Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-05-02 Bd Comm minutes MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL CONFERENCE ROOM APRIL 6, 2006 rnr APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Anciaux, Bob Brooks, Beth Koppes, Wally Plahutnik, Dean Shannon, Terry Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks STAFF PRESENT: Mitch Behr, Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Andrew Chappell, Charles Eastham RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Recommend approval, by a vote of 6-0, of SUB06-00004, an application submitted by Douglas Schnoebelen for a preliminary and final plat of Schnoebelen Subdivision, Resubdivision of Lot 2, Hoyles 1" Addition, a 4-lot, 2.61-acre residential subdivision located east of Hummingbird Lane. Recommend approval, by a vote of 6-0, of VAC06-00001, an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate the Alley of Block 27, north of Benton Street between Clinton Street and Dubuque Street. CALL TO ORDER Brooks called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA There was no public discussion. REZONING ITEM REZ06-00001: Discussion of an appiication submitted by Johnson County Permanent Supportive Housing LP for a rezoning from Public (P) zone to Public/Low Density Multi-Family Residential (P/RM-12) zone for 2.83 acres of properly located at 4435-4455 Melrose Avenue. Miklo said there is an issue regarding a median cut for Melrose Avenue. The developer submitted an application to the DOT, but was denied. They are appealing the decision, and request an indefinite deferral of the rezoning application. Shannon asked for clarification on the appeal. Miklo said the developer made application to the local office of the DOT for the median cut and received a letter saying it was not approved, The applicant indicated they will be appealing the decision, but he is not familiar with the appeal process. MOTION: Anciaux moved to defer the rezoning application indefinitely. Smith seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. SUBDIVISION ITEMS 1. SUB06-00003: Discussion of an application submitted by Dav-Ed Limited for a preliminary plat of Galway Hills Parts 10 & 11, a 56-lot, 21.75 acre residential subdivision located at Dublin Drive and Shannon Drive. Miklo said the applicant has requested a deferral until the April 20 meeting. MOTION: Koppes moved to defer the subdivision application to April 20. Anciaux seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes April 6, 2006 Page 2 2. SUB06-00004: Discussion of an application submitted by Douglas Schnoebelen for a preliminary and final plat of Schnoebelen Subdivision, Resubdivision of Lot 2, Hoyles 1" Addition, a 4-lot, 2.61 acre residential subdivision located east of Hummingbird Lane. T erdalkar reported the application concerns four residential lots in an RS5 zone. The lots do comply with zoning regulations. Three of the lots front on Hummingbird Land, with the other lot facing Lower West Branch Road. Both roads need improvements to meet city standards. The staff report indicates that the applicant is responsible for improvements to Hummingbird Lane adjacent to the subdivision, approximately 328 feet of road, and a portion of the cost would be shared by the applicant. However, the city engineer confirmed that this section would be part of the capital improvement project for Lower West Branch Road, so staff would like to amend statement to indicate the applicant will not be responsible for a portion of the cost of the road improvement. Terdalker said the applicant will be responsible for installing sidewalks along this section, which should be noted on the legal papers. The applicant is also required to extend sewer to the adjacent subdivision. The applicant is required to pay for the water main extension and sanitary sewer fees. Also, the discrepancies noted in the staff report been resolved, so staff recommended approval subject to approval of legal papers and construction plans. Brooks opened public discussion. There was none. Koppes asked if the commission needs to note the sidewalk requirement in the motion. Smith asked for confirmation that provision for the sidewalks would be included in the legal papers. Behr said yes. MOTION: Smith moved to approve the subdivision application pending approval of legal documents and construction plans prior to council consideration. Plahutnik seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. VACATION ITEM V AC06-00001: Discussion of an application submitted by the City of Iowa City to vacate the Alley of Block 27, north of Benton Street between Clinton Street and Dubuque Street. Miklo displayed a map indicating the location of the alley. He reported the ally currently serves several businesses located in the block. The county is in the process of acquiring all properties in the area, and had acquired all but two at the writing of the staff report. The two remaining properties do not use the alley, nor do they have access to it. The county's intent is to redevelop the block for a human service office campus, and would rather to do it as a whole rather than in pieces. Miklo said there is a sanitary sewer line running through the alley, so either an easement needs to be retained, or more likely the sewer line will be rerouted to an existing sewer on Dubuque Street. He noted that inquiries have been made with private utility companies, and there are no private utilities in this alley. Shannon said he thinks Quest has a cable in the alley. Miklo said they were sent a letter, but no response has been received. Miklo said staff does recommend that any necessary utility easements be retained. If there were any utilities other than sanitary sewer, the county would need to work with the private utilities to release the easement in the event that they run through the alley. He noted staff recommends approval of the application subject to retention of the necessary utilities easements. Brooks asked for input from the applicant. Chappell said he is the Assistant County Attorney in the civil division, and the county does not object to the city retaining an easement for the sanitary sewer. He said he suspects the application will come up for approval with the city council before the county is ready to remove buildings, so at that point he would recommend the city retain the easement and move the line at a later date. It looks like there is another sewer line on Dubuque Street where the current one could be rerouted, and the easement would be released at that time. Koppes noted there might be a private utility easement as well. Chappell said the county would take care of that as well. He displayed a picture of the area for the commission members, adding that the county Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes April 6, 2006 Page 3 has acquired all but two properties in the area, and are in the process of acquiring the last ones though he does not know what the timing will be on those. Brooks asked whether site plans for the new buiiding would come before the City. Miklo said yes, it would need rezoning to Neighborhood Public P1, and there are some setbacks and site plan requirements for that zoning. Brooks said he would like to make sure there is proper traffic circulation. Miklo said that is under discussion, and the city would work closely with the county on that issue. Chappell added the county is also interested in making sure traffic flows well. Behr said the actual vacation does not affect utilities. When the vacation goes to council, the city always checks on utilities and retains any necessary easements. Smith asked for confirmation that he and Shannon do not have a conflict of interest in this issue due to their employment with private utility companies. Behr said there is no conflict, because the city aiways keeps those easements. Miklo added that MidAmerican has reported they have no utilities in that alley. Brooks opened up public comment. There was none. MOTION: Anciaux moved to accept the vacation item. Smith seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. OTHER ITEMS Miklo noted the memo that commission members received regarding the April 17 council meeting and asked the members of the commission to attend. There are two items of interest, the first being that a consultant would be present to outline the steps for the preservation pian. Staff would like the commission to be informed and invoived in the process since the Historic Preservation Plan is part of the Comprehensive Plan. Also, Southgate will be presenting concepts for development of the Cardinal Ridge crossing area. Miklo said there would also be an informal commission meeting after the council meeting, hopefully in the lobby conference room. Smith asked what time the meeting would be. Miklo said to plan for 6:30 unless notice is sent otherwise. He said he would put a reminder into the meeting information packet. Shannon said he would miss the April 17 and 20 meetings. CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 2. 2006 MEETING MINUTES MOTION: Smith moved to accept the minutes from the March 2, 2006 meeting as submitted. Anciaux seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Smith moved to adjourn. Koppes seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. s:/pcdlminutes/p&zl2006104-06-06.doc ! Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission Attendance Record I 2006 i FORMAL MEETING Term Name Exoires 1/5 1/19 2/2 2/16 3/2 4/6 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X X OlE X X B. Brooks 05/10 X X X X X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X X X X OlE E.KoDDes 05/07 OlE X X X X X W Plahutnik 05/10 X OlE X X X X D.Shannon 05/08 X X X OlE X X T. Smith 05/06 X X OlE X X X I INFORMAL MEETING Term Name Exoires 2/13 2/27 D. Anciaux 05/06 X X B. Brooks 05/10 X X A. Freerks 05/08 X X E.KoDDes 05/07 X X W Plahutnik 05/10 X X D.Shannon 05/08 OlE 0 T. Smith 05/06 X X Key: X = Present 0 = Absent OlE = Absent/Excused N/M= No Meeting I I I ! p:: 5b 2 MINUTES APPROVE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, MARCH 29, 2006, 6:30 P.M. EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Jerry Anthony, William Greazel, Kelly Mellecker, Brian Richman, Michael Shaw (via speakerphone) Members Absent: Thomas Niblock, Matthew Hayek Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long, Sue Dulek Public Present: Stephen Trefz, Tom Walz Call to Order Anthony called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. Discussion Regarding FY07 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Requests Duiek stated that this is the time for someone to make a motion to reconsider the funding recommendations that were made at the March 23 HCDC meeting. No motion was made. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the commission, Greazel moved to adjourn. Richman seconded, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0 to adjourn at 6:37 p.m. ---.-----. -- I I , I Housing & Community Development Commission Attendance Record 2006 I I i Term Name Expires 01119 02/16 03/09 03/23 03/29 I Brian Richman 09/01/07 X X X X X i Jerry Anthony 09/01/08 X X X X X Kelly Mellecker 09/01/08 OlE X X X X Lori Bears 09/01/07 X OlE X -- -- -- -- Matthew Hayek 09/01/07 OlE X X X OlE Michael Shaw 09/01/06 X X X X X Thomas Niblock 09/01/08 X X X OlE OlE William Greazel 09/01/06 OlE X X X X I Yolanda Spears 09/01/06 -- -- X -- -- -- -- -- -- Key: X = Present I 0 = Absent OlE = AbsentlExcused I I NM = No Meeting I -- -- = Not a Member i I MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 2006, 6:30 P.M. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, ROOM A c:: APPROVED Members Present: Jerry Anthony, William Greazel, Matlhew Hayek, Kelly Mellecker, Brian Richman, Michael Shaw Members Absent: Thomas Niblock Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long Public Present: Ron Berg, Jesse Burns, Mary Chval, Maryann Dennis, Marla Edwards, Tracy Falcomata, Beth Koppes, Suellen Novotny, Mark Patlon, Sandy Pickup, Steven Rackis, Bill Reagan, Stephen Trefz RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL: Housing and Community Development Commission Funding Recommendations: FY07 CDBGIHome Projects HCDC RECOMMENDATION REQUESTED AMOUNT PROJECT NAME Housing. Home Eligible Activities Habitat for Humanity*- Homeownership ICHA - Tenant Based Rent Assistance FY07 HOME funds not allocated $220,000 $200,000 $89,409 $220,000 $368,064 Public Facilities, ED, Non-HOME Activities Arc of Johnson County - Fac Rehab. $2,852 CMHC- Facility Rehabilitation $18,280 DVIP - Facility Rehabilitation $6,400 Four Oaks - New Construction $200,000 Grant Wood Elementary - Playground $56,437 MECCA - Facility Rehabilitation $22,000 $2,852 $18,280 $6,400 $200,000 $56,437 $22,000 Public Services and Planning Compeer - Director Extend the Dream Foundation - Oper. Free Medical Clinic - Case Mgmt Shelter House - Outreach Coordinator VNA - Mental Health Home Care $1,000 $1,000 $4,900 $4,900 $2,500 $2,584 $2,250 $21,000 $10,000 $10,000 * Includes $25,031 in CDBG funds Consideration of minutes from February 16, 2006 MOTION: Greazel moved to accept the minutes as submitted. Hayek seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Public Comment Dennis distributed a letter to the commission members withdrawing The Housing Fellowship's application for CDBG funds for preservation of housing units. She said the city is willing to consider a $250K general obligation bond for the project over twenty years. She asked if the commission would provide a letter of support for the Housing Fellowship's request for a general obligation bond when it is considered by council. Anthony asked if there was consensus or discussion from the commission members about support for the Fellowship's request. Greazel said he was supportive. Hightshoe said a formal vote for that request could be put on the next meeting's agenda. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 2 Discussion of FY07 CDBG/HOME Funding Requests MOTION: Greazel moved to begin discussion with the Public Services category, then move to the Public Facilities category, and discuss the Housing category last. Shaw seconded, and the motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Hightshoe asked all the commission members to speak up so the visitors in the back of the room will be able to hear them. Anthony noted that most of the commission members did not allocate all available funds. He said he is concerned about this, and will have comments on the issue of holding funds back that he would bring up when appropriate. The comments may not influence discussion about Public Services, so he would wait until later. MOTION: Greazel moved to fund the Shelter House Coordinator at $2,250. There was no second, so the motion died. Hightshoe said that the bylaws indicate the commission has nine members, so five votes are needed in support for a favorable recommendation. Richman said most members were recommending between five and ten thousand for the Coordinator application, so the two groups should talk about why they funded at each level. Shaw said he would be comfortable with giving this project a lower amount if the funds were spread to other projects. He did not allocate to the other projects because with full funding to the Coordinator application, he would have had less than $1 K for the others. He added that funding the Coordinator position would be used to match federal funds, which is why he funded it at a high level. Mellecker said everyone funded this project at some level, so it should be a higher priority. MOTION: Greazel moved to fund the Coordinator application at $4K. Hayek seconded. Richman asked if it would make sense for the commission to come to some consensus on the amounts for all the projects and then vote on the overall allocations, or if people preferred to go line by line. Anthony said he preferred line by line. Hayek asked for confirmation that allocations could be changed later with future motions. Anthony said yes. Mellecker said looking at the whole category would be the beller way to go. Hayek said it is hard to keep track of what has been proposed for each line. Greazel noted that Long would keep track of the numbers on the projection screen. Anthony said he is more comfortable with going line by line. Then the commission members could debate each issue, and go back to amend previous decisions as needed, Hightshoe said the applications are ordered on the spreadsheet by the average priority ranking of the commission members. Richman said he would like to go higher with the allocation for the Coordinator application, such as $4,500. Shaw said he also wants to go higher, and noted the application had the highest priority for the majority of the commission members. Hayek said there are other applications that fulfill an immediate need. He said he could not go higher because of funding for Free Medical Clinic (FMC). Anthony said he definitely also wants to go higher for Shelter House. A lower level of funding would not adversely affect Free Medical Clinic (FMC) as much as Shelter House (SH). He agreed that both SH and FMC meet real immediate needs. However, funding SH gives more leverage for outside funding because of the federal match. Those additional funds would help many agencies. The commission voted against the motion with a total of 4 in favor and 2 against. Mellecker asked how much higher would the SH allocation need to be to gain support of the dissenting members. MOTION: Shaw moved to allocate SH at $6K. No second, so the motion died. MOTION: Shaw moved to fund at $5K, and Mellecker seconded. The commission voted against the motion with two in favor and three against, with one abstention. Richman said that $5K is a high amount considering the available pool is only $14K. He added that everyone wants to go higher for all the projects, but the funds just are not available. Hayek suggested $4,500. Shaw said he could support that if more money were put into other projects. He asked for confirmation that the other SH project would not be funded. Richman suggested considering the funding level for the other SH project at this point. There was general consensus to discuss both SH projects together. Greazel said he would agree to fund $4,500 for the Outreach Coordinator if no money were allocated for the Security Deposit. Shaw said the Security Deposit is important for renters and helps fill a strong immediate need. It is Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 3 difficult to choose between the two applications even though SH expressed a preference for funding the Outreach Coordinator. Richman said the commission should respect the preference of the applicant. Richman suggested again looking at the whole category before making a motion. Anthony said that would be fine. Richman suggested tentatively that SH Outreach Coordinator be funded at $4500 and asked for input about funding for FMC. Mellecker said FMC should be funded about equal to SH because it is one of the two that all the commission members funded. Richman suggested $4,500. Hayek said he would support that amount. Greazel said he would like more funding for FMC. Shaw asked about the Security Deposit. Greazel said he can support $4,500, but the total funding for SH should be no more than that. He said the commission should focus its efforts. Shaw asked if anything under $2K would be face-saving number for VNA. Greazel said he would rather focus. Mellecker suggested looking at VNA next because it has the next highest average allocation. Shaw said $4K would be high. Hayek said he suspected applicants could still use $1K or less. Richman asked for confirmation that Hayek thinks funding at lower amounts is still worthwhile. Hayek said yes. Hightshoe asked if there were any agencies the commission would not be funding. Shaw said NCJC was not funded except for Hayek. Hayek said he did have some concerns with the report issue, and would agree to not funding the project. Shaw asked for feedback about the concerns with Compeer's administrative controls. Anthony asked whether Compeer was also off the table. Shaw said it might be a lower priority. Hayek said he does not consider them a lower priority. He noted since the group operates on such a low budget, even $1 K would make a big impact. Hayek asked for clarification about the concerns with Compeer's ability to manage the funds. Anthony said the issue was with income and population reporting in the past. Hightshoe said the organization said they could improve that. Hayek noted that would be a question of data rather than managing money. Anthony said if the money is intended to serve a certain income population, then the issue could be with both. Hayek asked what qualifications are needed to receive Compeer services. Hightshoe said the organization must keep client income information in their files. The client may refuse to provide it, but they must document their efforts. They have received federal funding in the past, but the concern at the last meeting was that income information and time records should be kept. She added there were some problems that revolved around time records, but those issues were resolved. Hayek asked if Compeer has clients that do not fall within the income parameters of this funding. Hightshoe said the majority of their clients are most likely low to moderate income; the problem was the organization was not maintaining documentation one way or another. Richman asked who would support $1 K for Compeer. Four commission members agreed. Two members supported $0 funding. Anthony suggested looking at the average allocation for each application and trade money back and forth within the category. Hayek said that would remove all that have less than $1 K in average allocation. Anthony said that would be one way to do it, though not the only way. Richman suggested continuing as before. Hayek agreed. Greazel said he could support $1 K for Compeer. Mellecker suggested $1 K for Compeer, $2500 for VNA, and $1 K for Extend the Dream. Those amounts would fund those projects above the average allocation recommendation. Shaw asked whether the $800 remaining would go to SH Security Deposit. Hayek said it should go to the Coordinator application and allow SH to internally allocate the funds. Richman suggested dividing it between SH and FMC. MOTION: Shaw moved to allocate the Public Services category with $4,900 to both Shelter House Outreach Coordinator and Free Medical Clinic, $2,500 to VNA Mental Health Home Care, $1,000 for each the Compeer Director and the Extend the Dream Foundation Coordinator, with $0 allocated to the Shelter House Security Deposit and the NCJC Newcomers Network. Greazel seconded. Anthony said he would like to increase the SH Outreach Coordinator allocation even more. The average allocation for FMC is lower than what is on the table. He recommended giving $4,700 to FMC and putting the rest into SH. Hayek said he would support the $200 shift. Richman said he preferred the numbers already proposed. Mellecker noted that FMC asked for twice as much as SH. The commission voted on the motion as proposed. It carried on a vote of 5-1, Anthony voting against. Anthony said at the last meeting when the commission members discussed holding back some funding in reserve, he initially saw some merit in that approach. Next year there might be some good projects that could be funded. However there could also be less desirable projects next year, which the commission would have to fund because the money needs to be allocated within two years. So he does not feel that reason is very strong. Also, if there was a specific project being considered, that would provide a concrete reason to hold onto the funds. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 4 However, Anthony noted there are fewer applications for funding this year, and after talking to current and past applicants, and city staff, he believes there are two reasons for the lower number. The reasons are the scattered site policy limiting the location possibilities, and also the new city investment policy significantly limiting grants and changing interest rates. He is opposed to both policies, and initially thought this might be a chance to take concerns to council. Holding back money and pointing out the lower number of applications could bolster arguments against those policies. However, he realized the cost of holding back is staggering, so he supports spending all funds. Anthony asked whether the other commission members who support holding funds back considered the cost of that approach, or if they decided those costs were outweighed by benefits. Greazel asked what the costs are of not spending the full funding. Anthony said there is a cost involved with holding back, and the question is whether those costs outweigh the benefits. Shaw said one cost is that fulfilling some housing needs will be delayed. However, the benefits he sees are both what Richman discussed at the last meeting, but also the argument that it is important for the HCDC to discuss priorities during the next meetings, which would make decision-making easier in the future. Mellecker asked where the funds go if they are not spent. Hightshoe said the commission has two years to allocate the funds after they enter the city's line of credit on July 1. The funds are available to use, but are not drawn upon. The funds could wait until next year or there could be a mid-year allocation. Greazel said one message that not fully spending might send is that the commission cannot spend the money it already has, which could generate a bad image for the commission and bad feelings about the process amongst the applicants. Those are two obvious negative outcomes from not spending. However, he agreed he does not like the direction things are going and would like to change the policies. The question is how. Anthony pointed out that funds are decreasing, and with this approach the commission is voluntarily decreasing it even more. HUD looks at CDBG allocations periodically, and Iowa City could be the only community that has not fully spent. No community in the nation has not fully spent the funds because of the uncertainty inherent in the funding. HUD could come back and claim it. Hightshoe said HUD could not claim it as the city has two years to commit the funds to a specific project. She noted it is also possible to have a mid-year allocation; however HUD can't recapture the funds if the City is following the applicable HOME restrictions. Hayek said there is still time to allocate it before the deadline. Anthony said there are immediate benefits of housing vouchers and increasing housing opportunities, families who might not be homeless if a little more support was given to the projects. He cannot support holding money back because it would be irresponsible and cruel to expect people to suffer in a difficult situation now versus helping as much as possible. These are not numbers but people, so he strongly recommends spending all the funds. Mellecker said her concern is that the same thing will happen next year, but funding would likely be lower. The idea that there is only a 50 percent chance that projects will be better next year is not valid because the same organizations would be applying for funds. Anthony said future projects may be of the same quality. Richman said the idea to hold back funds also requires effort to work with the city and community to discuss ways to address long-term solutions to the housing situation. It does not make sense just to hold the money back for no reason, but requires the commission to take on some responsibility for moving the discussion forward. He agreed there is an immediate need for housing, but a long-term solution is needed. Anthony said he agrees a long-term solution is needed and that the city needs to be proactive in finding a solution and increasing affordable housing. However, there is no advantage to be gained in that discussion by holding money back. The discussion could be held on the topic either way, and it would be a disadvantage to have money held back when asking the city for more money. Shaw said if there is a discussion and there is a strategic plan and the commission is actively engaged with specific priorities, then the $100K held back is being put in place to be used in the future, and the commission is in the process of using them well. Anthony said his concern is how having