds incremental tax paid by Loparex would be roughly $12,250, or six )/ears of incremental tax value Source D: Business $6,007,943 Source E: Other Pdvate Sources $ Source F: $ Source G: $ Source H: $ TOTAL $6,320,443 Section A - Applicant & Project Information 9 Please list below any tax benefits (e.g. Investment Tax Credit, Sales Tax Refund, R&D Tax Credit, New Jobs Tax Credit, Property Tax Exemption/Abatement, etc.) that the Business expects to receive and included the estimated value of each tax benefit: Estimating the new facility expansion, Loparex is estimating that the refund of sales and use tax would be approximately $12,500, or 75% of the maximum refund. If qualified, the company would utilize investment tax credits. It is estimated these tax credits would be $117,000, or 75% of the maximum tax credit allowed, and up to $13,000 for refundable research and development tax credits. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 10 12. Employee Benefits: Please identify all employee benefits provided by and paid for (in full or in part) by the Business. Employee Benefits Total Annual Cost Portion of Total Plan Provisions Provided by the (show on a per Annual Cost Paid (Include deductibles, coinsurance %, office visit Business employee basis) by the Business* co-payments,~annual out-of-pocket maximums, ~ Employee Family Employee Family ~n_~m~ etc') _ $3707 $7786 $1988 $5383 John Deere HMO Medical/Health Zero deductible Insurance $20 co-pay $10 co-pay Prescription card $318 $784 $162 $530 100% for Checkup exam; $50 deductible for Dental Insurance all other services; then 80/20 for primary services and 50/50 for major services $1000 maximum per year. NA NA NA NA Vision Insurance $162 $162 $50,000 + AD & D for each employee Life Insurance $1000 $1000 13 weeks @ 100% of base wage Shod Term Disability (estimate) 13 weeks @ 66.7% of base wage (STD) plan is self insured. $136 $70 After 26 weeks of disability plan will provide Long Term Disability 66.7% of base wage until age 62 (LTD) * If the business's plan is self-insured, please use the amount paid by the business for costs associated with employee and family coverage during the past three years and then, determine the business' average annual contribution per employee for that three year period. Does the Business offer a pension plan, 401(k) plan, and/or retirement plan? X Yes [] No If yes, please indicate the amount contributed on a per employee basis by the Business to the plan. For 401(k) plans, please provide information on the company match and indicate the average annual match per employee (show average as a percentage of salary).Loparex's 401(k) provides a Company match of 1.5% on each 1% an employee contributes. Maximum match is 6% (on an employee contribution of 4%). In 2004 the average match for an Iowa City employee was 5.1% Does the Business offer a profit-sharing plan? X Yes [] No If yes, please indicate the total amount paid out each year for the past three year and then, determine the average annual bonus or contribution per employee for that three year period. Gain share payouts - 2003 82,895; 2004- 267,396; 2005 YTD - 149,246. Average annual payout per employee for the period of 1/1/03 to 6/30/05 - $837. Does the Business offer child care services? [] Yes X No Child care services include child care services on-site at the facility in which the project will occur or off-site child care subsidized by the business at the rate of 50% or more of the costs incurred by an employee. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 11 13. Identify the Business' competitors. If any of these competitors have Iowa locations, please explain the nature of the competition (e.g. competitive business segment, estimated market share, etc.) and explain what impact the proposed project may have on the Iowa competitor. Primary competitors are: Akrosil, Douglas Hanson, Rhinelander, Assi, and Enterprise, with no competitive locations in Iowa. 14. Will any of the current Iowa employees lose their jobs if this project does not proceed in Iowa? Yes [] No If yes, please explain why and identify those jobs as "retained jobs" in the following question. Six existing positions will be displaced should this project not occur in the Iowa City facility. The reason for the loss of jobs has to do with the release liner market moving away from the current coated paper products and moving towards coated plastic film products. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 12 15. List the jobs that will be retained and/or created as the result of this project. (A retained job is an existing job that would be eliminated or moved to another state if the project does not proceed in Iowa.) For retained jobs, include the current hourly wage rate. For jobs to be created, including the starting hourly wage rate. ,lob Title Skills, Education, or Experience Number of t Retained (Fi) or Starting or Current Wage Required JobsI Created (C) Rate Year 1 of the Project Primary operator Web handling and extrusion experience 2 C $22.21 * Machine Helper Web handling, machinery operating 2 C $15.85 ** experience Coater Operator 2 R $22.21 * Coater Helper 2 R $15.85 ** Roll Wrap Operator 2 R $19.32 *** Year 1 Subtotal 10 ~ .- - Year 2 of the Project Primary operator Web handling and exlrusion experience 2 C $22.21 Machine Helper Web handling, machinery operating 2 C $15.85 ** experience Year 2 Subtotal 4 Year 3 of the Project Process Engineer 1 C $26.44 Year 3 Subtotal 1 Total Number of Retained Jobs: 6 *average base rate is $17.16, can go to $22.02, However because Total Number of Created Jobs: 9 employees work 12 hour shifts 36 hrs. one week and 48 hrs the next, employees work 84 hours Bi-weekly and get paid for 106 hours. ** average base rate is $12.56, can go to $15.48, as above' employees work 84 hours but get paid for 106. ***average base rate is $15.31, can go to $19.17, as above' employees work 84 hours but get paid for 106. The 15 positions retained and created have an effective average wage of $19.56. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 13 16. Discuss each of the following items with respect to the proposed project: a) the current employment conditions in the community, include any business closures, unemployment rates, etc. and if applicable, the community's need for assistance in attracting the Business. In the past two months, Iowa City has lost two major employers, MCI - 200 employees, and General Mills - 83 employees. Due to the nature of the University of Iowa and the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, unemployment rates tend to remain Iow, yet the primary concern of the community is to grow our private sector enterprises. b) impact of the proposed project on the community and the state, include projections that reflect the impact on local and state tax revenue and any additional costs the community will incur as the result of the proposed project; The impact of Loparex's operation to Iowa City and the surrounding area is substantial, given the company currently employs 201 people in our market. The payroll of this project (15 jobs) will exceed $570,000 annually, or more than $19/hr. Supporting this project also provides additional security for the existing jobs because if this new production line is successful it will help to secure the viability of the entire plant. Loparex pays approximately $200,000 in taxes to local taxing bodies annually. This project will provide for additional tax base. Estimating a 6% individual state tax liability, this project would provide the state of iowa with more than $28,000 in annual individual tax income from the 9 new and 6 retained positions. Given the better than average state and local wage for these positions, it is also appropriate to estimate that the state would receive considerable revenue from the sales and use taxes these individuals will be paying to the state of iowa. Finally, income paid to individuals working on the construction of their proposed expansion will also provide a one time increase in state income taxes. c) impact the proposed project will have on current employees, including the potential for increased skills and wages; and With new technology proposed to come to the plant, existing employees will have the opportunity to increase their skills by working on this new production line. Loparex believes strongly in promoting from within their organization. The company will also have to backfill existing positions that were vacated as existing employees move into this new operation. Loparex continues to work with its vendors and organizations like Kirkwood Community College to maintain and improve the skills of its workfome. d) impact the investment will have on the ability of the business to expand, upgrade, or modernize its capabilities. The sole purpose of this investment is to begin the process of positioning the Iowa City facility to expand its capabilities and cement itself as a center of excellence within Loparex's release liner business. 17. Is the Business actively considering locations outside of Iowa? X Yes [] No If yes, where and what assistance is being offered? Loparex has facilities in Illinois and North Carolina that produce the same products as that found in Iowa City. With a new ownership team coming on board in September, local management would like to be poised to present an iron-clad proposal for why this new product should be manufactured in Iowa City. Loparex has similar facilities in Alabama, Illinois, and North Carolina. Illinois and North Carolina are also under consideration as viable sites for this expansion. Due to their sagging textile, furniture, and tobacco industries North Carolina has been particularly aggressive in offering incentives to attract new businesses and diversify their industrial base. As an example: for the 2003 expansion ($3.5 million total project vs. this project at $6.3 million) to Loparex's North Carolina plant, Rockingham county alone offered over $96,000 in cash. For the original 1996 plant construction and commissioning, North Carolina State, County and City governments provided Loparex with a 119,00 square foot building, 10.6 acres of land, 1.5 miles of rail siding, employee training for over 100 employees, and 10 years of tax incentives. 18. There are three general justifiable reasons for assistance. Check the box next to the reason why assistance is needed to complete this project Section A - Applicant & Project Information 14 [] Financing Gap - The Business can only raise a portion of the debt and equity necessary to complete the project. A gap between sources and uses exists and state and/or federal funds are needed to fill the gap. [] Rate of Return Gap - The Business can raise sufficient debt and equity to complete the project, but the returns are inadequate to motivate an "economic person" to 3roceed with the project. Project risks outweigh the rewards. X Locational Disadvantage (Incentive) - The Business is deciding between a site in Iowa (site A) and a site in another state (site B) for its project. The Business argues that the project will cost less at site B and will require a subsidy to equalize costs in order to locate at site A. The objective here is to quantify the cost differential between site A and site B. What measures were analyzed to determine the amount and form of assistance needed? North Carolina's incentives as outlined in #17 above. Worker's Compensation Cost per 1,000 man hours worked: Iowa $58.35 vs NC $11.30 = $1,488 per year Average hourly wage: Iowa $20.57 vs. NC $16.35 = $131,664 per year Construction costs: Iowa is 16.12% higher than North Carolina ( per RS Means) = $138,433 for the building. 19. What amount of state assistance is requested based on the above-identified need? $217,500 What type/form of assistance is preferred (e.g. loans, forgivable loans, tax incentives, etc.)? We would respectfully request $75,000 in forgivable loans from CEBA; refund of sales and use taxes for construction that are estimated to be $12,500; and tax credits associated with our investment as noted earlier. 20. Please indicate what program(s) the Business is applying to and download and submit those applicable sections: X CEBA (Complete Section B) [] EZ (Complete Section C) X HQJC (Complete Section D) [] EVA (Complete Section E) [] VAAPFAP (Complete Section F) [] EDSA (Complete Section G) The Department reserves the right to review this application and determine, based on the proposed project and available program funds, which financial assistance program(s) is best suited for the Business'project. The actual program(s) utilized may vary from the programs indicated above. Section A - Applicant & Project Information 15 21. Return on Investment Information - Business Taxes IDED is required to calculate the return on state and local government investments in this project. Data from other parts of the application will be combined with the estimates requested below to calculate the required return on investment information. Instructions for Question 21 IDED is asking for a best estimate on the increase in taxes associated with this project. Estimates should only include the expected increase in tax liability resulting from this project. At minimum, IDED needs estimates for the first three years of the project. Show data as if no tax abatements or tax credits awarded for this project were taken. For partnership forms of ownership (e.g. limited partnerships, s-corporations, LLC, etc.), please estimate the partners' increase in Iowa tax liability due to this project. Sales and use taxes refer to the taxes paid on materials, etc. that the Business purchases, not taxes you collect from sales to your customers. Applicants will not be held to these numbers with respect to any award from or contract with IDED. This page of the application will automatically be treated as confidential. Increase in Tax Collections Associated with this Project State Business Taxes Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 State Corporate Income Tax* $ 700 $ 750 $ 800 $ $ State Business Sales and Use Tax$17,500 $ $ $ $ * Insurance Companies: Provide State Insurance Premium Tax Local Business Taxes Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Local Real Estate Property Tax $12,250 $12,250 $12,250 $ $ Local Option Sales Tax SN/A SN/A SN/A $ $ Section A - Applicant & Project Information 16 Attachments Please attach the following documents: A1 Business Plan At a minimum, include: · marketing study, · feasibility study, · projected profit and loss statements for three years into the future, · project budget, · production operations, · management structure, · personnel needs, · descriptions of product or process, · status of product/process development, and · patent status (if applicable). (Any information outlined above not included in the business plan should be submitted as supplemental information via a separate attachment.) A2 Copies of the Business' Quarterly Iowa Employer's Contribution and Payroll Report Summary Page (Page 1) for the past year and a copy of the most recent payroll report for one pay period. A3 Affidavit that states the Business has not, within the last five years, violated state or federal statutes, rules, and regulations, including environmental and worker safety regulations, or, if such violations have occurred, that there were mitigating circumstances or such violations did not seriously affect public health or safety or the environment. A4 Financial Information (Existing Businesses Only) · Profit and loss statements and balance sheets for past three year-ends; · Current YTD profit and loss statement and balance sheet; · Schedule of aged accounts receivable; · Schedule of aged accounts payable; and · Schedule of other debts. Application Checklist Section A - Applicant & Project Information 17 IOWAApplication Checklist J changing" For each section the Business is required to submit, please indicate with a '-/' that items needed for that section are included when