money held back would change the nature of the discussion. Last year, funding was over one million dollars, while this year there is only $830K to spend. Having funds left over after allocation would undermine the argument that more support is needed. Hayek said he could see the merit in that point. However, he disagrees with the suggestion that not allocating all the money is cruel. The commission is charged with setting policy and determining the most prudent and efficient use of the funds. If that involves a decision to hold back and wait for better options, it is a question of effectively applying the funds. However, the question of whether holding funds back undermines the commission's position with the council is a good one that should be considered. Anthony said if there were oniy a moderate level of housing problems, the commission would have the luxury of strategizing. He is not against strategizing and making policy decisions. The commission has not been proactive for the past 20 years and he would like to change that. However, the situation in Johnson County is more similar to an Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 5 emergency room than out patient care. Emergency room treatment means treating the immediate problems, while out patient care situations allow deferring treatments if needed. Greazel said when considering whether to hold funds back, he did not do it arbitrarily, but instead looked at the projects and criteria. He said the commission is not throwing money at just anyone because it is available, but looking at the projects and determining whether it meets the commission's goals. The commission could tell the council that they hope at mid-year or next year there will be projects proposed that they feel very confident about and will use the money efficiently. Anthony said there are enough projects to use the money well. He believes the commission should be proactive in the community and with the council, and not rely solely on federal money, and then the additional funds gained locally could be used on an additional allocation. Richman said the housing situation is both chronic and acute, and to address it solely as a short-term problem will not solve long-term problems and fulfill the commission's obligation to the community. He does not think holding back money is a matter of strategizing, but instead is .an attempt to address long-term problems. Long-term problems need more than money, but also to have policy issues addressed. Until those policy issues are addressed, it is difficult to spend money in a fashion that best meets the long-term problems in the community. Mellecker said she agrees with Richman, that the commission is looking at making prudent financial decisions and allocating in the best way possible. Having money set back to use towards policy objectives shows dedication from the commission to actively engage in a policy discussion. Anthony said this would be the first commission to look at policy issues. In his memo to the commission at the beginning of the year, he laid out three initiatives that the commission should try to address. He said he is deeply committed to housing and has been active in this area for many years, including going before council to ask for additional funding, and going before the planning and zoning commission to ask for support for affordable housing. With his experience, he sees no merit in holding money back, since it would not improve the strength of the commission's argument in a discussion about policy. Hayek said he does not view holding money back as making a statement or sending a message. He said he thinks there could be significant changes at the council level in the next year on some of these issues, and there could be a completely different council outlook on these policies in one way or another. If that is the case, there might be some new projects proposed that would respond to those changes. He is not thrilled with the current projects, so he hopes to hold some money back to see whether other projects materialize. If not, the money would be allocated to similar projects as the ones proposed this year. Anthony said if better projects are not proposed, the money has been held for no purpose. Greazel noted that the topic had been thoroughly covered, and suggested moving on to discuss Public Facilities. Richman said the Housing Fellowship has withdrawn its application. Anthony said that means there is more money to give to other projects. Long said there has been a change to the amount requested by ReStore to $107K. Richman asked how much remaining funds are available in each category. Hightshoe said there are $484K in HOME funds and $331 Kin CDBG. Richman asked for clarification that HOME funds could be held back in reserve, while CDBG funds cannot be deferred. Also, CDBG could be put into land acquisition. Hightshoe said yes, in the Habitat and Harmony projects, the land acquisition would be eligible for CDBG funds. ICHA - Tenant Based Rental Assistance would not be eligible. Hayek recommended funding full amounts to DVIP and Arc, since all the commission members supported them. He suggested continuing with the practice of evaluating the whole category. Anthony agreed. Richman asked Long to fill in $2,852 for Arc, and $6,400 for DVIP. Hightshoe said she emailed the construction estimate information for Four Oaks to the commission members prior to the meeting. Habitat for Humanity submitted revised budget information that was distributed before the meeting. Greazel asked if there is support for $1 07K for ReStore, since it received a lot of support. Hayek said support was split in half. Shaw said he was able to fully fund everything else if he did not fund ReStore. Mellecker agreed. Greazel suggested fully funding the Grant Wood playground and ReStore. Hightshoe said the ReStore project has changed from property acquisition to facility rehabilitation since the application was submitted. The city would purchase the building and Habitat for Humanity would lease the space. The lease would have to be approved by the council. The council must approve the below market lease and show the public purpose or benefit. When asked, Patton stated there was council support of the project. Shaw asked what the advantage is to the revised plan. Hightshoe said it would be a larger lot and would be able to offer many services such as an east side recycling area. The furniture project and the salvage barn could possibly relocate there as well. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 6 Hayek asked how likely it is that the plan would be approved by council. Hightshoe said there is support. Patton said council is supportive of the general concept. Richman said though he is supportive of Habitat for Humanity, he feels there is too much in flux with the ReStore project for him to feel comfortable funding it. He does not know whether it will go through, and does not know as much about the cash flows of ReStore. He said he is more comfortabie with the Four Oaks project. Mellecker said she also favors Four Oaks over ReStore. Shaw asked if the ReStore project would go forward if it were not fully funded in its new form. Patton said the sprinkler system in the building is a safety issue that needs to be addressed. Otherwise the building needs to be converted from a garage into a place that is more comfortable for customers. He does not know how much volunteer labor will be available. Greazel said he supports fully funding DVIP and the Arc, and recommended fully funding Grant Wood as well. He asked for feedback about Grant Wood. Shaw said the average allocation for this project is skewed by one recommendation for $0. Mellecker said the five middle projects were almost all fully funded. If all of those are fully funded, $225K is left over. Richman said fully funding Grant Wood is fine. Anthony asked about funding for MECCA. Greazel said he would support full funding. Shaw asked if the commission could recommend a cooperative effort between the applicants. Anthony said yes. Greazel said that MECCA would be fully funded then. Shaw said he is more strongly committed to fully funding CMHC than MECCA because the repairs are more an issue of safety. If MECCA is fully funded, then he thinks CMHC should also be fully funded. Greazel said the discussion is now down to Four Oaks and ReStore. Mellecker said that $225K remains to be allocated. Richman said the funds could be spent in this category or put into land acquisition for Harmony or Habitat. Shaw suggested 75 percent of requested amount to Four Oaks and 50 percent to ReStore. Richman said he is not sold on ReStore. Greazel said he would prefer to fully fund Four Oaks. Anthony said if Four Oaks is given $200K, then that leaves $25K. He asked if any of the HOME funds could be applied to this category. Hightshoe said no. Mellecker said she thought this would be a good opportunity for savings, freeing up $50K by allocating $175 to Four Oaks and $0 to ReStore. Richman noted CDBG funds must be fully spent this year. Greazel suggested $150K to Four Oaks and $75K to ReStore. Richman said he does not think that $150K to Four Oaks would carry the project. Chval said the project would have to be reworked if funded at that level. Greazel said he would prefer to avoid reworking the project so they could do it without cutting corners. Richman said it costs more in the long run to build at a lower cost, so the lowest he would go for Four Oaks is $185K. Shaw said the issue is what to do with the money that is left over. Richman said it should be spent on Habitat or Harmony land acquisition. Greazel asked whether there was a required amount necessary for the ReStore project. Patton said the greatest need is for the sprinklers, and they would not turn down any amount. However, the project would go forward regardless and funding would be found. Shaw said ReStore does not have an income requirement for using their service, so when considering whether to fund the project, locating the furniture project there had a significant impact on his opinion. Having the furniture project located on the east side would be a significant improvement on that service's availability. Greazel said this is another organization with two requests, so he suggested giving more money in the HOME funds. Richman said ReStore is in flux, and that he is more comfortable funding the Habitat land acquisition application. Greazel suggested giving Four Oaks $200K and increasing the Habitat land acquisition allocation accordingly. Richman confirmed that would mean $0 funding for ReStore and leave $25K in CDBG funds to be spent in land acquisition. Anthony said ReStore is a good project, and it would go forward regardless, so he could live with that plan. Mellecker said the Habitat land acquisition application is better, since there is more information available and the situation is settled. Shaw suggested looking at the Housing applications and then reviewing the Public Facilities applications again. MOTION: Greazel moved to accept funding allocations for the Public Facilities category with full funding requested amounts for Arc, CMHC, DVIP, Four Oaks, Grant Wood, and MECCA, and $0 for Habitat ReStore. Shaw seconded. Hayek said he has some discomfort about the ReStore project. He asked whether that application came before the commission last year. Anthony said yes, and he recommended against funding then. However, now he feels the project is really flying, so thinks it should be funded at some level. He is not concerned about the project this year. Richman said he is not yet prepared to support the current motion until he sees how the funding in HOME funds works out. Anthony suggested voting on the motion and coming back to this category later. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 7 The commission voted against the motion, with three in favor and three against. Anthony asked whether reducing $200K would work for those opposed. Hayek said everything is fully funded in the Public Facilities categories except for Four Oaks and ReStore. He asked whether moving $25K out of Four Oaks to ReStore would be effective. Anthony confirmed that would be $25K more than the $25K already allocated, taking it to a total of $50K. Mellecker said $25K might not do anything, so her preference is to do $0 and put the money somewhere more effective. MOTION: Hayek moved to allocate $175K to Four Oaks and $50K to ReStore, with full funding to the other Public Facilities projects. Greazel seconded. The commission voted against the motion with four in favor and two against. MOTION: Richman moved to allocate $200K to Four Oaks and $0 to ReStore, with a commitment to put the extra $25K into Habitat's land acquisition after allocating the HOME funds. Greazel suggested not deciding on the Public Facilities category until the HOME funds have been determined. There was no second, so the motion died. Greazel suggested $180K for ICHA, based on the average allocation recommendation. Anthony said he would like it to be higher. Mellecker said she would like it higher as well. She suggested focusing on a few projects and not funding Harmony. After focusing on some of the projects, the leftover amount did not seem like very much. Shaw asked whether the Harmony project would scaie back if not fully funded, or if it would go through at all. Burns said it is not a simple yes/no answer. Tax credit projects need to have a certain magnitude to go forward, either in the number of units or cost per unit, to generate enough tax credits. Considering the millions of dollars leveraged in previous projects through federal and state programs, he estimated a project similar to Whispering Gardens would be possible at a lower level. That would require review vis-a-vis the scattered site policy, however. The reason the Harmony request is at its level is because of the land cost for compliance with the scattered site policy. He estimated they could do a project similar to Whispering Gardens with $150K and still have enough to leverage state funds. They cannot apply for state HOME funds without a certain commitment from local funds. He estimated that $150K minimum would be needed to do the project. Greazel asked where the money would come from if Burns did a project in another community that did not have HOME funds. Burns said it would be made up with state HOME fund requests. They also have used enterprise zone benefits for some projects, though that has not been approved in Iowa City. Hightshoe said if the project is not in an entitlement city, they could apply for funds competitively through the state. Anthony said since Iowa City is an entitlement city, funding must be provided through the city allocations. Hightshoe added that while some projects have received both state and entitlement funds, it does not happen often. Shaw said that the developer has served the city well. Greazel said everyone has done well with the money they have received. Anthony said he likes the project because it brings funding into the community through state funding and investment. His concern was with the cost per unit, but that might be based on tax credit project guidelines raising the rates. If comparing funding $200K to Harmony versus $200K to Four Oaks, Harmony would bring in additional funding whereas Four Oaks would not. However, he noted that is an example only and not a fair comparison since it looks strictly at financial benefits, since Four Oaks provides an essential service and Harmony does not. He said additional funding is a big plus in his consideration. Richman suggested $150K for ICHA. It is an important program that helps people right away. Shaw asked whether this is the only project that involves rental housing. Richman said that Harmony is rental housing. Mellecker said she thinks giving the tenants options on where they live through housing vouchers is a better plan than creating a few housing units of a specific type. Greazel said he is looking at the number of people the programs will impact. Anthony said that is a valid point, and that the ICHA program is a good program. He said as the application was originally submitted, the funds could be used outside of Iowa City. However, Rackis said the commission could specify funds given to the ICHA be used only in Iowa City and he would make it work. Greazel asked whether there was support for $180K for ICHA. Hayek said he is willing to discuss it but would like to see how the other projects work out. Greazel said that leaves $84K plus $25K from the Public Facilities category. He said he would support the funding currently on the board, which includes not funding Harmony. Anthony said he would like to fund Harmony. Burns is the only developer from the private sector that has provided affordable housing. The average allocation for Harmony was $64K, and he suggested increasing it to $110K. Shaw said that would be the $84K plus the $25K from the other category. Richman said if $200K is allocated between Four Oaks and ReStore that leaves $25K to go into land acquisition. Anthony said with the plan as it stood, Harmony could get $110K. Greazel asked what that amount would do in terms of project viability. Burns said he was mentally comparing numbers to Whispering Garden, which is the basis for his estimate for $150K. He said a lower interest rate might be possible, though it is already pretty low. Shaw Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 8 asked if Harmony would come back next year with this application. Anthony said they would be back regardless of whether funds are held back or not. Shaw said it is possible that Harmony would come back next year with a project the commission could more fully fund because of holding back money this year. Anthony said there is no guarantee since nothing would be in writing. Shaw agreed. Hightshoe questioned if commission members were interested in HOME projects that could repay the City as that was the point of the Financial Investment Policy. Greazel noted that Habitat's project is 100 percent taxable, while Harmony is Section 42 and not fully taxable. Burns said the amount that is taxable is based on the income approach in the application. He estimated these units would be around 50 cents on the dollar. He added that since the project would pay money back, those funds could also be reused for future housing projects. Greazel agreed that is a good point. Anthony noted that Habitat does great work, but Harmony would bring in more funding from outside of the community. Greazel pointed out that even if the funding were not used in Iowa City, it would be leveraged elsewhere. Iowa City is very affluent, and a poorer community could also benefit from those funds. Anthony said many of the poorer communities do not have the same housing problem since while they have low incomes, they also have affordable housing. Per the census, Johnson County has the highest percentage of people with an affordable housing problem. Richman said that Habitat would also ieverage funding through in-kind donations. Anthony said that Habitat should receive full funding, but also that Harmony should be funded at some level. Hayek noted the commission is running up against the issue of holding back money. Richman said he is willing to fund Harmony, though then discussion is needed about amounts for the other projects. Hayek said he is leaning toward holding funds back for the future, and that he thinks more private developers should be involved in providing affordable housing. It is a complex area, which might be why others are not involved, but there is room for private developers. Richman suggested funding Habitat at $175K, ICHA at $150K, and Harmony at $75K. Shaw asked whether Richman was changing his opinion about holding funds back. Richman said no, just reducing Habitat and ICHA and putting that $75K into Harmony. Anthony asked how $100K was decided as the amount to hold back. Hayek said that was what he ended up with during his calculations. Mellecker said her concern is that if funding is split between three projects; all would be crippled versus making two of them viable. Richman said he could support what has been proposed at this point, $200K, $200K, and $0. Rackis said he would like to clarify that ICHA money goes to the landlord and is fully taxable in the private market unless it is going to a tax credit project. The money goes back into the community. Mellecker suggested $200K for ICHA and $220K for Habitat. Greazel said he could support that. Hayek asked how much support there is for funding Harmony, since three people allocated $0 and the others were varied. Shaw suggested voting on Harmony alone as a line item. Anthony asked if Mellecker, Greazel, and Shaw are still recommending no funds for Harmony. Mellecker, Greazel, and Shaw said yes. MOTION: Richman moved to put $200K to ICHA and Four Oaks, $220K to Habitat, and the other numbers as they currently stand. Mellecker seconded. Mellecker said that would leave $89,409. Shaw asked what would be done with the held back funds. Richman said the commission could ask they remain in the City's line of credit while the commission worked with developers and the community to create good long-term solutions to the housing problem. Hayek said he would like to fund Harmony, and he also wants to hold money back. He suggested reducing funds for Habitat and ICHA and using the balance for Harmony. Richman said he would support funding Four Oaks at $190K. The commission members voted against the motion with four in favor and two against. Richman asked how much Hayek would like to put into Harmony. Hayek said he does not know, though he originally had the project at $100K. Richman suggested reducing Habitat and ICHA and funding Harmony, which would still leave money held back. Mellecker asked where that would put Harmony, and if it would be viable. Greazel asked how much a $1 OK reduction would impact the ICHA project. Rackis said the request was based on a per unit cost of $426 per month, so $200K would support 40 people for one year or 20 people for two years. Richman asked if a good estimate is $5K per unit per year. Rackis said yes. Greazel noted that Harmony is only six units, and it comes down to the number of people who would benefit. Hayek said the impacts of the two projects are impossible to compare. Rackis said what needs to be evaluated is the long-term benefits. In those terms, the two projects could be compared. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 9 Anthony said the average amount held back is $43K. He suggested holding $50K, then putting the other $39K elsewhere. Shaw said there was agreement to increase the land acquisition allocation for Habitat since ReStore was not funded. Mellecker said there were two recommendations to hold back $0, which skews the average. Hayek asked how many commission members would support holding back $100K. Five members agreed, with Anthony against. Mellecker said $150K would need to be pulled from other projects to fund Harmony. Anthony suggested holding back $50K, plus reallocating from the other projects. He noted he originally recommended holding back $0 but has come up to $50K. Richman said he originally wanted to hold back $120K and has come down to $90K. Hightshoe asked if the commission could come to a consensus if after setting priorities during the next year, the city puts in an application based on those priorities. Anthony said no that wouid not alleviate his concern, since the city could make a proposal even without having funds held back. Hayek said he could support $75K held back. Anthony asked how the other funds would look at that point. Hayek said $25K into Harmony plus some from Four Oaks and the other Housing projects. Greazel said he wants to give Four Oaks full funding so they can do the project as proposed. Hayek said taking $25K from each category would give Harmony $100K. Richman said he could do $75K for Harmony, but cannot find $100K for the project. Shaw said he would like to fund Harmony, but it seems like so much more could be done by strongly funding the other projects. Mellecker agreed. Anthony said he would be able to support Hayek's numbers, though he would prefer more money for Harmony. Richman said that would leave $40K to be held back, which he could not support. Greazel said he would like to put the extra $25K back into Public Facilities, to make it easier to keep track of. Hayek asked if the two Habitat projects could be considered together. Anthony said no since the ReStore project is a partnership project that leases a space in collaboration with other groups, while the land acquisition project is a stand-alone project. Richman suggested making final decisions about the Housing category before deciding what to do about ReStore. Shaw noted $60K more is needed to make $100K hold back. Mellecker said she thinks ICHA and land acquisition are too low. Greazel agreed, and the only place he can find the money is from Harmony. Anthony said he could support the current numbers. Mellecker asked for confirmation that Harmony would not be viable if funded under $150K. Shaw said that Burns was comparing that amount to another project, but that does not mean $1 OOK would not be helpful. Burns said they would take $100K if that were the amount available. Anthony said if the commission does not allocate the funds, they are giving up the authority to determine where the funds should go. Richman noted the council could do anything they want with the funds, since the commission only offers recommendations. Anthony clarified that if the commission holds back $50K, for example, the council could allocate the held back funds as they wished. Mellecker said that argues for holding back a higher amount, and that $100K sends a more solid statement about the commission's commitment and intentions. Hightshoe asked for clarification on what statement would be expressed by holding funds back. Hayek said he thinks some changes are coming up in the next year, and having additional funds might give the commission the opportunity to respond to projects that work with those changes. He noted he is not thrilled with any of the projects currently on the table. Hightshoe said a justification memo needs to be written that includes why those funds were held back and what the commission wants the council to do with them. Richman said he agrees with Hayek's statement about not being thrilled with the projects on the table. However, the bigger issue is the desire for the commission to work with the council and community to create a better balance between the short- and long-term needs, which are currently funded through short-term funds. Hightshoe noted that both the intended statement and reasons behind it need to be clear when the statement is made to the council. Greazel said $100K would be more valuable next year, since the funding might go down again. Having an extra amount of money held back might make a project viabie that otherwise would not be. Richman suggested funding Harmony at $75K, Habitat Land Acquisition at $170K, ReStore at $0, ICHA at $165K, and hold back $100K. Greazel noted that allocating to Habitat at that level would be less than half of what they requested. Richman said they are still receiving the highest percent of funding.from the commission. Mellecker said she thinks the $75K for Harmony could be used elsewhere more effectively. Shaw said that narrows down the discussion and asked if it is all about the $75K. Hayek said he could support those numbers. Anthony said Habitat's Land Acquisition amount is too low. Greazel and Mellecker said they were in favor of $0 for Harmony and higher funding elsewhere. Housing and Community Deveiopment Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 10 Anthony asked how many lots $220K would get for Habitat. Patton said four lots at $55K each. Shaw said $170K would then fund three lots. Mellecker said Harmony's lots are $60K each. Richman asked how to resolve the disagreements. Greazel said he does not agree with the current suggestion Anthony agreed. Hayek said he could live with it. Greazel said he would reduce the hold back amount before allowing ICHA go that low. Hayek said he would leave Public Facilities as it stands, leave the hoid back amount at $100K, and either take the Housing category as it stands or do something with Harmony. Shaw confirmed that Hayek would choose holding back over Harmony. Hayek