submitting the application to IDED. If an item listed is not included, please indicate in the corresponding box the date on which IDED can expect to receive it or explain in the space provided below why it has no[ peen III~;IUU~U, Section B Section C Section D Section E Section F Section Section A CEBA EZ HCJC EVA VAAPFAP EDSA Original plus 1 Copy X X X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Signed by the Business X N/A City of Iowa Signed by the Sponsor(s) City will sign N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sept 6 Business Plan w/3-year Projections X N/A N/A N/A. N/A N/A N/A Quarterly Employer's Contribution and Payroll Reports X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Current Payroll Report X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Affidavit re: Violations X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A P/L statements & Balance Sheets (3 years) X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A CurrentYTD Financials X N/A . N/A N/A ' N/A N/A N/A Aged Accounts Receivables X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Aged Accounts Payable X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Schedule of Other Debts X N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Resolution from Sponsor N/A City of Iowa City N/A N/A N/A N/A . will sign Sept 6 Legal Description of Project Site N/A N/A X N/A N/A' N/A Map N/A N/A X N/A N/A Meeting / Public Hearing Notice N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Meeting Minutes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Technical Assistance Budget N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bids, Quotes, & Estimates N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Employer Certification Form N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Commitment Letters N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Comm. Development & Housing Needs Assessment N/A . N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Assurances Page N/A N/A N/A ' N/A N/A N/A Applicant/Recipient Disclosure/Update form N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Explanation for Items Not Included: Application Checklist 1 I OVV Section B- CEBA I changing' 1. Which program component is the Business applying for? [] Small Business Gap Financing [] New Business Opportunity X New Product Development [] Modernization Component 2. Funding Information: Total Amount Requested: $ 75,000 Loan Amount: $ Forgivable Loan Amount: $ 75,000 See Chapter53, Section 261 in the CEBA Administrative Rules for maximum funding amounts. The CEBA program is not designed to provide 100% funding for any project and limits assistance based on the type of project submitted. 3. Security X Corporate Guaranty [] Surety Bonds [] UCC Financing Statement [] Mortgage on Real Estate [] Irrevocable Letter of Credit [] Escrow Account [] Personal Guarantee [] Other: Ail awards secured by Personal Guarantees wi//require a current financial statement from each of the persona/ guarantors, which must be attached to the application. 4. Does the business certify that at least 10% of the positions to be created will be made available to qualified Promise Job Participants? X Yes [] No 5. Are underground tanks (whether or not in current use) for the storage of petroleum products, agricultural or other chemicals, waste oil or other liquid waste or any other inflammable, corrosive, reactive or explosive liquid or gas located on the project site? X Yes [] No If yes, please explain: We currently have underground storage tanks for Isopropyl Alcohol, T-40 (40%toluene/60% heptane blend), and Heptane. These solvents are used in the coating process. Tanks and piping are less then 10 years old and meet all of the current State double containment requirements. Will the Business be storing above-ground, on or about the project site, in tanks or otherwise, any liquid or gas (as described above) or any inflammable, corrosive, reactive or explosive solid, for any length of time or any purpose? X Yes [] No If yes, please specify: We currently keep solvent and flammable chemicals in an approved solvent storage building. This project will not increase any solvent or chemical requirement above the present day levels. Section B - CEBA 2/4/2005 1 Will the Business be treating, transporting or disposing of any liquid, gas, or solid (described above) either on or about the project site or at a landfill or other treatment facility or upon any public street or highway, or on any waterway or body of water, or in any aircraft? X Yes [] No If yes, please specify the substance and what the Business will be doing with it. Plant currently disposes of solid wastes to a local landfill and recycles paper and plastic materials wastes through a local recycler, City Carton. 6. Does the Business generate solid or hazardous waste? X Yes [] No If yes, please describe and provide a copy of the Business' solid and hazardous waste reduction plans. Any hazardous wastes are disposed of through M M Chemicals for recycling. Iowa City has recently installed automatic batching equipment that reduced the hazardous liquid waste by over 35% on one of our coating lines. This has proved so successful that we are in the process of expanding this system to our other lines. Attachments Please attach the following documents: B3 Community resolution authorizing the submission of the application Section B - CEBA 2/4/2005 2 IOWA Section B- High Quality I changing Job Creation Program 1. The Business must meet at least 4 of the following required elements to be eligible for the High Quality Job Creation Program. Please indicate which 4 required elements the business meets. (If the business is a start-up, please indicate which 4 required elements the business will meet when its operation commences.) X The business shall offer a pension or profit sharing plan to all full-time employees. For purposes of this requirement, a retirement program offered by the business, such as a 401(k) plan, and to which the business makes a monetary contribution shall be considered the equivalent of a pension plan. X The business shall produce or manufacture high value-added goods or services or be engaged in one of the following industries*: Release liner and Packaging Products [] The business shall provide and pay at least eighty pement of the cost of a standard medical and dental insurance plan for all full-time employees working at the facility in which the new qualifying investment occurs. For purposes of this requirement, single or employee-only medical and dental coverage will be what the department considers in determining if the business meets this required element. [] The business shall make child care services available to its employees. The business shall satisfy this required element if it provides child care services on-site at the facility in which the project will occur or if it subsidizes 50% or more of off-site child care service costs incurred by an employee. [] The business shall invest annually no less than one percent of pretax profits, from the facility located to Iowa or expanded or modernized under the program, in reseamh and development in Iowa. The business must be able to demonstrate, using generally accepted accounting principles, the facility's history of pretax profits or a reasonable expectation of pretax profits from the facility in order to utilize this element. X The business shall invest annually no less than one percent of pretax profits, from the facility located to Iowa or expanded or modernized under the program, in worker training and skills enhancement. The business must be able to demonstrate, using generally accepted accounting principles, the facility's history of pretax profits or a reasonable expectation of pretax profits from the facility in order to utilize this element. X The business shall have an active productivity and safety improvement program(s). The program(s) will involve both management and workers and have benchmarks for gauging compliance. [] The business shall pumhase and occupy an existing facility that includes at least one vacant building which is at least 20,000 square feet. * State's targeted industries include: value-added agricultural products, insurance and financial services, plastics, metals, printing paper or packaging products, drugs and pharmaceuticals, software development, instruments and measuring devices and medical instruments, recycling and waste management, telecommunications and trucking and warehousing. Attachments Please attach the following documents: For projects of $10 million or more, include the following: D1 Resolution by the sponsoring County Board of Supervisors/City Council approving this application For projects of $10 million or more and when a local value-added property tax exemption is beinq offered, include the following: D2 Legal description of the project site. Include the size, in acres. D3 Detailed map (no larger than 8"x14") showing the boundaries of the project site. Section D - HQJC 6/24/2005 1 IP14 DRAFT MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION EMMA HARVAT HALL 410 E. Washington Street Tuesday, August 23, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lisa Beckmann, Scott King, Sara Baird, Jim McCue, Bev Wit~ver, Geoff Wilming, Paul Retish MEMBERS ABSENT: David Short, Billie Townsend STAFF MEMBERS: Dale Helling, Anne Burnside 1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the meeting held July 26, 2005. It was noted that under Reports of Commissioners, Baird and I4Ang, rather than Baird and Relish, had reported on the pride festival. With that revision, the minutes of the meeting were approved. Approval of the Minutes of the meeting held August 17, 2005. It was noted that the draft minutes erroneously quoted Dulek as having said she did not concur there was probable cause to support the constructive discharge claim. With that revision, the minutes of the meeting were approved. 3. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL. None. 4. NEW BUSINESS. a. Relish opened a discussion regarding a recent visit to Regency Trailer Court, located south of Iowa City but within Johnson County. Relish had not visited the Court before and ~vas struck by how isolated the area is from community services. He estimates the Court houses up to one thousand people. After his visit, Relish contacted Johnson County Supervisor Terrence Neuzil to inquire about whether additional services could be offered to residents of the Court. Relish is awaiting a reply from Neuzil. Commissioners discussed whether some outreach from the Commission was appropriate. The possibility of inviting Court residents to participate in the next Building Blocks was mentioned. Follow- up on the matter should be placed on this Commission's agenda for September 2005. b. Witwer offered to serve as liaison to the University of Io~va Human Rights Commission Executive Board, in David Shorr's place. Burnside ~vill notify all parties. c. Building Block to Employment. The next event is currently scheduled for October 18th. Retish noted this will need to be rescheduled. One problem is the Social Hall at the Recreation Center is not available that date. Another October date will be selected. McCue stated he would like the next program to include information regarding temporary employment. He suggested that Leon DeBoer from Shelter House ~vould be a valuable contact person on the topic. d. Music on Broadway. It is not clear at this time when or whether this event will be reprised. Retish reported that the Education Committee ~vhich had organized and sponsored the event last year, is in a state of flux. e. Winter Projects. Beckmann asked Commissioners to give thought to possible projects for Commission sponsorship in the coming year. This topic will be included on the September 2005 agenda. Beckmann would like to sponsor 1 or 2 movies again this year and believes the movies sho~vn last year were very successful events. The landlord forum ~vas also very successful. It was well- attended and provided valuable information. f. Cedar Rapids Human Rights Commission. I4Ang reported his disappointment over the action of the Cedar Rapids Human Rights Commission's recent decision not to co-sponsor a workshop against gay bullying. Retish inquired whether this Iowa City Commission could invite a member of the Cedar Rapids Commission to discuss the decision. KAng will provide a copy of the newspaper article to Burnside and she will contact the Director of the Cedar Rapids Commission. The Iowa City Commission sponsored a program against bullying in 2004-2005 and it was very successful. The program focused on elementary age children. Witwer stated she would like the Iowa City Commission to follow up on the and-bullying program and focus this year on high school aged youth. g. Human Rights Breakfast. Burnside will call Townsend to inquire whether parking around the I.M.U. is projected to be restricted this year, as it was last year. King stated he must step down from the committee reviewing nominations due to a conflict in interest. Wilming offered to take King's place on the committee. Nominations will close at 5 p.m. on September -/th. Beckmann will contact committee members soon after so they can meet and select award recipients. In past years, news of the award winners and the Breakfast have been spread via the City website, posters, press releases and appearances on local radio programs. It was agreed we will utilize all of these methods again this year. 5. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS. Baird reported on a peace march sponsored by members of the local Sudanese community, being scheduled for Saturday, August 27th. Burnside ~vill obtain information about the place and tSme for the march and email it to the Commissioners. Witwer reported on an upcoming PBS program called I, the Mix which discusses the problems of bullying. Beckmann stated her daughter started attending junior high, giving Beckmann the opportunity to review the school district's orientation materials. Beckmann was very favorably impressed with the language of zero tolerance for bullying. The materials were quite clear about the behavior which was prohibited and the consequences for violating the policy. 6. ADJOURNMENT. Approximately 7:40 p.m. Board or Commission: Human Rights ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2005 (Meetin ~, Date) TERM 1/25 2/22 3/22 4/26 5/24 6/21 7/26 8/17 8/23 9/27 10/25 11/22 12/27 NAME EXP. Lisa 1/1/07 X X X YA O/E NMN X X x Beckman Q Paul Retish 1/1/07 X X X YA O/E NMN X O x Q Geoff 1/1/07 X X O/E YA X NMN X x Wilming Q Sara Baird 1/1/05 X O/E X YA X NMN X X x Q David Short 1/1/06 X X O/E YA X NMN X O/E o/e Q James 1/1/06 X X X YA X NMN X x McCue Q Billie 1/1/06 X X X YA X NMN X o Townsend Q Bev Witwer 1/1/05 X X X YA O/E NMN X x Q Scott King 1/1/05 X X X YA X NMN X X x Q 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 COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Bob Brooks, Ann Freerks, Dean Shannon MEMBERS ABSENT: Terry Smith and Don Anciaux STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Karen Howard, Mitch Behr OTHERS PRESENT: Paula Brandt, Dennis Nowotny, Mark McCallum, Armond Pagliai, Nila Haug, Eric Bochner RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommended approval by a vote of 4-1 (Shannon voting in the negative, Anciaux/Smith absent) the proposed draft Zoning Code as printed on 2/22/05 with the amendments that the Commission had reviewed, approved and voted on at the 6/27/05 and 8/18/05 Commission meetings. REZ05-00014, a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB- 5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street as depicted on the map. Recommended deferral to 9/1/05 by a vote of 4-0 (Plahutnik recused self, Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05- 0001,5, a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00016, a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) Zone and Planned High Density Multi- Family Residential (PRM) Zone for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Burlington Street and west of Linn Street. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00017, a rezoning from Residential Factory Built Housing (RFBH) to Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH-12) for all properties currently zoned RFBH, including Saddlebrook, Bon-Aire, Hilltop, Baculis, Forrest View, Thatcher Mobile Home Parks and property located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien Road. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00010, a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to Planned Development Housing Overlay, Medium Density Single- Family (OPDH-8) for property located on Longfellow Place within the Longfellow Manor Subdivision. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00011, a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for property located on Dodge Street Court within the Jacob Ricord's Subdivision. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00012, a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for a property located on Catskill Court within the East Hill Subdivision. Recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 (Anciaux/Smith absent) REZ05-00013, a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for property located south and east of Whispering Meadows Drive within the Whispering Meadows Subdivision. CALL TO ORDER: Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:34 pm. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August18,2005 Page 2 PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. DEVELOPMENT CODE - PROPOSED NEW ZONING CODE (CITY CODE: TITLE 14): Brooks said this would be the last meeting for public input on the proposed revisions to the revised Zoning Code. Revising of the City's Zoning Code had been a two-year process which had included several formal open houses hosted by City Staff and the Commission where the public could meet one- on-one with staff to discuss concerns and ask questions; a series of meetings with various civic and community groups where Staff had given presentations on the proposed revisions; several public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission; and numerous opportunities in various formats for the public to provide written comments and input to Staff and the Commission regarding the proposed revisions to the Code. At this point in the process the Commission was ready to vote on the proposed revised Zoning Code and make their recommendation to City Council. After receiving the Commission's recommendation and a final draft copy of the revised Zoning Code, the Council would then have a number of work sessions with the Commission to discuss the proposed changes. After that there would be several public hearings held before the Council and then the Council would vote on the proposed revised Zoning Code. Brooks said that the Commission had heard and reviewed a lot of input both in person and in writing. He requested that during this public input session new items and issues be presented to the Commission. Miklo said there were a series of rezoning items associated with the Code listed on the agenda. Public input on these items had been received at previous Commission meetings so they would not be opened for public input however if someone wished to address them during public input for the Development Code they were welcome to do so. Brooks said as a result of the last public hearing regarding the proposed revised Zoning Code there had been several proposals / ideas put forth by the public. These included: · Change the maximum allowed density in the multi-family zones so that a developer is allowed to develop more apartments per acre if the apartments have fewer bedrooms. · Provide a density bonus for handicapped accessible dwelling units that contain a small number of bedrooms. · Incorporate inclusionary zoning provisions into the zoning code that would require developers to build a certain percentage of units within each new development that would be affordable to those at or below area median income. · Table 5A-2 Minimum Parking Requirements: Reconsider the proposal in the new code that would increase the parking requirements in the PRM Zone for apartments with large numbers of bedrooms. · 14-4E=5E and 14-4E-6C: Increase the allowable damage for nonconforming structures from 70% to 75%. The draft specifies that nonconforming structures damaged beyond 70% of the assessed value of the structure may not be rebuilt without bringing the structure and the use into compliance with the Code. Request is to increase this figure to 75%. · Make some allowance for cottage-type industries to locate within retail commercial zones in the City. Clear up any ambiguity in the Code in this regard. Brooks asked the Commissioners if they wished to make any motion(s) to direct staff to include any of the proposed amendments to the draft Code prior to opening the public hearing session. Motion: Freerks made a motion to include proposed amendment #55, to make some allowance for cottage-type industries to locate within retail commercial zones in the City and clear up any ambiguity in the Code in this regard." Koppes seconded the motion. Howard said this was a grey area in the Zoning Code. Currently there were broad use categories which allowed certain uses in certain zones. The cottage-type industries frequently had a small-scale manufacturing type component but a very important retail component to their business so they needed to locate in commercial zones as they needed exposure from a retail district. Typically when they started out the manufacturing component was fairly small. It would include incubator type small cottage industries Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 3 such as bakeries, candy manufacturing, furniture and small consumer items. There might also be some wholesale trade associated with the business. Currently in the Code it was a grey area because it was not well spelled out and Staff had to make a judgment call for each type of thing that came in which made it very frustrating for both Staff and the business owner. Staff wished to make it clear in the new Zoning Code that these types of businesses would be allowed in the commercial areas. Behr said the Rezoning Items under Section D of the agenda would not have separate public hearings tonight because they resulted from the new Code. If people had comments with new and different information about them. they should make those comments during the public hearing time for the new Code. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. (Anciaux and Smith absent) Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to include language for proposed amendment #54, "Increase the allowable damage for nonconforming structures from 70% to 75% for nonconforming structures damaged beyond 75% of the assessed value of the structure may not be rebuilt without bringing the structure and the use into compliance with the Code." Shannon seconded the motion. Howard said this was standard in the Code for non-conforming uses. Currently the Code allowed a structure that had been damaged by fire or acts of God to be rebuilt for that same non-conforming use. There was a percentage that the structure had to be damaged before it could be rebuilt. In the proposed Code the percentage of damage had been reduced from 100% to 70% based research done by Staff. They had found that in a number of different zoning codes the typical range was between 50% and 75%. Freerks said she felt the current Code's 100% figure was an anomaly as it was not found anywhere else when Staff had researched it. She was comfortable with 70% as it fell fairly between 50% and 75%. Koppes said she was also comfortable with 70% so she would not be able to support the motion. Plahutnik said in many instances these were people's businesses that they relied upon for their livelihood. Any damage to them, rebuilding a conforming structure many times would prove economically unfeasible so he wanted to give whatever leeway the Commission could to help the people out. The motion passed on a vote of 3-2 (Freerks and Koppes voted in the negative; Anciaux and Smith absent). Behr said with respect to the last motion prior to public hearing, the Bi-Laws provided that it took four (4) votes for a positive recommendation on a substantial amendment to the zoning chapter. For the new Code it would most definitely require four votes. With respect to the question of whether the 3-2 vote on the change from 70% to 75% was substantial or not, Behr said Legal Council would like to reserve judgment on that. Substantial was the key language. Public discussion was opened. Brooks said if there were new items or new information relating to the Code and/or as the Code related to the proposed zoning changes the Commission would receive public input at this time. Paula Brandt, 824 N. Gilbert Street, said the Northside Neighborhood Association did not meet during the summer so they had not previously spoken about the CB-2 zones that affect their neighborhood. However, the Steering Committee had met to discuss the proposed zoning changes for the Northside Market area. They appreciated the work of the City planning staff to further the City's Comprehensive Plan which was developed with the input of the citizens of Iowa City. It was a challenge to balance the needs and desires of residents and historic preservationists and business people and visitors and economic development and parking and aesthetics while still seeing that property owners received a fair return on their investment. Brandt said the Committee believed that the proposed zoning changes for the Northside Market area struck that balance by supporting the Comprehensive Plan and preserving the Iow scale houses and businesses that helped make the neighborhood a viable, attractive and enjoyable area in which to live and visit and by keeping the higher buildings with higher densities downtown and south of Burlington Street. The Steering Committee wished to believe that the owners of the immediately affected properties shared their enthusiasm for their neighborhood even if they didn't reside there. The Steering Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 4 Committee urged the Commission to consider the greater good of Iowa City and the neighborhood and would support the proposed changes to the Zoning Code. Dennis Nowotny, 517 E. Washington Street, said at one time he had stated that the new Code had doubled in length from the current Code. It had been pointed out to him that the type setting was different. The City of Des Moines' Code was approximately 137 pages versus Iowa City's 400+ pages. Their densities started at somewhat more dense than Iowa City's. In their high density areas, Des Moines multi- family dwellings started at 850-square feet per dwelling unit, about 25-square feet less than Iowa City's PRM. Des Moines square foot of lots 2,000 vs. Iowa City's 5,000 in the PRM areas. Mark McCatlum, 811 East College Street, provided a copy of the editorial opinion he'd had published in the Press Citizen in July, 2005. He said he was a member of the Historic Preservation Commission for the College Green area. McCallum said he was trying to advocate a few good ideas, the editorial had given the context for the mind set he'd had when he'd proposed them. McCallum said he appreciated the Commission's consideration of his proposals. He'd been trying to follow the Commission's meeting minutes and work sessions on the internet; but the May 23 and June 20th meetings were not available on the internet yet. It was his understanding that his proposals had been discussed during the August 1st work session. Given the visibility that he'd put himself in he would have liked to have had the opportunity to sit in on that work session to respond to any questions the Commission had at that time and to have gotten a consensus as to how they had been thinking. McCallum said he'd gotten a lot of positive feedback on his ideas, particularly from wanna-be politicians who were running for City Council at this time. One City Councilor had asked for copies of all of his proposals. There was interest at the Council level for his ideas. McCallum said he was aware that his historic preservation idea had been a little controversial; the multi- family one was just good common sense. If the City was going to try to effect and create a diverse mix of housing downtown, the Commission needed to do something other than what it was doing right now. He was at a loss why a community that espoused the values that the City said it did, would be against offering a density bonus for handicap housing. McCallum asked if the work session meeting minutes were available, would they be put on the internet and could he ask for a copy? Miklo said the work session minutes were available to the public but typically were not put on-line. He was welcome to stop by the Planning Office to pick up copies. In terms of the bonuses for handicap accessible apartments, because of the ADA, all new apartments/any new buildings were required to be handicap accessible on the ground floor. McCallum said in his analysis of College Street, the issue he was presenting was that he'd spoken with the owner of the property in the 300-block of College Street who'd built over 60-units. He'd asked the property owner if he would build more smaller units if there was an incentive. The property owner had said yes of course he would. McCallum said developers were very simple creatures. They did what the zoning code allowed them and tended to want to maximize their return on investment. Current ADA only required that handicap accessible units be built in new buildings, they didn't specify the mix. In some of the new areas that had been developed in the last 10-years, they were seeing handicap units being built out in 4 or 5 bedroom units. McCallum said to him it seemed they were meeting the minimum standards of the goals of the ADA law but were really not creating a housing mix that was in the spirit of the people who really needed it. Armond Pa,qliai, 302 E. Bloomington Street, said in the current zoning of CB-2, if they put up a new building, what would their occupancy be; could they build a higher occupancy; what could they build now and how many people could they hold for a restaurant. Howard said the occupancy load would only be limited by the parking requirements. Their current occupancy load was 113 persons, by special exception they could achieve up to 125 persons. The occupancy load was based on a number of factors which included the number of bathrooms, the amount of parking, the amount of space available for seating, how many exits all determined the occupancy load of a restaurant. He could consult Housing and Inspection Services for specifics. Pagliai asked in CB-5 or CB-2 how many people could they seat. Was it limited? Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 5 Howard said again it would be based on all the Code factors. Although there is not a specific occupancy cap in the CB-5 or CB-2 zones, it would be limited by the amount of parking, configuration of the building and other zoning factors. Pagliai said if they did have the required parking available, there still would be the potential for not being able to expand as big as they wished to. Miklo said that was correct, the size of their lot would determine parking and if they added apartments above, parking spaces would have to be provided for the residential as well. Nile Hoa.q, 517 E. Washington, said she'd spoken her mind before so the Commission knew how she felt. One of the things that seemed to be important in the downzoning or which prohibited the upzoning from CB-2 to CB-5 was the parking. It seemed to her that everyone who was in that area had explained that they could get the parking. Hoag asked if the area were upzoned to CB-5, would the Commission consider that parking be made available. In the other CB-5 areas parking was not required, but in this case would the Commission consider an amendment which would require that all the CB-2 areas upzoned to CB-5 be required to provide parking. Freerks said at the last meeting she had requested Staff to provide information regarding parking space availability in the downtown ramps. The Commission had received those numbers. The Chauncey Swan parking ramp had 475 parking spots and currently there were 400 parking permits issued which left only 75 available spaces for paying customers. She didn't think that was enough to meet the needs of the area Hoag was referring to. Hoag said Pagliais had said that they could provide parking, she and the other property owners had plenty of parking or they could provide it on their properties. She said if it was made a requirement however they had to do it they would have to do it. Miklo clarified that Hoag was suggesting that there be an amendment to the CB-5 zone to require parking in these particular areas. Hoag said that was correct -just because they could do it. Miklo said that would require some study by the City and a separate amendment to go forward with that idea. Eric Bochner., Bochner Chocolates, 50 Sumac Court, said he believed that the proposed amendment #55, allowance for cottage type industries, was based on commentary by him. He wanted to clarify some of the issues that he'd had when he had tried to establish his business in CC-2 zoning as well as in CI zoning and to make sure that there was also clarity not that just that he just could have put his business with manufacturing and retail in a CC-2 zone but that also he also had a problem in the C1-1 zone in that he couldn't establish retail presence. He wanted to make sure that the new Code allowed both retail and manufacturing. When he had started his business it had been hard because he had no established retail business so what was the driving force - retail as accessory use or retail as a primary use. They had ended up with it being easy to say "which ever one you want the answer to be" and he'd found out that he was no where. Bochner said he wished to clarify that at least the C1-1 zones should be able to accommodate the same sort of business in the same clear way as well as CC-2 zoning and allow the business owner based on cost and economic issues to be able to locate the business where ever they wanted. He also wanted to raise the issue that he'd previously discussed with Howard regarding the same thing was actually true for the R&D zoning. Some of the same kinds of manufacturing that he did at his business could also be appropriately located in an R&D zone. To identify the larger issue for him, he always tried to find the most number of places that he could accomplish his business purposes within the city bounds and what he'd found was that there was no clear zone for light manufacturing. Possibly an R&D zone with the buildings with their cooling and their infrastructure might be just as good for him but per the R&D uses he was not allowed to locate in that zone either. Bochner said for businesses such as himself he wanted to make sure that there were at least a few choices that made sense consistent with use whether it would be CC-2 or C1-1 or R&D zones that would allow a variety of uses. It was his understanding that attracting light manufacturing to the city was of high importance. He wanted to make sure that if there were other people like him, that they would be able to establish their businesses very easily. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 6 Howard said she felt it had been clarified in the C1-1 zone so that it specifically called out provisions to allow a certain amount of retail as a principle use which had been done earlier. In the current Code there were not use categories so it was a grey area. Howard said with the amendments that Bochner had just discussed it should help in the retail commercial zones of CC-2, CB-5 and CB-10. With regard to the RDP zone, those were originally intended for high tech sorts of businesses so they had been written in that fashion. Without looking at the Code, she was not sure whether an amendment would need to be made to the uses for light manufacturing to allow those types of businesses in RDP and ROP zones. Bochner said the reason he raised that issue was when he'd been looking to expand his manufacturing and locate it somewhere else, the research & development parks whether they were used for pharmaceutical manufacturing or light manufacturing of electronics, etc, had all seemed to be identified ok to be in research & development parks but doing a high tech food manufacturing had not been allowed under the current Code. The infrastructure of those parks, whether it be for trucks or for having office space and being able to do high tech manufacturing, those spaces were actually perfect for his kind of use but under his reading of the Code and his discussions with Staff several years ago had said that those were off limits for him. Bochner said to allow that flexibility as well would be consistent with the use of what those types of spaces and the land uses are done for right now. Howard said the distinction with the RDP and the ORP zones, they were intended for larger uses. There was a 1-acre lot minimum in the RDP zone and a 7-acre lot minimum in the ORP zone. That didn't seem quite consistent with a cottage industry type, maybe incubator business type, but a bakery or something like that probably would not fit in there although the market would tend not to encourage a bakery to locate in the RDP. Miklo said when Staff were talking about a research and development park, they were talking about locations such as ACT, NCS Pearson, Northgate Corporate Park, areas of a little different character than a C1-1 or retail zones. Miklo said on page 183 under #16, the C1-1 zone specifically allowed the type of retail that was requested by Bochner. Plahutnik asked if the current provisions prohibited retail in the R&D parks? Howard said retail was allowed always as an accessory use, there were always businesses that had a mix of things - wholesale, retail, a small retail component but it was intended to be accessory to the larger principle use. In any commercial zone you could have any type of accessory use that would be typical for that kind of a business. That was not specifically called out, it was more of a judgment call, was it something that was accessory or was it a principle use of a property. That was where in the current Code it was ambiguous because there was no use categories to be able to determine which was principle and which was accessory. Howard said Staff felt in the proposed Code it was a little more clear exactly what was a principle use, the accessory uses would still be a judgment call. Howard referred to page 153, the definitions of manufacturing zones, industrial manufacturing categories. Looking at Technical Light Manufacturing, she didn't know if chocolate manufacturing would fall under general manufacturing and not light manufacturing. In the RDP and the ORP zones, only light manufacturing was allowed, so it would require an amendment to those two zones. Miklo said what was important was when looking as the proposed Code compared to the current Code, the proposed Code allowed a far broader number of zones that would allow the sort of manufacturing / retail combination being discussed. Brooks said knowing the plight that Bochner had gone through trying to locate his business, it had been the Commission's hope that they were opening things up to allow that type of business and operation to locate in a broader range of areas. The Code might not have gone as far as Bochner would have hoped, but it would clearly allow such businesses in several more zones when compared to the current code. Bochner said he wished to point out that the proposed amendments would not help him now but he wanted to be sure to do this for others who were like him. Bochner said what was actually happening in his business now was because of the place they'd had to go the retail was actually separating off from the manufacturing. Now looking at his business going forward and forwarding thinking about light manufacturing, was if he wanted to relocate his manufacturing to another location, what kinds of locations would he like for a business like his. An R&D area would be significantly better if the space was available in a park like that to be putting his manufacturing operations, just as if he were manufacturing Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 7 pharmaceuticals or bio-tech. Even though it was a lower tech product than what people were used to, that was the kind of industry the city wanted. He could do very well manufacturing in that type of park and imagined that other people who didn't make a computer or other type of bio-tech device typically recognized as high-tech, they too could successfully be located in those areas assuming the economics worked out. and assuming the infrastructure was right. Bochner said he knew for his particular business, a research and development park developer would have already spent a lot of money on the types of things that would be useful for him and he could do manufacturing in that location. Bochner said he could identify several businesses for which a research and development park might be an appropriate place to locate. Persons might not wish to spend that much money per square foot, but he at least wished to have the opportunity to consider locating there. Howard said to clarify for the record, these types of businesses would be allowed in the CC-2, CB-5 and CB-10, C1-1 zone and if the retail was accessory it would be allowed in the I-1 zone which allowed general manufacturing. Regarding RDP zoning, there was not much of this type of zoning in the city and most was already developed. There were a lot of ORP zones but it was a minimum 7-acre lot so a small manufacturer would probably not fit in that zone. Nowotny said he wished to speak for the people who were being down zoned essentially from the CB-2 to MU, essentially 9 lots east of the downtown area. They'd had their signatures notarized as not wanting their properties to be devalued. Down zoning to them was devaluation. Brooks said the Commission had received copies of the signature lists. Public discussion was closed. Miklo said there were a couple of decisions that the Commission needed to make before voting on the entire Zoning Code package. The proposal now, as the draft was written, was to eliminate the CB-2 zone and then rezone the various CB-2 areas to other zones. If the Commission decided not to eliminate the CB-2 zone, then they would need to decide that before they voted on some of the other proposals. If they decided to eliminate it, then they would need to vote on the other agenda items after they voted on the proposed Code rewrite. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve the proposed draft Zoning Code as printed on 2/22/05 with the amendments that the Commission had reviewed, approved and voted on at the 6/27/05 and 8/18/05 Commission meetings. Koppes seconded the motion. Freerks said this had been a huge process. She felt pretty comfortable with the Zoning Code they had come forward with. You couldn't please everyone all the time with everything. It was about a vision for the community and how to try to create growth yet have it be something that really fit with Iowa City and with the Comprehensive Plan. They were not a political body, they looked at the vision that they had for a community and felt comfortable with getting rid of the CB-2 zone. She felt it was not really a zone that fit that particular area of Iowa City, it was a zone of tall thin buildings surrounded by parking lots, which was not what was needed in those areas. Freerks said she felt they could do better with those areas and it would be discussed later when the Commission voted on the individual development items. Freerks said the Commission was going to have a couple of meetings with the City Council, discuss it with them and the public would have the opportunity to speak with the City Council about the proposed Code rewrite again. Shannon said with this one vote they would be doing away with the CB-2 zone and that would be shutting the door in people's face that had hoped that they could hang on to the CB-2 zone. If the Commission voted to eliminate the CB-2 zone that would make it a done deal, for the people and owners who'd spoken before the Commission at the last 2 or 3 meetings, then they would have to take their cause to the City Council. Behr said if the Commission made a positive recommendation on the Code as a whole without CB-2 zones, the Commission would need to rezone those CB-2 properties which could be done yet this evening. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 8 Freerks said she was not saying that she didn't think that maybe even some of the areas that the Commission was thinking of rezoning might not be better in CB-5 at some point but it might not be tonight. It could and would be discussed later. Shannon said he was not comfortable doing away with something that that many property owners felt they needed to have for their property to run their businesses or for their values. He liked to listen to people who were actually involved and owned the property. He was opposed to doing away with the CB- 2, he felt it was awfully iffy to tell the people to come back before the Commission and maybe we'll let you have something and maybe we won't. Right now they had the CB-2, maybe it was not a good thing to keep, but apparently at this time they felt it was. Maybe the people didn't understand but maybe they did. Koppes said one of their goals had been to simplify the Zoning Code. She felt by eliminating one zone it would help. It had been a long drawn out process and she had been in it since the beginning. Koppes said she actually understood everyone's concerns but at City Council was where the politics had to be worked out. The Commission was recommending what they thought the City should do, she was going to support the proposed Code without the CB-2. Plahutnik said he'd come later to the process but every single that the Commission had voted on since he'd been a Commission member had been hammered out item by item, the Commission had taken every bit of public comment into their consideration and then in the end voted and tried to do what they thought was best for Iowa City. In terms of this being the final slamming of the door on the CB-2 areas, it was not. The Commission had not come to the final zoning of the two areas being considered and what exactly they would be. What the Commission was talking about was eliminating the CB-2 zone and there was still recourse with the City Council. Every other week the Commission met and people presented them with rezoning applications. Nearly invariable since he'd sat on the Commission in one way or another the applications had been approved. It was not slamming the door, it was an obstacle, but the Commission had worked it all out item by item and given it as much thoughtful consideration as they possibly could and had worked very hard on the Code rewrite. Plahutnik said he was strongly in favor of supporting the proposed Code draft. Brooks said he agreed as had been mentioned earlier that this was somewhat of a balancing act. Having not been involved in the writing from the very beginning but having gone back and reading through all the information, minutes, communications and discussion that had gone on from the beginning it was pretty obvious that there had been a lot of give and take in the process. There had been comments made that a lot of it was being pushed down their throats by Staff, which was the farthest thing from the truth. The Commission had had a very active role in reviewing and working out a whole draft of different options and different directions to go. It was a balancing act and they were there to try to present to the Council a document that was a useful tool in implementing the City's Comprehensive Plan. What they had and what they would be taking forward to them hopefully was going to be a good tool for many years to come. That didn't mean that there couldn't be some tweaking and modification in the coming years as new trends and new things became evident but he felt that they'd come up with a very good document for Iowa City and Iowa City was different than almost any other community in the state of Iowa. That was why we all loved it here and was why we liked to be here. Brooks said he felt very strongly that what they had was a very good document and hoped that as it proceeded through the Council hearings there would be good open discussions with the Council. The motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Shannon voted in the negative; Anciaux and Smith absent). Brooks said he had had a meeting earlier in the day with the City Clerk regarding the timing of when the Council would receive the Code draft and when they'd have work sessions with the Commission prior to the public hearings. At this point the Planning Staff would need to get the amendments incorporated into the draft Code, get the draft re-printed and sent out. They potentially were looking at mid-September before the final draft would go to the Council and then there would be a series of work sessions with the Council and open to the public to review the proposed Zoning Code with them. It would then be totally in the Council's hands to decide when they would set public hearings. Brooks thanked everyone for their input. It was always important to the Commission to hear what the public had to say and to have dialogue with them. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 9 RFZONING ITEMS: REZ05-00014, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) Zone, Mixed Use (MU) Zone, High Density Multi-Family Residential (RM-44) Zone, and Public (P) for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Jefferson Street and east of Gilbert Street. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00014, as depicted on the map. Plahutnik seconded the motion. Freerks said right now she felt these were the best zones for these areas for the future as she saw it. They Commission was not political, she was looking at it in terms of planning and what she saw as being the best thing for the city in those areas. In the future there could be the possibility that some of those areas could be rezoned, when and what that might be she was not sure. She felt very comfortable with the zones, as currently proposed and what the future held for them. She would support the motion. Plahutnik said currently this area was almost self-zoned, there was not a single building that had been built to the maximum limits of CB-2. The area itself had kind of accepted and built up at lower densities and lower heights than CB-2 allowed. If at some point in the future it became economically viable to build to the densities of CB-5, then there would be the time for rezoning. He would vote in favor of the motion. Freerks said she felt this was a wonderful area, it did well as it was. Change was necessary sometimes, but it was a really beautiful, vibrant part of Iowa City as it was right now too. Shannon said it was a nice area. He was having a hard time following why the Commission felt the need to change something that seemed to be doing quite well for the case of simplification. If it was a good area, why did the Commission wish to tweak it. Brooks said he supported the proposed changes. He'd been convinced that because of the lot sizes and the requirements of CB-2 zone, the vision that some people had for development would never be reality, because there just wasn't the space for parking and the other amenities that were required. What the Commission was proposing as a transition zone between areas to the East and the downtown was reasonable. He would vote to support the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Shannon voting in the negative.) REZ05-00015, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) Zone, Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1) Zone and Mixed Use (MU) Zone for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Davenport Street and north of Jefferson Street. Howard said at the Commission's last map, the Commission had requested a different map indicating that the northern portion along Bloomington Street be included with the CN-1 designation. The newly drawn map had been distributed to the public and to the Commissioners at this meeting. Plahutnik recused himself citing a possible conflict of interest due to his employer owning property in this area. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00015 as depicted in the 'new' map distributed 8/18/05 and to zone the area to the North as CN-1 rather than MU. Freerks seconded the motion. Motion withdrawn by Koppes, second withdrawn by Freerks. Motion: Koppes made a motion to defer the vote on REZ05-00015 to the 9/1/05 meeting. The motion to defer passed on a vote of 4-0. Behr said for the public's information, at the 9/1/05 meeting there would be no additional public discussion on REZ05-00015, it would just be for consideration before the Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 10 REZ05-00016, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB-2) Zone to Central Business Support (CB-5) Zone and Planned High Density Multi-Family Residential (PRM) Zone for all property currently zoned CB-2 located south of Burlington Street and west of Linn Street. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00016, as depicted on the map. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-0001'~, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Residential Factory Built Housing (RFBH) to Planned Development Housing Overlay (OPDH-12) for all properties currently zoned RFBH, including Saddlebrook, Bon-Aire, Hilltop, Baculis, Forrest View, Thatcher Mobile Home Parks and property located at 1705 Prairie Du Chien Road. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00017. Plahutnik seconded the motion. Miklo said the proposal was to eliminate the RFBH zone and to zone the existing RFBH zones to OPDH- 12. OPDH stood for Overlay Planned Development Housing. The draft Code included the manufactured housing standards in the OPDH zone so in effect the existing parks would continue as they were now. If there was a proposal to expand them they would need to amend the OPDH plan or add additional land to the OPDH plan. Today in the current RFBH zone they would have to amend the manufactured housing site plan or add to the manufactured housing zoning area if they wished to expand the mobile home park. It was more of a housekeeping matter than a significant zoning change and would not change existing parks. A concern had been heard from the public that an OPDH zone would also allow, if approved as part of a zoning ordinance, townhouses, single-family, duplexes and apartment buildings. There had been a concern that those buildings could be built in these zones and displace the manufactured housing. He said that was not the case unless there was action by the City Council after receiving the Commission's recommendation to approve an amended OPDH plan. Brooks said it would still all be part of a planned development process whether it was a residential factory built housing plan or an OPDH. This would collapse all of that into one name and one zone. Freerks said it was not the Commission's desire to eliminate manufactured housing at all. Howard said the original intent had been to make it more fair for new manufactured housing parks not to have to go through a separate special process. They were a type of planned development and would be treated the same manner as other types of planned developments. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-00010, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to Planned Development Housing Overlay - Medium Density Single-Family (OPDH-8) for property located on Longfellow Place within the Longfellow Manor Subdivision. Miklo said on Tuesday evening at 5:00 p.m. there had been 5 individuals from the Longfellow neighborhood who'd met with Staff who'd had some questions trying to clarify what was happening with this rezoning. The area that was currently zoned RS-8 would be rezoned OPDH-8, which would allow the remaining vacant lots to be built with single-family or duplex structures depending on the property owners choice. Early on there had been some confusion regarding the original proposal. There still might be some concern on the part of some of the persons who'd attended the meeting but in general Staff had received indications of support for what was being done. Brooks said the rezoning was intended to facilitate allowing what had been started to be completed. Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to approve REZ05-00010. Freerks seconded the motion. Freerks said she felt this would help to continue with what had been planned and platted; people already had plans so they could continue with what they had prepared. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August18,2005 Page 11 Koppes said she hoped the public would understand that the Commission was not taking away what they could do, it was exactly the same as when they started. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-00011, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for property located on Dodge Street Court within the Jacob Ricord's Subdivision. Brooks said this was mainly an effort to try to keep what was started in compliance with the proposed new Code. Miklo said there were two vacant lots there. Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve REZ05-00011. Plahutnik seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-00012, consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for a property located on Catskill Court within the East Hill Subdivision. Brooks said this was a housekeeping item to allow the City to keep the trend for what had been planned for that area, given the new Zoning Code. Miklo said there were four vacant lots there. Motion: Freerks made a motion to approve REZ05-00012. Plahutnik seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. REZ05-00013., consideration of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City for a rezoning from Medium Density Single-Family (RS-8) to High Density Single-Family (RS-12) for property located south and east of Whispering Meadows Drive within the Whispering Meadows Subdivision. Brooks said this was a housekeeping matter to keep things in compliance with the new Code and allow the development to proceed as was originally planned. Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to approve REZ05-00013. Koppes seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 4, 2005 MEETING MINUTES: Motion: Koppes made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and corrected. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. OTHER ITEMS: Brooks said he and Miklo had met with Marian Karr, the City Clerk, earlier in the day. Dates to keep reserved for potential meetings with Council were September 19 and September 26 to September 29 for two two-hour work sessions. There would be one meeting for a one-hour introduction to acquaint the Council with the Code and not deal with specific questions and answers. The next meeting would be discussion of commercial zones or residential zones and the third meeting would be to discuss what had not been discussed at the previous meeting. Attendance was not mandatory but Commissioner attendance/support was strongly recommended. Brooks thanked everyone for their hard work putting the draft Code together, it had not been an easy undertaking. They needed to go forward as a Commission with their consensus on their position on the proposed Code and work with the Council. Brooks said he and Staff had also discussed opportunities to educate the public and the Commission regarding the proposed Code rewrite. Possibilities included a Letter to the Editor, Editorial or Video that Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes August 18, 2005 Page 12 would be shown on the public access channel to explain what direction the Commission had gone with the Code. He felt it would be best to address the few hot-button issues up front and start to talk about them early. He and Staff would be working on this over the next few weeks and come back with some ideas of how they might take this to the public in terms of what they had finally agreed upon and what was being presented to the Council Miklo asked if there was a consensus with the Commission that it was not a significant change regarding the eadier vote and the proposed Code amendment change from 70% to 75%. The Commissioner's agreed that it was not a significant change and that the 3-2 vote was sufficient to approve it. ADJOURNMENT: Motion: Plahutnik made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:03 pm. Freerks seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:03 pm. Elizabeth Koppes, Secretary Minutes submitted by Candy Barnhill s:lpcdlminuteslp&TJ2005108-18-O5 doc Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record 2005 FORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/6 1/20 2/3 2/17 3/3 3/17 4/7 4/21 5/5 6/16 6/27 7/6 7/21 8/4 8/18 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X X X O/E X X X X O/E X X O/E O B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X X W Plahutnik 05/10 ................................ X X X X O/E O/E X D. Shannon 05/08 X X X O/E O/E X X X O/E X O/E X X X X T. Smith 05/06 ................................ X X X X X X O/E INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Expires 1/3 2/14 2/28 3/14 4/4 4/18 5/2 6/13 7/18 8/1 8/15 D. Anciaux 05/06 CW X X O/E X X X X X O/E X B. Brooks 05/10 CW X X X X X X X X X X A. Fr¢¢rks 05/08 CW X X X O/E X O/E X X X X E. Koppes 05/07 CW X X X O/E X X X X X X W Plahutnik 05/10 CW .................... O/E X O/E O/E X D. Shannon 05/08 CW O/E O/E X X X X X X X X T. Smith 05/06 ............................ X X X X I I Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused N/M- No Meeting MINUTES PRELIMINARY IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AUGUST 10, 2005 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL-IOWA CITY, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Karen Leigh, Vincent Maurer, Michael Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: Ned Wood STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Clark, Jim Clark CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maurer called the meeting to order at 5:02 pm. CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 13, 2005 BOARD MINUTES MOTION: Wright moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Alexander seconded the motion. Motion passed 4:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: EXC05-00014 Discussion of an application submitted by Uptown Properties for a special exception to allow off-street parking for property located at 320-322 S. Johnson Street on a separate lot at 317 South Dodge Street in order to allow additional roomers in the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC- 20) zone at 320-322 South Johnson Street. Before presenting the staff report Miklo showed the site location of the two properties, pictures with the location of the properties and the existing parking spaces. Miklo said that there are seven specific standards that apply to this type of special exception. First, he said that a special location plan shall be filed with the Board by the owners of the entire land area to be included within the special location plan. The plan shall contain such information deemed necessary to comply with the requirements and evidence of ownership shall be provided. Miklo said that a location map of Johnson Street was submitted and shows that there is little space to provide parking. He added that a site plan for Dodge Street was submitted and presents how the proposed parking spaces would be arranged. However, he said, the required legal agreement that would specify that in the long term the proposed parking spaces would always be available for the tenants at 320-322 S. Johnson Street was not received. Second, the parking spaces have to be within three hundred feet of the use being served. He mentioned that although 317 South Dodge Street is 110 feet east of 320-322 S. Johnson Street, there is an intervening property. He noted that because there is no easement over the intervening property connecting the two properties in this application, residents of the duplex would have to follow the public sidewalk south to Court Street and around to the other side of the block, a distance of approximately 650 feet. He said that in staffs opinion the proposed parking would invite trespassing across the backyards of neighboring properties. He added that a retaining wall located along the east side will also hinder the tenants' direct access to parking. Miklo said that another likely result will be that the additional tenants will still park on the streets. Miklo said that where two or more uses jointly use off-street parking, the number of parking spaces shall equal the sum of total of off-street parking required for each use. He mentioned that in this case the single-family residence at 317 South Dodge Street is required to have 3 spaces. If the duplex is to have a total of ten occupants, 6 spaces are required. Currently, there are 3 off-street parking spaces of 317 South Dodge Street. Miklo said that the applicant had submitted a plan showing the 9 parking spaces, but they do not comply with the dimensional requirements of the zoning code. Miklo mentioned that a written agreement, properly executed by the owners within the area of the special location plan, assuring their successors and assigns, shall be submitted with the special location plan as a covenant running with the land. He said that the applicant had not submitted the written agreement. He noted that this document is required to assure that if the properties come under separate ownership, the occupants of 320-322 South Johnson Street will have access to the parking area at 317 South Dodge Street. Iowa City Board Of Adjustment Minutes August 10, 2005 Page 2 Miklo stated that in assessing an application for a special exception, the Board shall consider the desirability of the location of off-street parking and stacking spaces, aisles and drives on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety; any detrimental effects on adjacent property; the appearance of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking; and in the case of non-required parking, the need for additional off-street parking. He said that locating the parking lot at 317 South Dodge Street might result in some adverse effects on adjacent properties, or on the general public. Miklo continued the staff report saying that the special exception must be in accordance to the general standards. Miklo said that the specific proposed exception should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He mentioned that as noted, the location of the parking may result in trespassing on a neighbors' property or greater demand for on-street parking in this already congested area. Miklo stated that the proposed exception should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. He said that the issue of trespassing would apply in this particular case. Miklo continued by saying that the establishment of the specific proposed exception should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the zone in which such property is located. He added that it would not affect the redevelopment of other properties in the area. Miklo said that adequate measures should be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. He added that the addition of 2 additional tenants might slightly increase the congestion in this already congested area. Staff has inventoried on-street parking in this general area and found that very little is available. Parking is likely to be even in shorter supply when the University of Iowa is in session. Miklo said that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific exception, must conform to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. He mentioned that the site plan submitted shows 9 parking spaces, but they do not comply with the dimensional requirements. Next, Miklo said that the proposed use should be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. He said that the Comprehensive Plan designates the area as being appropriate for relatively dense residential development, so this particular test would not be an issue. Staff recommends that EXC05-00014 an application submitted by Uptown Properties for a special exception to allow off-street parking for property located at 320-322 S. Johnson Street on a separate lot at 317 South Dodge Street in order to allow additional roomers in the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-20) zone at 320-322 South Johnson Street be denied. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Jeff Clark, 414 East Market Street, presented a new site plan. He said that in the new site plan there is a change in the arrangement of parking spaces. He said he believed that the new plan complies with the dimensional standards of the code. Miklo said that he would like to have the new site plan reviewed by the Housing Department prior to making any opinion regarding the compliance with the code. Alexander asked if by using the new site plan, the person parking in the proposed space 4 would block the person parked in space 3. Clark said that usually the people live in the same unit. He said that the 320-322 South Johnson Street does not have any parking. He said that the lot goes back approximately 100 feet from the 317 South Dodge property. He added that the duplex exists, and there are 5 rooms in each unit already in place. He said that he would not add any rooms to the building, but he is trying to take care of the parking issue. Iowa City Board Of Adjustment Minutes August 10, 2005 Page 3 Going through the staff report, and referring to the first specific standard, Clark said that the new proposed site plan should comply with the requirements. For number two, Clark said that the proposed parking is only 100 feet away. He said that the ordinance does not describe which way should the distance from units be measured. He added that when applying for the Special Exception they are required to get addresses of people living 300 feet ordering the property. He said that he followed what the Zoning Ordinance asked for the application. He mentioned that he discussed with City Staff and determined that legal document could be submitted later. Regarding the issue of trespassing, Clark said that students will take the safest path. He added that they would pick their own path, and that is not an issue that could be controlled. Maurer asked if in the Johnson Street property there are currently 4 tenants, and where do they currently park. Clark said that they park on the street. Maurer asked if they are cutting through and parking on the Dodge Street property. Clark said that the tenants do not park there. Maurer asked how would they get to the Dodge Street parking spaces if the application would be approved. Clark said that they would have to go down the Dodge Street. Maurer asked who owns the property that would be used as a path to get to the parking lot, and if that would be an issue for the owners. Clark said that he does not know the owner personally. He added that he considers that there would be little or no concern about students passing by, however, he said that he did not feel proper for him to ask for an easement because it could restrict them in the future. Clark said that each side of the duplex has 5 existing habitual bedrooms. He said that 4 people can still live in that place, but there is no parking. He said that false occupancy is an issue. He said that students would say that the fifth room is for guests, and guests have the right to stay for 30 days. He said that he would like to clean up the situation and make it ok for 5 people to live in legally. He said he would only add 2 roomers, but would add 6 parking spaces. He noted that in this way he is taking 6 spaces off the street. He said that the parking in the area is more and more congested. Clark said that student would use off street parking 2 or 3 blocks away, because there is not enough parking in the area. He added that student store their cars. Clark said that they would park the cars and not use them for weeks; however, they need a place to store them. Clark said that he owns another property across the street from 320-322 South Johnson Street that has space for additional parking, but the two properties are zoned differently, and it would be against the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to plat the parking for Johnson Street there. Clark said that approving of the application would be an improvement for the area. Jim Clark, 414 East Market Street, said that the building is existing, and they do not require any additions to the property. He said that they would get rid of the gravel drive on Dodge Street property which will turn into a paved driveway, and concrete in the back. He said that in Iowa City everybody walks wherever they want without having a permanent easing. He said that it would open up South Johnson Street with 6 parking spaces. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Holecek said that however the motion would be formulated she would ask to include two contingences, the legal document that needs to be supplied, and the construction of the parking lot in accordance with an approved site plan. Alexander said that they might consider deferring the application until the site plan was reviewed. Holecek added that another issue that needed to resolved was whether the parking for the duplex could be stacked. Miklo said that the intent of allowing stacking for single family and duplexes is that the residents live together, and can move the cars easily; however, when there is a distance as in this case it would not be easy to have the cars moved around. MOTION: Leigh moved that EXC05-00014 Discussion of an application submitted by Uptown Properties for a special exception to allow off-street parking for property located at 320-322 South Johnson Street on a separate lot at 317 South Dodge Street in order to allow additional roomers in the Neighborhood Conservation Residential (RNC-20) zone at 320-322 South Johnson Street be Iowa City Board Of Adjustment Minutes August 10, 2005 Page 4 approved subject to submission of an approved site plan and submission of a legal document specifying that the proposed off-street parking spaces at 317 South Dodge shall be reserved for the occupants of 320-322 South Johnson Street in perpetuity. Wright would vote against the application. He said that if the properties would be contiguous it would not be an issue. He said that the application meets some of the specific standards. He added that although the Zoning Ordinance specifies the required distance between properties as being 300 feet, he does not believe that it means within 300 feet crossing someone else's property. Wright said that he has question for both site plans that were submitted. He said that the proposed application would make the property located on Dodge Street less desirable because the tenants will live in top of the parking lot. He said that it would not make substantial difference in the amount of traffic in the neighborhood. Talking about the general standards Wright said that the application should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He said that he believes that it would endanger the public welfare due to the lack of a clear path between the parking area and the duplex. In terms of being injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood, Wright said that trespassing would still be an issue. He said the specific proposed exception would not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding properties. He added that it would not have a major impact on public streets. Alexander said that it is a creative plan, and the goals are laudable. She said that for the reasons already stated she will vote against the application. She said that the distance is too great, and it is the intent of the ordinance that should be considered and it would be hard to consider that the intent was to encourage trespassing. She mentioned that her bigger concern is about the actual parking lot. She said that it is impossible to imagine how the stacking will work with properties that are distant from each other. Maurer would vote in favor of the motion. Maurer said that looking from a practical stand point there are 4 occupants on the Johnson property who are currently parking on the over parked street. He said that if some off street parking could be legally created, even if there is no easement, he prefers to have more off-street parking assured. He said that the City and community would benefit from this due to the fact that there are only two additional tenants, and 6 off-street parking spaces provided. Leigh said that she would vote against the motion for the reasons already stated. She said that the most important reason is the issue of trespassing. She said that people do care if students are trespassing on their properties. She added that if people put up barriers to keep students going across the parking lot that does not release them from the liability issues involved if people or properties are injured when people are trespassing. Motion failed with a vote of 1:3, with Leigh, Alexander, and Wright against the application. OTHER Holecek said that she would send a memo on the recent litigations regarding the Board of Adjustment decision to allow the auto and truck oriented uses at Wal Mart's proposed site. Alexander asked if there is any update on he Shelter House case. Holecek said that they are proceeding to brief to the Supreme Court. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION NONE ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Alexander moved to adjourn. Leigh seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 6:02. s:/pcd/minutes/BOA/2005./~8-05~5 doc Board of Adjustment Attendance Record 2005 Term Name Expires 01/12 02/09 03/09 04/13 05/11 06/08 07/13 08/10 09/14 10/12 11/09 12/14 Carol Alexander 01/01/08 X X X NM X X X X Ned Wood 01/01/I0 .... X X NM X X X O/E Karen Leigh 01/01/07 X O/E X NM X X X X Vincent Maurer 01/01/06 X O/E X NM X X X X Michael Wright 01/01/09 X X X NM X X X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting ..... Not a Member MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2005 CiViC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Brennan, Richard Carlson, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Jan Weissmiller, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: James Enloe, Justin Pardekooper STAFF PRESENT: Chris Ackerson, Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Fran Blanc, Helen Burford, Pat Cincotta, Richard Wayne CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificate of Appropriateness: 800 North Van Buren Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a listed national historic property, a local landmark, and a key, contributing structure in the Brown Street Historic District. Terdalkar said the proposed project is for the restoration of the barn on the property. The work includes the replacement of the masonry (stone) foundation with poured concrete foundation and finishing it with plaster to match the existing plaster. He said that the roof will be finished with asphalt shingles, and the missing wood shakes and other damaged wood work would be repaired as necessary. Weitzel said this project was discussed at the Commission's last meeting [due to the lack of quorum conducted as a work session], and the consensus was to approve the project as proposed. McCallum said he felt that the contractor working on this was using good sense. He said this is not an ideal situation, but the proposal is a reasonable one, as it would save the basic structure and general appearance of the barn. Ponto said that the rest of the barn and foundation is stable, but that repair using limestone would not be feasible to achieve a strong and durable foundation. Carlson stated that this is especially problematic because of the steep grade change. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the proposal to reconstruct a barn at 800 North Van Buren Street, as proposed. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0. 533 South Summit Street. Terdalkar said that this is an application for the replacement of existing wood windows with metal-clad wood windows. He added that this is a contributing structure in the Summit Street Historic District. Terdalkar said the owner also plans to replace the wood shutters with PVC shutters. Weitzel stated that this item was discussed at the work session, and it was determined that the Commission may not be able to mandate the replacement or removal of the shutters. He said the consensus of the Commission was to offer a recommendation that it would be acceptable to simply remove the shutters but to also recommend that replacement shutters not be made of PVC. Carlson said that he ordinarily would not approve of a wholesale replacement of windows. He said, however, that pretty much all of the windows on the house are rotted. McCallum said that, however, the commission has been approached for suggestions in the past and this issue can be considered as request for recommendation. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 2 Gunn asked if the Commission could regulate the shutters. Weitz. el said that because a permit is not required for shutters, the Commission has no enforcement ability with regard to shutters. Maharry said that the shutter replacement should actually not be part of the application. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the replacement of windows at 533 South Summit Street, as described in the application, with a recommendation against the use of shutters, specifically against the use of PVC shutters. McCallum seconded the motion. Brennan said he would like it to be clear that the recommendation is non-binding. Ponto said he felt that the recommendation is clearly non-binding by definition. McCallum withdrew his second of the motion. He stated that he feels it is important for property owners to know their rights but agrees that it is appropriate for the Commission to make recommendations. Gunn seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-2, with Brennan and' McCallum voting no. Terdalkar agreed to inform the contractor that the recommendation regarding the shutters is non-binding. 422 Brown Street. Weitzel said this is the second application regarding this project. He said that the first application was approved to the owner's specifications, to allow egress windows on the two sides of the front porch. He said the owner would now instead like to put the egress windows on the front of the pomh. Terdalkar said the owner would now like to replace two windows instead of installing two new windows on the sides. He said the proposal is to remove two frames of inoperable windows and replace them with double hung wood windows. Weitzel said that there is a large window well on one side of the porch that would prevent the installation of a window there without grading or some kind of walkway. He said the Commission discussed this at its work session, and the Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) also discussed it at its last meeting. Weitzel stated that the recommendation of the DRS was for the installation of four new windows across the front to give unity across the front fa(;ade. He noted that this is a filled porch, therefore there is nothing original to the building here. Weitzel said the DRS proposed the four windows to at least match across the front. Maharry said this project is changing something that is pretty much a puzzle anyway. Weitzel said the owner still wants just the two windows on the front. Maharry said the Commission only has the option of approving or denying the proposal, which is to replace two non-opening windows with opening egress windows. McCallum said the owner is required to have egress windows for rental property, but this situation has been like this for years. Gunn asked if the front windows had separate sashes. Terdalkar said that there are four separate fixed-pane glass openings that appear as tow large tow large windows. Weitzel commented that it consists basically of eight barn sashes nailed to a frame. McCallum asked what the owner's options would be if this were denied, since he is required to install egress windows. Weitzel said the applicant could go with the previous certificate if this one is not approved. He said the owner could try to work with that or come back with something new. Weitz. el stated that the Commission is required to work with the owner but is entitled to have design opinions. He said that if the situation is not immediately life threatening, then the Commission is obligated to work with HIS towards something appropriate here. Maharry said that what is supposed to be a porch here is now two apartments. He said that the two front openings look like windows. Maharry said he always tries to protect what is historic, and this is not. He said that the new proposal would not be a further detraction to the building. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 3 MOTION: Maharry moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a proposal to install egress windows at 422 Brown Street, as proposed. Carlson seconded the motion. Carlson said he could see Maharry's point in that the house is a jumble already. Carlson stated, however, that even though this is not historic, he would like to see unity there, especially on the front fa~:ade, which is the only part of the building visible from the street. Ponto commented that a person looking at the windows now would think they are double hung windows. He said that if one of each set is replaced, it will become obvious that they are not. Wayne, the owner of the house, distributed graphics of what the porch would look like with four replacement windows and with two replacement windows, one on each side. He said that with the replacement of only two openings, the remaining non-opening windows would flank and support them. Wayne said he is trying to put in egress windows in a manner that is least invasive. He said he would like to try to preserve whatever is there. Wayne said that his reaction to the two twin double hung windows on either side of the center is that it doesn't look good to him. He said it would also be a replacement of four of the five existing openings. Wayne said the openings are almost six feet high and the two sets would not be great looking. He said he thought the best arrangement would be to allow the inner two openings to remain and replace the outer windows with double hung windows. Carlson said the Commission's work is to decide if the four new double hung windows look much better than what the owner has proposed. He said that if the Commission is interested in preserving what Henry Black did, then it could agree to leave the two non-operable openings. McCallum pointed out that the style of Henry Black was to be non-conforming. The motion carried on a vote of 7-1, with Gunn votinq no. 404 South Summit Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a contributing structure in the Summit Street Historic District. He said this project was discussed at the Commission's work session on August 2, 2005. Terdalkar said the project involves demolishing the glass workshed to the east and south, restoring the foundation and basement walls, closing existing openings in the foundation wall, which will be exposed as the work-shed is removed, re-grading the yard, repairing the kitchen foundation, construction of new peers under the sleeping pomhes, and restoring the chimney, including tuckpointing. He stated that the work is proposed to be completed in three phases and that the potential restoration of the sleeping pomhes will be considered in the third phase. Blanc, the owner of the house, introduced her contractor, Pat Cincotta. Blanc said she was available to answer any questions about the project. Weitzel said the DRS looked at the project. He stated that the workshop on the back doesn't fit the style of the house and was added on later. Weitzel said that the artist, Mauricio Lasansky, and his family lived in the house at one time and put on the addition, which was probably used primarily by one of the sons for his work as a metal sculptor. Weitzel said that the workshop was built in or after 1952 and is therefore on the 50-year cusp. Weitzel pointed out that the workshop doesn't match the house but said that the historic significance needs to be looked at. He said the issue of significance and the association Lasansky was consulted with the State Historical Society office. From what he understood, Lasansky not have lived or worked from there. Weitzel said that he received a comment from Barbara Mitchell, Amhitectural Historian of SHPO, who said that because Lasansky is still alive and productive, it is not possible yet to know his impact. Weitzel stated that the sleeping porches and kitchen are additions to the house. He said that the rest of the house is in the Greek revival style, with Italianate additions on the front and side. Carlson said that his research showed that Lasansky bought the house in the 1950s and may have lived there with his family. He said that Lasansky's sons were the primary users of the house. Carlson said that it should be determined whether the 1950s and 60s were a period during which Lasansky did important work. He said he did not know if the Commission should refrain from approval of demolition of the workshop, because Lasansky is still active and productive in his 90s. Weitzel said that it appears from the Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 4 letter of Barbara Mitchell that the criteria states that a living artist is to have a lot less historic significance than one who is no longer living. Blanc agreed that Lasansky is a major artist, but she said that there have been a lot of major artists who have lived in Iowa City. She said the focus should be on the difference between the significant artwork and the significance of what the Historic Preservation Commission devotes time to achieving for the community. Blanc distributed a letter from Mrs. Sloan, written in 1972, for Margaret and Emil Trott, to prevent demolition of the house. Blanc said that Sloan moved into the house in 1910. Blanc said that there was a major fire in the house in 1919, before the sleeping porches were added on. She said that at one time there was a large wraparound porch on the northwest side of the house. Blanc stated that the letter shows that the current kitchen was not the original kitchen but was on the north side of the house, and there was direct access from the kitchen to the yard. Blanc said that Lasansky moved here from South America and had six children. She stated that in later years, the sons were in the house exclusively. Blanc said that Lasansky had print shops at The University of Iowa and at his summer house in Maine, but not in the house on Summit Street. Blanc said that what was built as a workshop was probably for the benefit of his sons. Blanc stated that there are eight steel frames on each side [of the workshop], and the rest is brick, but not good brick. She said that the walls are soft red brick, and the house is made of soft brick stone. Blanc said that the house was a fraternity in 1927 and was later converted into three apartments. She stated that it again became a single-family home, probably one or two families before the Lasanskys lived there. Blanc stated that there was once a turret on the northwest quadrant of the house. She said that holes were punched out, and there are I-beams under the porch. Blanc stated that the roof is made of a barn material. She said that she could not believe that Lasansky's art work and his association with the house and the demolition of the workshop are related. She would think that state of dilapidation of the workshop is a result of his efforts to construct this addition without any professional help. Weitzel said that preserving the building would be an effort to preserve all facets of his life. Blanc said that Lasansky sold the house to a developer, who planned to tear it down and construct apartments. Blanc said it was the efforts of the neighbors that prevented the tearing down of the house. She said she did not think that Lasansky would have placed great value on the house. Maharry asked Blanc if she had an opinion as to whether or not the sleeping porches should remain on the house. Blanc responded that it is hard to decide until the project gets past a certain point. She said the nicest thing would be to keep the pomhes. Blanc stated that even 30 years ago, there was already a compromising situation on the southeast portion. Blanc said there are options with regard to the porches. She said she could try to bring them back, but then all of the windows would have to be redone. Blanc said that the porches could be taken off, but then the house and the roofline would have to be brought back. She said another option would be to rebolster and reframe the pomhes but not enclose them. Blanc said she really could not answer the question yet about what she would like to see done with the porches. Maharry said that her decision is then partly based on what the Commission decides about the workshop. He said it is his opinion that the sleeping porches should be removed. Maharry said that they would be very hard and costly to redo. He added that they are not original to the building and not consistent with the style of the building. Cincotta suggested that the best thing to do would be to bring it back to a pomh and rail. He asked in case this option is not acceptable would the commission approve restoring the porch without the windows. Cincotta said that the floor is gone, the roof is okay, the panels are savable, but the structure on the inside is rotted. He said that the porch is supported by two I-beams that are also part of the workshop roof. Cincotta said there would be a small cost to construct new supports for the porch when the workshop is removed. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August15,2005 Page 5 Blanc said that there are three stages to the project and immediate need the partly collapsed structure, regarding the exterior to the east. She said that the porches could be stabilized and dealt with later. Maharry asked when the porches were constructed. Blanc stated that they were added on after 1919. Weitzel stated that the main priority of HIS is the workshop. He said that the next priority would be the sleeping porches and then the doorway. He asked Blanc for her preferences. Blanc said that she has received a directive from the City in that regard. Weitzel said that the Historic Preservation Commission is part of that process. Blanc stated that her intent is to comply before the end of the work season. She said the first work would be to replace the soffits and tear down the back addition. Weitzel said that the soffit replacement would be acceptable, as long as it was done with wood. He said the Commission should now focus on the workshop and the proposal to remove it. Blanc said she was working through this and hoped to get the workshop torn down. Weitzel said that, per the city Code, HIS should have talked to the Commission before issuing the notice to the applicant. The commission could then consult with the applicant and recommend appropriate solutions within 30 days of such communication. He said that if Blanc decides that she would like to have the porches removed from the back of the house, which is a different issue. Blanc said that the porches are part of phase three so that the Commission could look at the first two phases now to keep it simple. Weitzel said that would be acceptable if the rest of the house could be kept stable over the winter. Cincotta responded that it could. Weitzel said that a decision would not then have to be made now regarding the sleeping porches. Cincotta said that right now, a permit is needed for the soffit, the chimney work, and demolition of the workshop. He said that phase three could be removed from the application for now. Gunn asked about the exterior wall behind the porch. Cincotta said that it is still there however, some of the windows and door openings on this fa(;ade have been closed/filled in with glass block. He said that the plan is to change the dooms to windows and do something to the roofline. Cincotta said that something needs to be done but that what is there would be very expensive to restore. Weitzel asked how much of that addition is tied together if it was all built at the same time. Blanc said that not much was tied together. Cincotta said that he would need to install peers to prop up the sleeping porches and remove the workshop. Maharry said this project really hinges on whether the glass workshop is historic. He said that if it is not, then the rest of this is a no brainer. He said this hinges on if the area is worth preserving. Maharry said this is either an application for a certificate for demolition or a certificate for approval of building plans. McCallum said the significance of the artist is at issue. He said he does not see any overwhelming evidence that says that the workshop should be saved, and he would like to help the owner get started on this project. Maharry said the issue is whether the evidence presented shows the workshop to be historic or not, and the Commission must decide if there is enough evidence to show it to be historic or enough evidence to contradict a historic status. He said that there does not appear to be enough evidence presented either way. Weitzel said the period of significance is considered to be a moving window, at least for National Register properties. He said the window continues to move forward in time, which would make the 50-year window for significance relevant to issues before 1955 at this point. Brennan asked if a non-contributing property would then become contributing when it becomes over 50 years old. Maharry said that only if it had a reason to become contributing would it become so. Weitzel said it would need to fit within the context of the district. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 6 Carlson suggested that the Commission did not have enough information yet to make a determination about the workshop. Maharry said that Lasansky is well known in Iowa but perhaps not well known outside of the State. Weitzel and Gunn stated that the significance can be a State-wide significance. Maharry said he didn't know if the fact that this is Lasansky's hometown makes a difference in the significance. Weitzel said that the only procedural difference with this application is that it was initiated by a City action. He said the item could be deferred to gather more information. Carlson stated that he would like to have the full 30 days from the time of the application, which Terdalkar stated was submitted on July 25th. Blanc stated that it is already late in the building season and said she would like to get started as soon as possible. MOTION: McCallum moved to defer consideration of a certificate of appropriateness for a proposal for 404 South Summit Street to August 25th, in order to determine the significance of a former occupant. Maharry seconded the motion, McCallum said he is satisfied that the information and the letters show that there is not enough significance related to the workshop to delay a vote on this. Carlson said the issue is whether Lasansky is important, not whether the workshop per se is significant. Maharry said that while the artist is living, it seems that the artist would not be deemed significant enough to preserve the workshop. Weitzel said there are two related issues: whether there is enough information to make a decision on the significance and whether there is still enough integrity to the building to preserve it. Carlson stated that even though the workshop is in terrible condition, the integrity of it is still reasonably high. Cincotta stated that there is nothing left to the workshop that is useful. He said that the foundation and the timber are unusable. Blanc said that the workshop was a Rube Goldberg job. She said that Lasansky had no intent to preserve the building. Carlson referred to the criteria to decide whether this was worth preserving or not. He said, leaving aside the fact that Lasansky is still productive in his nineties, he assumed that one could still say that this is significant. Weitzel said the criteria include the word "generally." Carlson said that when the importance of an artist is considered, his studios are considered most important, but also to be considered are where his most important studio is, where he lived, and the integrity and where the house fits in. Maharry suggested that someone else would know what the workshop was built for and its significance. Carlson added that the Commission would not approve tearing down a porch on a famous writer's house, just because he did his writing in another room. Brennan commented that the workshop seems to be structurally unsound and unusable. Weitz. el added that if the integrity of the building is so bad that it cannot be used, then the significance doesn't matter. Gunn agreed and said that if it is irretrievable, the significance doesn't mean much. The motion to defer failed on a vote of 1-7, with Carlson voting no. Weitzel said (something about by proxy the decision is not significant.) Carlson said there is not enough information for approval. Weitzel said that Barbara Mitchell and (some other lady's) comments indicate that Criteria B and the integrity issue weigh against the significance issue. Terdalkar suggested that the Commission document the building before it is demolished. Maharry agreed that the workshop could be photographed, and the dimensions and description determined. He said this would not be demolishing anything of architectural significance. Terdalkar said that he thinks if the applicant wanted to build the same structure now, the commission may not approve such addition. He asked should a later addition such as the dilapidated workshop be saved if it is even possibly damaging the original structure. Carlson said the historic association is worth looking Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 7 at. He said, however, that he is in the minority on this issue and suggested that the Commission vote to approve or disapprove. Terdalkar referred to item three in phase one regarding closing off existing door passages in foundation walls with cement block masonry. Weitzel asked how much of the doors will be visible? Cincotta said the upper half, portion above grade will be visible. He said that it might look like a window with an archway. He said he would try to blend it with fieldstone. Blanc stated that the three on the east would not be visible. Cincotta said that he would use brick to fill in, if acceptable. Maharry said that the Commission will probably require skirting underneath the lower pomh so that probably none of it will be seen. Cincotta said that one might see upper half on the back side. Gunn asked if the applicant could explain about the archway openings. Cincotta said that some are original but not the two that Lasansky did. He said he could do them all in stone or at least the part that shows. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve phases one and two for the project at 404 South Summit street, including the demolition of the glass house workshop, with the modification of item number three in phase one to use rubble stone as a filler above grade level for all visible areas. Weitzel pointed out that no action is to be taken regarding the sleeping porches at this time. Brennan seconded the motion. Gunn said he would vote in favor of this project, as he feels it is necessary and reasonable. He said that the demolition of a structure that is unusable and irretrievable is acceptable, regardless of its historic status. Weitzel agreed that this would be a different story if the roof had not collapsed. The motion carried on a vote of 7-'1, with Carlson votin.q no. 922 East Colleqe Street. Terdalkar stated that this is a non-contributing structure in the College Hill Historic District that is an apartment building. He said the project involves the removal of window openings on the ground floor to install patios and to replace a mansard roof with vinyl. Terdalkar said that the proposal also includes installation of metal rails at grade to protect the wells created graded for the patio doors. He said that egress is provided by other windows. Weitzel said that the DRS discussed this, and the consensus was that the members would like to see uniform facades on buildings so that the impression on the neighborhood is less haphazard looking. He added that the DRS agreed that the intent of infill ... having no balconies far out. Maharry said that he would recuse himself from discussion on this item and would speak as a citizen. Weitzel said he would recommend against having window wells along the parking area. He said the DRS also discussed the possibility of disallowing vinyl. Weitz. el said that in this situation, it is probably a moot point. He added, however, that if this were a new infill construction in the neighborhood, the Commission could deny the use of vinyl. Weitzel said that the guidelines state that the Commission 'may' allow exceptions. He said his point is that if this were new, infill construction, the guidelines say that it is within the Commission's purview to deny the use of vinyl if it had a reason. Weitzel said that he, however, has not made up his mind to apply it in this case. Carlson said that Section 3.2 applies to overall exceptions. Maharry said that they are about not patios or balconies, just doom and windows. Gunn referred to Section 3.2, and Weitzel said that section 3.2 applying to the materials to be used. Carlson said that 3.3 allows an exception for non-historic properties and states that the Historic Preservation Commission "may..." allow the exceptions and it is not binding on the commission to allow non-historic materials. Gunn pointed out that this property is in a conservation district. Weitzel said the Commission could grant an exception here to allow vinyl but doesn't have to. McCallum said that vinyl was allowed for the property Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 8 in the historic district down the street in an earlier instance. Weitzel said it can be an exception if the Commission has a reason to allow an exception. McCallum said that overall, this would be a general improvement over what is there now. He said that the change of the rail style is an improvement. Maharry said this building faces a single-family home that is already there. He said the commission should not automatically approve all changes. Weitzel said that the intent of the infill guidelines is to not allow balconies on side elevations so that single-family dwellings are protected from nuisance such as noise etc. He stated that, in general, balconies are not allowed on the sides of buildings. Weitzel said that if this were new construction, this couldn't be done. He stated that the east side doesn't have balconies, but the west side does. Maharry asked if there would be a change in the east side fa(;ade. Terdalkar responded that there may not be enough room to add balconies on the east side where there is a driveway. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a proposal for 922 East College Street as proposed, but without the lower level patio doora and wells and with the provision that all of the siding used to replace the mansard areas be consistent on the entire building. McCallum said that this would be a major improvement overall. Weissmiller seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0, with Maharry abstaining. MINUTES FOR JULY 14, 2005 AND AUGUST 2, 2005. July 14, 2005. Carlson said he had typographical corrections to submit for items on page five. He also stated that in the last paragraph before the final motion on page five, in the first line, the word "agreed" should be changed to "...took the applicant's word..." Carlson said that in the second to last paragraph on page five, in the first sentence, the words "saw and shingle" should be changed to "sawn shingle" MOTION: Maharry moved to approve the July 14, 2005 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as amended. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. August 2, 2005. Maharry said it should be noted near the top in the headings area that this was a work session. MOTION: Ponto moved to approve the August 2, 2005 minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission, as amended. Maharry seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. OTHER: Maharry said he received an e-mail from a neighbor of the property at 420 South Lucas. Terdalkar stated that the owner received a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the roof but did not apply for a permit. He said the roof work has already been completed. Maharry asked if there has been an appeal of the Commission's decision regarding 946 Iowa Avenue, and Terdalkar said there has not. Burford said that the proposed new zoning code would change the CB-2 zone to multi-use zoning in the conservation districts. Miklo said the proposed zoning code would eliminate CB-2 zoning and would therefore rezone CB-2 properties to other appropriate zones, given the surroundings. He stated that there are two controversial areas: the area to the east of downtown that is proposed for the Mixed Use Zone and the area north of downtown in the vicinity of Pagliai's Pizza. Bun~ord said this change would affect older neighborhoods. Burford asked if the Commission would want to issue an opinion regarding changing the character of these neighborhoods. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2005 Page 9 Miklo said that since this was not included in the Commission's agenda as an item to be discussed and voted on, it would be best to proceed as individuals instead of taking action as a Commission. Maharry said that the Commission could go before the City Council while the new zoning code is being considered. Weitzel asked Burford, and she agreed, to draft something for the Commission to consider at a later meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:32. Minutes submitted by Anne Schultes:/pcd/minutes/HPCr2005~pc08-15-05.doc Historic Preservation Commission Attendance Record 2005 Ternl Name Expires 1/8 1/13 2/10 2/15 3/10 4/14 4/28 5/12 5/26 6/2 6/9 6/30 7/14 8/15 M. Brennan 3/29/08 .................... X X X X X X O O/E X R. Carlson 3/29/07 ........ X X X X X X O/E X X O X X J. Enloe 3/29/06 X X X O O X X O O O O/E O/E O/E O/E M. Gunn 3/29/07 O/E X O/E O/E X X X X X X O/E X X X M. Maharry 3/29/08 X X X X X X X .................... X X M. McCallum 3/29/06 X X X X X X O X X X X X X X J. Pardekooper 3/29/07 O?E X X O O O/E O O O O O X X O J. Ponto 3/29/07 X X X X X X X X O/E O/E 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 O/E X X X O/E X T. Weitzel 3/29/08 O/E OrE X X X O/E X X X X X X X X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM - No Meeting .... - Not a Member