said yes. Richman agreed. Anthony suggested not holding back funds and distributing the $100K evenly amongst the three housing projects. Shaw said the money would come from either Harmony or deferred funds. Hayek said he would like $100K held back. Greazel said he is unhappy with having ReStore at $0 if the Land Acquisition amount is so low. He added if Habitat does not get full funding for the lots, they will not have the funds to shift around as needed, so he wouid need money to be put into ReStore. Anthony asked why the amount held back is $100K, rather than holding all the HOME funds back. Richman said he thinks it would be unwise not to fund any affordable during this allocation. Hayek said the number is arbitrary, and that he decided on $100K because it is a sizeable amount of money that could have a beneficial impact on future projects. He said he does not see projects that capitalize on densities the change in zoning code was supposed to address, such as townhouses. Anthony said next year there might not be a scattered site policy, which would open up more areas for housing. Richman said holding funds back is about balancing long and short-term needs and goals. Anthony said in his experience with affordable housing issues, he believes a $100K commitment is not going to change council opinions or policies in any way. He agrees that the commission should try to change policies, but recommended maximizing the current funding to meet current needs, and then have the discussion about addressing those long-term concerns and policies during the next year. Mellecker said there is a very good chance funding will decrease next year, and $100K could make or break a project. Anthony said holding back funds might result in next year's allocation being lower. If there is a cushion, the push for long-term changes might not be as strong. Mellecker said she thinks it would be easier to change policy than get additional funding. Anthony disagreed. Hayek said he does not look at holding back funds as a way to change policies. The policies will change one way or another, and having the extra funds next year could help fund a project that takes advantage of those changes. Long pointed out that the council could put the held back funds somewhere else. Richman said the council could do anything they want, including change the allocations for all the projects. Anthony said the commission is responsible for recommending allocations to the council for the full amount, and if the commission cannot decide, it defaults to the council. He said he thinks the commission is capable of allocating the funds. Shaw said the final say would default to the council either way. Greazel said if the commission allocates it, the council does not change it very much. Anthony agreed, as long as the full amount is spent. Shaw asked when the last time money was held back. Anthony said never, and for 99 percent of communities, money is not held back. Mellecker suggested funding Harmony at $0, Habitat Land Acquisition at $220K, ICHA at $200K, ReStore at $0, which would leave $90K held back. Anthony said he would support $50K held back, and split the remaining funds between the two Habitat projects and Harmony. $25K for ReStore would bring Harmony up to $100K. Greazel said he agrees with Mellecker's suggestion. If Harmony were funded, he would take money from the hold back funds before reducing other funding. Hayek said if that is the choice, he would agree. MOTION: Greazel moved to accept funding in the Public Facilities and Housing categories with Harmony at $0, Habitat Land Acquisition at $220K (of which included $25,031 in CDSG funds), ICHA at $200K, ReStore at $0, Four Oaks at $200K, and fully funding the requested amounts for Arc, CMHC, DVIP, Four Oaks, Grant Wood, and MECCA, which would leave $89,409 held back. Richman seconded and the motion carried on a vote of 5-1, with Anthony voting against. Anthony asked for two volunteers for the committee to write the justification memo for the funding decisions. Given his strong position against holding funds back, he asked for someone who was strongiy in favor of the position. Hightshoe said the justification letter is needed by March 31. Richman and Greazei volunteered to assist. Anthony said he would email them. Anthony noted for the record that he strongly objects to holding back any funding and views it as an abrogation of the commission's responsibilities as established by the council. He said he feels it would be acceptable if the Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 23, 2006 Page 11 commission had a specific project in mind for the funding, but otherwise it is irresponsible not to allocate all the funds available. There being no further business to come before the commission, Hayek moved to adjourn. Greazel seconded, and the motion passed on a vole of 6-0 to adjourn at 9:35 p.m. = o .- '" '" .- 13 13 o U ..... = ., "0 13 8 Q. "" o ., ~ ~ ~ ., IJ:> ~ "" <:> .... = <:> C~M ._ "0 = = = ., 13 ;: 13 < o U ~ CJ) = .- '" = o == l"l , ~ , t:! >:: >:: >:: , >:: >:: >:: , l"l , 0 , <:> , I a, , <:> >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: , -- , l"l <:> , IJ:> IJ:.l .... >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: -- -- M 0 <:> a, ~ IJ:.l ~ , .... >:: >:: >:: >:: >:: , -- -- .... 0 0 0 , <:> , tIl t- oo 00 t- t- 'J:> 00 'J:> 'J:> 8 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- a>.~ - - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- E-<1J:.l 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. ..:.: ..:.: - = ., '" ~ ~ ~ "" N .. ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 13 "" - ., ~ 0 ~ ~ ..c ..c ..c ., '" == ..c Z .. - ~ 00. "" ..... - .. 00. ~ = ., ~ ~ ~ ~ - '" 13 < ., ., ~ "0 ., = t .a ~ ..c ~ 13 ~ = ..... ..c .- ~ ~ .- ..... - ~ - .. ~ "" 0 - - .- ., 0 ~ ..c ~ 0 .. ., ~ Z ~ ..., ~ ..:l Eo-< >< "0 ~ ~ ::l bl)..c "" i:: 8 ><:.- (l) 15+-,~1l~ <l)~~~ro 1ZI tf.l lZI '+-' ~~~ZZ II II II II II ;,:, ~~ ~>::OOZ MINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2006, 6:30 P.M. IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, ROOM A C[ APPROVED Members Present: Jerry Anthony, Lori Bears, William Greazel, Matthew Hayek, Kelly Mellecker, Thomas Niblock, Brian Richman, Michael Shaw Members Absent: Staff Present: Tracy Hightshoe, Steve Long, Linda Severson Public Present: Ron Berg, Mary Chval, Maryann Dennis, Mark Edwards, Marla Edwards, Beth Koppes, Jan Lehman, Sandy Lawrence, Suellen Novotny, Mark Patton, Steven Rackis, Stephen Trefz, Michele Schintter Call to Order Anthony called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. Public Discussion of any Item Not on the Agenda Bears apologized to the commission members for being unable to attend the last meeting. Anthony said the city legal department advised that if a commission member has a potential conflict of interest - such as serving as a board member on any of the agencies that are applying for funds - they should talk to city staff at the end of this meeting. The matter will be investigated and a decision made whether the commission member can participate on March 23 when the commission formulates a budget recommendation to Council. Hayek said he has discussed his situation with representing Community Mental Health Center as their outside counsel and it was determined he does not have a conflict: Bears said she has to abstain from discussing the ARC of Johnson County as she has been on their board since July. Hightshoe said more research on that situation will be done to find out what options are available and she will contact Bears later to discuss it: Discussion Regarding FY07 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Requests Anthony said the discussion would occur in two stages, first to discuss the rankings, and then the average allocations. No decisions are made on allocations at this meeting, though they may be discussed. Score sheets and recommended allocations from each member have been distributed, but the commission members should feel free to alter their recommendations and give their changes to staff by early next week. Staff will make the proposed changes before the next meeting. Anthony said updated score and allocation sheets were distributed at the beginning of the meeting. Hightshoe said the allocation sheet is the same, but the ranking sheet has been updated with Greazel's information. The ranking for public facilities was the only change. Anthony asked how the commission would like to proceed. City staff has taken pictures of one of the housing projects and all of the public facility projects. All agreed to begin by discussing the public services projects and to review them one at a time. Hightshoe suggested discussing the projects that had a large difference in scoring. Shelter House - Outreach Coordinator Richman suggested that Anthony and Shaw share their thoughts regarding why they recommended full funding for this project: Anthony noted first that this category could only provide up to $14,300.00, so it would not be possible to recommend funding for all the projects. He chose to fund the Outreach Coordinator fully because Shelter House would use the money as part of the local match for a large federal grant, which would potentially bring in an additional $400K in outside funding. The additional funding would benefit not only Shelter House, but also many other service groups in the community. Not funding this project would potentially lead to losing out on the larger grant: Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 2 Shaw said the match of funds from the outside grant, plus the fact that it would benefit more than just Shelter House, also primarily influenced his recommendation. He felt it was the one he would like to fully fund and then review the other projects after that. Hightshoe said the commission members also have the option to ask the applicants questions if necessary. Greazel said he did not recommend funding for this project because there is never enough money to go around. His philosophy on the issue is that the choice is either to provide funding to one or two projects, enough to make an impact or to spread the money thinly all around. Putting all efforts into one might make it strongly viable, versus spreading the money and making several things barely viable. He noted there is nothing wrong or lacking in any of the projects; he simply chose a few to focus attention on this year and will choose other projects in the future. Hayek said he does not know that partially funding would make or break any of the projects. Since not all of the projects can be fully funded and since all of the applications had a lot of merit, he chose to fund them all at some level. Some were weighted more heavily than others, but all received something. Mellecker said she falls between the two approaches, but tried to choose some projects to focus on. Shelter House representatives did say they would prefer funding go to the Outreach Coordinator, so she chose to fund that project and not their other project. Shaw said he was trying to maximize some of the funding, but also spread out the rest of the funding to the remaining projects, hoping a little would be helpful. In this case, he funded his top candidate fully, and then spread the rest of the money among the other projects. Shaw asked for clarification whether Greazel had a strong opinion about not funding any of the agencies. Greazel said he thinks all of the applications are great programs. It is simply a question of how best to distribute the money, and trying to make the best judgment. He has decided to try to make a real impact on a few things and choose other things next year, but stated all were good programs. Free Medical Clinic - Case Management Anthony asked if anyone had comments about this project. Greazel said the clinic makes an immediate difference in people's lives. Some other things are not as urgent, but having medication available is a high priority. Richman said this program also brings in many in-kind donations from drug companies and other donors, so it is another one that gives a lot of leverage in terms of funding. Anthony said he is not sure that he agrees with the funding leverage aspect, because it is not a local matching situation. He said it is a great program and he wished more money were available to fund it. Shaw noted the stated intention is to use the funding for case management and said he did weigh that aspect against whether funding this project would make a significant impact on their services in terms of direct patient care. Hayek said the announcement of the clinic's move coincided with the last HCDC meeting. He asked if there is any information about staffing needs for the new clinic and when it will open. Hightshoe said a larger space would help them utilize more volunteers. Hayek said that could ramp up the demands on their staff. Shaw asked whether the case management project would work if it was not fully funded. Hightshoe said their representative indicated funding would be found. Anthony asked about the loan forgiveness situation. Hightshoe said the clinic received a loan in fiscal year 1997 to renovate the Wesley Center into medical office space. It was a 10-year forgivable loan, which still had approximately 1.5 years left with $5,000 outstanding to be forgiven. Free Medical Clinic asked if they could move up the expiration date and forgive the remaining debt at that time so they could move. They did not ask for additional funds for the relocation. Bears asked if the clinic was supposed to find a tenant. Hightshoe said the Wesley Center is now looking for a tenant for that space. As far as she knows, they do not have one yet. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 3 Shelter House - Security Deposit Niblock asked if there was a preference specified between the two Shelter House projects. Anthony said yes, Shelter House stated the Outreach Coordinator. Hayek said that is the project where they need the match. He added that this is also a great project, helping to move people into employment and housing. Shaw agreed, and said if the money were avaiiable, he would try to fund this particular project completely. It is one of very few resources available that helps people begin the steps to secure a permanent home. Hayek asked about the funding amount available in the public services category. Hightshoe said the city's entitlement amount has been going down every year; however there is a set council earmark of $105,000 that gets distributed to Aid-to-Agencies. Hayek asked for confirmation that it comes out of the public services pool. Hightshoe said yes. Hayek asked if any of the FY07 applicants get funding through Aid-to-Agencies. Hightshoe asked Severson for that information. Severson said Shelter House, Free Medical Clinic and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County receive funding through the Aid-to-Agencies process. Hayek noted that VNA, Compeer and Extend the Dream do not receive funding under Aid-to-Agencies. Anthony said that if federal funding continues to decline, there might not be any money in this category next year for HCDC to consider unless there is an adjustment in the way the Aid-to-Agencies earmark is calculated. VNA - Mental Health Home Care Anthony said there just is not enough money for all. This application received low points when he scored it, so he decided not to fund the project. Mellecker said she tried to fund programs that were unique and filled a specific niche. The fact that they have no city funding is also significant. Shaw asked for confirmation that VNA has done things to bring the budget more in line. Novotny said yes, when she became director in 2002, there was a bottom line issue and significant losses. Much was due to overspending grants. Fifty percent of patients are on Medicaid, which was not covering their costs. They had only one fundraising event per year and now there are four or five to try to offset their operating costs. They may have made money in 2005, but they will not know until receiving the 2005 Medicare reimbursement. They also raised funds to support 12 health units for their mental health patients. Novotny said a Medicare cost report is done annually for Medicare certified agencies. For 2004, nursing cost was $84 for home care and Medicaid would only reimburse $74. The gap needs to be subsidized somehow. There is a larger gap for Medicaid mental health care, where the actual cost is $84, and Medicaid reimburses $65. She negotiated with Medicaid to have that amount increased from the original $55. She added the cost report for 2005 has not been done yet. Shaw asked for confirmation that the cost for services was reduced. Novotny said yes, she has downsized the organization and reduced the overhead. The field staff could not be reduced, so administrative staff was cut by 30 percent. There was a 47 percent reduction in staff overall and the organization cannot cut any more. The $84 cost reflects their current status. Mellecker said another reason she funded this project was because it appeared a lot of effort from the organization was put in to reduce costs. Hayek said he likes the application because it is preventive in nature. Dollars spent now on in-home mental health assistance could help avoid situations in the future where the person needs institutionalization or becomes homeless. It also is heavily weighted to the zero to thirty percent income level, and is targeted to the people who need help the most. Richman agreed with that aspect of this program. He added that in terms of extending help to mental health patients, this program provides the most for the money, which is why he allocated more money to them than the others. Compeer - Director Hayek noted that all of the commission members recommended low or no funding, so there might be no need for discussion. Shaw said he was concerned with the group's administrative control of finances. No points were given on his score sheet for financial and administrative support and ability to deliver on the project. He noted there was a gap in some reporting, and that is where the application took the biggest point hit. Anthony said it was a gap in the income reporting. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 4 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County - Newcomers Network Anthony said he gave the lowest recommendation because no report was submitted for the funding the group received in a previous year. He does not know how the money was used and is very reluctant to fund them again without that information. He noted the organization itself is great and has done very good work. Hayek asked if there was confusion about the report or if it was simply not submitted. Long said they submitted information, mainly meeting notes, and there are no plans to submit more. Hayek asked how much did NCJC receive for the project. Long said approximately $5,900. Hightshoe said they presented a survey at the meeting, but the survey was conducted before the money was awarded so it cannot be used as the planning study or work plan for which the funds were utilized. Hightshoe said what was submitted were meeting notes from a large meeting they had. The notes had identifiable objectives, but were laid out like minutes. Bears asked how long it has been since the project was completed. Anthony said the project has been done for over a year. Hightshoe said they did present a document. It is rare that funding is given for a planning project that was not completed or performed by city staff, thus there were no specific requirements regarding what must be contained in the study or work plan. However, a' work plan/study was required based on the agreement and application submitted. Anthony said a revised plan or one with more detail has been requested, so there might be no point in asking. Hightshoe said NCJC views what was submitted as their report. Long agreed that it comes to a difference of opinion on what the report must contain or how it should be presented. Richman suggested requesting a copy of the planning document in the future when applications involve a specific product to be produced, as a provision of the funding agreement with the agency. Long said that was in the agreement, but the guidelines did not have very much detail. Shaw said that would help reduce ambiguity about whether the project had actually been done. Hightshoe said the previous project was done, though it may not have been done the way that was envisioned. The report submitted was based on one meeting that divided participants in subcommittees to address different goals. The subcommittees then identified how they could meet their assigned goal. The report detailed the work done at that meeting, however it many ways it read like the minutes of a meeting and did not appear as a formal report, broken down into sections, with a table of contents, etc. Richman asked if the expectation was for an externally or internally generated report. Anthony said internally generated by the agency. Long said the commission expected to see a clear-cut plan, what the neighborhood needs and the steps to take to get there. Hayek asked if the neighborhood center got some good information out of the study. Hightshoe stated she believed so as the proposed FY07 project came out of the study and there has been work to meet some of the goals outlined in the document submitted. Greazel asked where the money for the project went. Shaw said the money went to fund the staff person who facilitated the discussions. This activity qualified as a planning activity instead of a public service activity as a study was performed and a subsequent report submitted Hightshoe noted. Shaw said it is his understanding that the current application for funding is intended to support the staff that will facilitate the discussions with the newcomers group, which formed as a result of the previous project. Extend the Dream Foundation - Coordinator Greazel said he was impressed with the amount of volunteer labor the group had and the level of expertise amongst their volunteers. He expects them to do good things with the money and to be able to do what they say they will do. Shaw said the applicant lost points with him in documenting their ability to meet the need. He said he is concerned with the group's ability to complete the project. Anthony said this organization has done excellent things in the past. Last year, some HCDC members saw the facility (F Street - Micro-Enterprise Project) they were working on and were impressed with how fast the project was completed, the updated facility and that it is an innovative solution to an identified problem. Bears added that a lot of businesses in Uptown Bill's are owned by people with disabilities, which gives their clientele great opportunities. Hayek said he has known many of the people involved and has no Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 5 concerns about their abilities to stretch dollars and do great things. Mellecker said she did not fund the project because of similar concerns that Shaw expressed. Anthony said he hopes there will be more money in this category to distribute next year, though if CDBG funds continue to go down and the city continues to take out a set amount (instead of a percentage of funds) for Aid-to-Agencies, the category may not exist. Greazel agreed it is not a good situation. Grant Wood PTO - Playground Shaw asked if the new piayground wouid take the place of the basketball court in the picture. Edwards said no, it would sit to the side of it. Hayek said the large structure in the picture is the new gym and resource center that was funded in part by CDBG dollars in 2005. Shaw asked what is planned for the old piayground, whether it wouid stay or be removed. Edwards said it would be staying. It only accommodates 30 kids in Kindergarten through 2"' grade. The new playground would be for the older students. She added that some equipment was lost from the existing playground in part due to age, and also because of the new building location. Shaw asked if the playground equipment would be designed for older students. Edwards said it would accommodate 4 to 12-year-olds. Anthony said he has a philosophical problem with funding school district projects with funds intended for the low income population. In general, he stated that taxpayers are willing to support school district projects. A bond was recently approved for the school district for 39 million dollars, which is the total amount of CDBG funding the city has received during the past 31 years. However, taxpayers, typically, are unwilling to pay for low-income projects and services. Funding intended for low-income populations should be used for those populations. If a special bond referendum came through for this project, he would support it, but does not wish to put CDBG funds into it. He added that he respects the school district and has nothing against them; it is simply a matter of wise use of scarce resources. Hayek said he would agree except that there is considerable overlap with the community and neighborhood programs in this project. More than just the school uses the facilities. The neighborhood is also involved in the evening after school hours as well as a pre-school program operated by a local non- profit. Shaw said the distinction with this project is that without this funding, the project will not happen. Essentially money for a play space is supported by the income of the people who attend the school. This is a PTO project rather than a school district one. One of the gaps in the management of play spaces is that schools in more affluent areas have the ability to fund huge, expensive playgrounds. People in lower income areas do not have the resources to support projects like this. Anthony said he generally agreed, but his concern is that the gym and resource center was funded in part by CDBG funds, which should not have happened. The funding for that should have come from the bond referendum. So $325K of CDBG funding was given to a project that should have been shared by all taxpayers. Four Oaks - New Construction Mellecker said there are two major projects in the category, so she fully funded everything else and chose one major project for the remaining money. Four Oaks is a very good and unique project that is serving a need not covered elsewhere. Bears asked how long they had been in that facility. Chval said since 1995, though the agency is 35 years old. They have also been renting space for a few years. Richman asked what would happen to the project if it did not receive full funding, whether it wouid be reconfigured or if funding would be found elsewhere. Chval said they would have to discuss other options. The environment the children are currently in is not ideal. There are two residential programs at this site, so the proposed space would provide additional classroom and recreation space, which is important to the child residents who live there. They would like to move ahead and consolidate some things that would likely bring savings in the long run through improved infrastructure. There would be discussion about raising additional funds or scaling the project back, neither of which would be ideal. Shaw asked Mellecker why she did not fully fund Four Oaks. Mellecker said she felt ReStore was more private and did not serve lower income families as directly as Four Oaks. She said looking back, she might change her recommendation to completely fund Four Oaks. She also thought if a large enough Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 6 amount was awarded, the rest could be covered through fund raising or other means. Shaw said he fully funded the project because it is very important to have a comfortable environment for the resident children, given that most of them are homeless or near homeless. Mellecker asked if Four Oaks had looked into other fund raising options, in case the project was not fully funded. Chval said the amount requested is being matched with their funds and in-kind donations. Fund raising is something they could investigate, but their funds are fully committed. Hayek asked for clarification about the JCO project that Four Oaks took over and its impact. Chval said that the ACE program was not doing well financially, and because of organization restructuring, the organization who had the contract believed they could not fulfill the contract. Due to this Johnson County asked Four Oaks to take over the program since they already offered the service to the community and had some experience. The service deals specifically with delinquent youth, tracking and monitoring youths who are in the program, and also involves the families in therapy and assists with making changes to get to the real issues. Hayek asked if this is part of a youth's probation compliance. Chval said yes. Hayek noted that attorneys in the juvenile court system say the need for that sort of service is spiking in that segment of the population. Greazel said his decision not to fund Four Oaks was purely pragmatic, allowing him to fully fund all of the other projects. He added that he would vote for fully funding next year if the project does not go forward this year, and that it is a very good and worthwhile project. He hopes the other projects could do what they proposed with their funding. Niblock said he wouid like more information about both of the construction projects, specifically a breakdown of budget similar to what was submitted for the HOME projects. They are both very good projects, he just would like more detail. Shaw asked if a process could be set up so similar information for construction projects could be gathered. Hightshoe said all construction projects are encouraged to submit construction budgets. Chval said Four Oaks did submit some information about the budget. However, to submit solid numbers they would have had to get bids. They did call and discuss with contractors and had a written bid on the project, but that information mayor may not be what they go with if the project goes through. They did consult with a reliable contractor for the estimate, a contractor who frequently works on city/CDBG projects. Shaw asked if Niblock was looking for additional documentation such as pro forma. Niblock said yes, those would be helpful for giving a clearer Idea about the project. Even having a breakdown of the square footage of the inside areas would be helpful. Hightshoe stated a proforma is used for rental housing projects, but additional budget information regarding construction costs could be sought. Richman suggested discussing the Restore project next, since it is the other large project in this category. Anthony agreed. Iowa Valley Habitat - ReStore Hightshoe said there was discussion whether the ReStore project meets a national objective required under the CDBG program for the project to be eligible to receive funding. Hightshoe stated staff consulted with their HUD representatives to discuss what national objective this project could meet. The response was that the project would meet the national objective of the creation of jobs for low-to- moderate income persons. Though the proceeds of the project would be used for affordable homeownership, it was not considered a direct benefit to low income persons. To qualify as an area benefit the location must be in a primarily residential neighborhood, which it is not. It is located in a commercial/industrial area. Hightshoe stated that if job creation is the way this project meets a national objective, the maximum amount of funding that can be allocated to the project is $50K per FTE position created. Richman said this group applied for funds last year. In one sense Habitat for Humanity does a great job, and if the store runs as proposed it would generate an income stream for the group. However, there are no construction or development budgets submitted, no estimated amount of proceeds going back into housing, no business plan for the ReStore, so it is hard to see what it will generate on an annual basis and how much will go back into the community as affordable housing. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 7 Patton said he could give the commission more information before they make their final decision in two weeks. Shaw said he also would like more information from Four Oaks. Richman agreed, and asked aiso for a construction budget. Long asked for confirmation that Habitat would be moving their headquarters to the new location. Patton said yes. Shaw said the project lost points from him because there is no clear indication that this project will be helping low income people gain self-sufficiency. Patton said they do not check income levels of people who shop at their store, and donations come from anyone. However, they are in discussion with people with the furniture project to move their facility to the same location, which would specifically help the low- income population. Shaw said that is a significant positive point and caused him to fund the project. Hightshoe stated there may be a problem with having the Furniture Project move to this facility or share space with this project. There is a prohibition against spending CDBG funding for government expenses (some exceptions) or for the acquisition/rehabilitation of a government building. The Furniture Project is funded by the city as a service for low-income residents. Hightshoe cautioned commissioners that if the project changes substantially from the intent of the application originally submitted the commission needs to determine if they will continue to consider a substantially modified application. Mellecker agreed that it did not seem clear that this project would be meeting the objectives, while other projects clearly did. That also influenced her funding recommendation. Greazel stated it was his impression the facility would be a lot more than just the store, but also would bring in and partner with other entities. That information was not in the application, however it probably should have been. Hayek asked what elements are involved with economic development to support funding. Hightshoe said job creation. Richman asked what the funding limit would be. Hightshoe said $50K per full time equivalent (FTE). Richman asked if the number of jobs that would be created is known. Patton said probably 1.5 in the first year, perhaps up to 2 the second year. Hightshoe said that would be $100K maximum under the job creation criteria. Hayek said the commission might be blurring some of the distinctions in the categories, but he sees this project would perform a lot of different functions, with many benefits providing space for other programs. There would also be the impact on the landfill and the provision of low-cost furniture for housing needs. However, he does not know if that will fit with HUD. Richman asked if economic development is within the purview of the HCDC. Anthony and Hightshoe said yes. Anthony said the commission could do it if they wish, but can choose not to. Hightshoe said it is an eligible activity, but it needs to meet a national objective. To meet a national objective, the project must benefit low and moderate income persons (directly), aid in the prevention of slum and blight, or meet an urgent need such as what is needed following a natural disaster. This project must provide a direct benefit to low and moderate income persons. Hightshoe stated as of right now, the way the city would document this requirement is through job creation for low-to-moderate income persons as 51 % of the potential buyers of the building materials may not be low income. Buyers would be home owners, landlords, etc. Greazel suggested gathering more information from Habitat and doing investigation on whether the project is eligible. Hightshoe said it can be funded; there is just a limit on how much money can be allocated based on job creation. Shaw asked if there is a limit on the amount of funding Four Oaks could receive. Hightshoe said no, Four Oaks can show a direct benefit to low-to-moderate income populations. Richman asked if the ReStore project would go through without full funding from the commission. Patton said they are working on funding alternatives. Hayek asked Patton and Chvalto send more construction information. Chval asked what information is needed. Niblock said any more specific information about their construction budget and the project plans would be helpful. MECCA - Facility Rehab Bears asked how long the carpet had been in the facility. Berg said about 10 years. Shaw apologized for looking at the wrong category at the last meeting when discussing self-sufficiency. Greazel asked if a Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 8 quantity discount would be possible for the carpet projects, whether there is any consistency in the type of carpet the agencies are looking for. Berg said yes, though he did not know others were iooking for carpet. Shaw said everyone is requesting carpet. Greazel said there couid be significant savings if a large enough quantity is purchased. Berg said the different agencies have a strong record of working together to maximize savings, so it is a possibility. Shaw asked how that would work. Hightshoe said that if each agency received funds, they could work together to bid it as one project. Greazel said they would have to talk to the carpet people. Hightshoe said the contractor would have to be willing to separately bill and is not sure if it would be feasible as each entity might want different carpet; however it was something that could be investigated. Anthony suggested requiring carpet squares for these projects, so the entire carpet does not need to be replaced if one part is damaged. Greazel said most commercial buildings do squares. He added that if the agencies worked together and saved money, fewer funds would be needed. The commission would view that favorably during future funding requests. MCHC - Facility Rehab Long said in addition to carpeting, the city is requiring them to add a railing next to a significant drop adjacent to the sidewalk. Shaw said that safety concerns were weighted heavily when considering his recommendation. The carpet requests did not as clearly reflect safety concerns as the issues in this request when he reviewed the projects. Greazel said carpet could be a safety concern, catching feet on it and tripping on it, particularly at DVIP. Shaw agreed that he did consider that for DVIP with children running around. Mellecker noted that MECCA had a children's room. The Arc of JC - Facility Rehab Hayek said this one received the second highest percentage in funding recommendation in this category, just below DVIP. Shaw said that might be a bang for buck question, since funding this small portion would allow them to finish their whole project. Bears noted that the agency would be celebrating their 50th anniversary next year. o VIP - Facility Rehab Hayek asked for confirmation that the building was purchased with CDBG funds. Long said yes, it was new construction. Hayek said the quality of construction is poor, and the deterioration in the facility is higher than expected even given the high traffic it sees. He asked what sort of standards HUD has for construction. Hightshoe said CDBG has no standards beyond those that must meet local building code requirements. Anthony added that fire code needs to be met as well. Greazel said when he wants to fully fund a project; he wants it done well instead of what just gets by. That means commercial quality components that will last. Often these facilities are not done at higher quality because there is no other choice. By putting a little more money in at the front end, money will be saved in the long term because it will last longer. Hayek said maybe it is better to fully fund a project to promote long term cost savings than to create gaps in the short term due to poor quality materials and stated he was alarmed by the state of the facility. Shaw said it also increases the likelihood that recipients will come back for funding later. Greazel said his theory is that even if not everyone is funded this year, they should come back again when they have enough money to do it right. Mellecker asked if the standards of construction could be changed. Shaw asked for confirmation that the commission could require higher standards. Hightshoe said it could, but the building code is very complex and creating standards above what the city allows currently would be very complicated for community development staff and applicants. Habitat for Humanity - Land Acquisition Shaw said there would be a high impact from this project, and he considered the volunteer support a positive aspect. Hayek said he thought it was good that Habitat is getting into a Land Trust. He noted that he is increasingly convinced that funding for single-family homes will be difficult to justify if multifamily Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 9 buildings or duplexes are an option. There is much more potential bang for the buck in those sorts of structures, but that is a generai concern and not directed at this particular project. Greazel said one of the challenges is that newer subdivisions are not receptive to multifamily homes. That means infill in other areas, many of which do not permit dupiexes, so there are not many existing lots available. Hayek said there was progress in zoning because of the recent rewrite of the zoning code. He added that with costs increasing every year, any opportunity to build multifamily homes should be taken advantage of. Greazel agreed, but said the lots are very tightly controlled, and there is strong reiuctance to do anything to reduce the desirabiiity of the rest of the lots. Richman asked if the scattering of sites is an outgrowth of zoning issues, since there few lots for multifamily buildings. Greazel said there are lots available, but they are in areas that the commission has been told should not be funded. He said Burns was looking at some duplexes and the costs per unit were outrageous compared to building south of Highway 6. There is a scarcity, which drives up the cost. Anthony agreed there are very few places that duplexes can be built, even with the new zoning code, plus some areas that do allow duplexes have restrictive covenants imposed by homeowner associations that disallow multifamily housing. There are not very many opportunities. Shaw asked why Niblock and Richman made their funding choices in this area. Richman asked for confirmation that $484K is available that needs to be spent within the next two years. Hightshoe said yes, the commission has two years to commit the funds after they are received. Richman noted there is a long- term problem with affordable housing in the community, which the commission is forced to deal with on short-term funds. There is a critical need for good long-term investments, and while the projects proposed are good, they may not be the best for solving the long-term problem. So he is proposing to hold funds back to make a larger pool available for next year, and in the meantime see if discussions can produce other ideas that address the problems better. Greazel said if he had remembered that not all funds needed to be allocated, he might have made different recommendations. Hayek asked if Richman had a sense what a better project would be. Richman said no. He continued to say that the skills in the development community and the desire of the council could facilitate creation of ideas to address the long-term issues. Hayek asked if Richman was concerned that the current projects do not provide a long-term benefit. Richman said he would like a higher level of comfort that funding is being spent in the best way possible, given that the funds are dwindling. Hlghtshoe notified members that the L1HTC preservation project from the Housing Fellowship may only be funded with CDBG funds. The units proposed in the application were funded with state HOME funds and are still in the required period of affordability. Thus additional HOME funds can't be allocated to this project during this period. Anthony asked for confirmation that the Preservation project should be considered with the Public Facilities projects. Hightshoe said funding for the project needs to come from CDBG, thus funds for this project would compete with the various public facility, public service, andlor CDBG eligible housing projects. Niblock asked for confirmation that there are only three projects to consider for HOME funds. Hightshoe said yes. Mellecker said Richman's point about the future of the funding and long-term solutions is very good, since there is so much in flux with the scattered site housing pian and Section 8 changes. For example, her concern with the Harmony project is she does not know what the demand for three bedroom rental units will be in the future. Anthony said he had the least concerns in this category about the appropriate use of funds. He has some concerns in the other categories because many of the projects are not really adding anything to the pool. However, he would like to get as much land into affordable housing projects now as possible, since the funds are diminishing. Greazel asked Anthony his view about the Tenant Based Rent Assistance project. Anthony said that is the one project he has some concerns about, as that is about restoring housing assistance that was provided in past years rather than adding anything to the pool. Of the three projects, that is the only one he has some concerns with, but it does fill a very high need. If there were more funds, he would give more to Habitat to help lock in the land for affordable housing. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 10 Hayek asked for clarification about Richman's concerns. Richman said he would like to see a more comprehensive approach to the problem of affordable housing at the city level, taking zoning and other structurai elements into account. The price of housing is going up, the funding is being reduced and he would like to set aside some money until those issues can be addressed. Shaw asked for confinmation that if no other solutions are suggested, if the funds would be given out next year. Richman said yes, the commission would allocate the funds to the applications presented at that time. He added that starting a dialogue about the issue would be the first step. Anthony agreed that there is a need for broader discussion about this topic in the community, including ways to address the problems more comprehensively. Affordable housing is almost all funded with external sources. There are barriers in the zoning code and also in the restrictive covenants. Richman said council and the community might decide the current situation is okay. However, a dialogue should be started to determine if there is something that the city will pursue. It wouid be beneficiai to set some money aside for possibie solutions that might come out of it. Hayek said he thinks that discussion has begun in earnest in the community. Niblock said he felt housing was the biggest need to be addressed during this funding round and there were some great things in all the projects. He could see where Habitat is going with their projects which is why he ranked them highest and fully funded it. The others he funded according to how well he thought they addressed housing issues. Housing is the most important thing, so he funded accordingly. ICHA - Tenant Based Rent Assistance Shaw said what this project does is subsidize families who cannot buy homes to help them get into apartments. The Harmony project is building affordable housing, but the Tenant Based Rent Assistance will subsidize families so they can rent existing properties at lower rates. Anthony said Harmony wouid have to be affordable without Section 8 or rental subsidy. Shaw asked what rent for the Hanmony housing would likely be if they were built. Hightshoe said it would be governed by L1HTC rules and Section 8 guidelines. Dennis said tax credit housing has a specific formula within their program, as does Section 8. The owner of a tax credit unit cannot deny tenants occupancy because of their eiigibility for Section 8. Shaw confinmed that tenants couid move in at the affordable rental rate, and then also use a Section 8 voucher to further reduce their cost (the voucher would make up the difference between the rent charged and the ability of the family to pay the rent based on income). Rackis said the landlord sets the rent and then the Section 8 voucher would determine how much the Housing Authority would subsidize based on income. Typically people with a voucher will not pay more than thirty percent of their domestic gross income for rent. Mellecker said the Iowa City Housing Authority has tremendous need. Harmony is targeted to a niche, but ICHA is broader and allows greater freedom on behalf of the tenants. Hayek said he was surprised everyone on the commission recommended funding for the Tenant Based Rental Assistance project as there is a difference between bricks and mortar versus providing a funding stream. Funding this does not provide any additional rental units. Anthony said it is money that produces no tangible result. Greazel said that is not the viewpoint for people that need a place to live right now. Anthony said many people had assistance before, but then funding went down in the community, which resulted in loss of assistance. So in some sense it is restoring them to the quality of life they had before. Greazel said in many cases, this is a viable alternative to homeownership. Hayek agreed, but noted the two ways to fund is either a project that will produce units or one that will pay for vouchers. He noted that everyone on the commission funded it, which was unexpected. Mellecker said she also looked at numbers. Rental assistance can help a lot of people, whereas building six units does not help as many. It seemed realistically the best place to put the money. Shaw asked how many people would be supported with the rental assistance at the requested level of funding. Rackis said it was calculated for 36 families for two years, using the HUD formula which includes a per unit cost of $426. The actual number of families that would be helped depends on actual costs of the units, so the funds might stretch or reduce. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 11 Rackis added the waiting list is not the only issue in regards to calculating need. Many families move here without assistance. They often can meet rent for the first couple months, but then cannot meet it any longer and end up being evicted. So the exact need cannot be calculated, because there is no prior information about those situations. He added only 44 percent of people in the community are homeowners, while the rest are living in rentals. Long asked if there is a list of available accessible units for elderly or disabled tenants. Rackis said every rental unit is entered into software that determines the number of units that are definitely accessible or adaptable for people with disabilities. In some cases, an adaptable unit does not have the necessary requirements for code such as a grab bar in the bathtub, but could have things changed or added easily. Rackis said he would suppiy that information to the commission. Harmony Development, LLC - Rental Units Long said the sites for the units are not identified, so no pictures are available. Hayek asked who would receive the architect fee for the project. Long said he is not sure. Greazel said he was concerned about costs in the proposal, such as the appraisal and architect fees, which also seemed excessive. Hightshoe confimned that the per unit cost was $245,693.00. Shaw asked if that was for six duplexes. Hightshoe said it is for six single family units. Applicant noted that lots would be easier to find for single family units. Mellecker said there are a lot of questions about this project, and asked whether it would be easy to revamp in the future. Hayek asked for feedback from staff on the per unit cost. Long said it is a little higher than usual. Hayek asked if it is still higher than typical without the increased land cost. Long said it seems to be. He noted that with tax credit projects, some of the costs have a cap. Shaw asked if tax credit projects are increasing recently, and suggested the commission might not understand the requirements very well because of unfamiliarity. Greazel said there is no requirement for certain things to be paid, just that it is allowable to pay up to a set amount for certain services. Just because it is allowed elsewhere does not impact his vote for a local project. His decision is influenced by cost per unit, and $100K with Habitat versus $240K for one of these is a big difference. Shaw asked if this increased cost would give a renting tenant a nicer place to live at the same rental rate. Greazel said income level determines rent, and his issue with this project is that both single-family owner and rental properties are needed. How those needs are balanced is determined by the commission's priorities. He added that he agrees with Richman's suggestion to take a two-year look at housing and priorities. Long said there is a 50-year affordability period for these units. Niblock asked how long the usual affordability period is. Long said it depends, though HOME funds require at least 20 years for new construction. Richman asked what the period is for the tax credit. Hightshoe said additional points are received for longer afford ability periods. Hayek asked what the reserves line item is. Long said investors require a reserve for maintenance. Hightshoe said the amount should be significant for a 50-year period of affordability as if the unit receives HOME funds, additional HOME funds cannot be put into the unit during its affordability period. Richman said he would assume there would be some positive cash flow from the unit that would allow additional funds be put into maintenance or a reserve. He added he is not disputing the need for the reserve. Hightshoe said the amount is higher because of the length of time needed to maintain the unit during its period of affordability. Hayek asked for confirmation that the reserve is for long-term maintenance and rehab. Long said yes. Anthony said tax credit projects have slightly higher quality standards than other projects. Long said that there will be a representative from the Iowa Equity Fund at the April HCDC meeting to discuss the tax credit process. Anthony said that would be a good idea. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 12 Anthony said he funded the project because he wants to encourage non-governmental agencies to be involved in providing affordable housing. Burns and Burns have been providing affordable housing in the community for a long time, and many times is the only private developer that has been involved in this area. Whiie $245k per unit is high, they are getting one million dollars of additionai funding for the project, which would be going into the tax rolls, giving property tax benefits for several years. Greazel asked whether the units are under Section 42. Dennis said all tax credit units are under Section 42. Greazei said the tax credit then is not dollar for dollar. It is closer to 25 cents per dollar, so the property tax benefit is minimal. Anthony said it still brings in some tax benefit and also more investment from outside the community. It also supports the only developer who has been involved in providing affordable housing. Richman said he funded at a level that he hoped would make the project viable, even if it cannot be fully done as proposed. They asked for $300K to buiid six units, so hopefully $150K will allow them to make six units and still make sense for the developer to go ahead. Housing Fellowship - Preservation Mellecker asked when the Housing Fellowship would find out whether the city will be supplying other funds. Anthony said not before the allocation meeting. Richman confirmed that funding for this project would come from some combination of CDBG and other appropriations from the city. It could be a combination. Long said yes, it just needs a local commitment. Shaw asked for confirmation that this project would have to compete with the funds in the Public Facilities/Services category. Hightshoe said yes. Under the CDBG program, there is no requirement that states so much has to be allocated for public services, public facilities, or CDBG eligible housing activities. However, there is a requirement that the city can't allocate more than 15% of its CDBG entitlement on public service activities. Historically the commission has decided to allocate as much as allowed for public service activities. Richman said he has a lot of questions. There is a letter now, which has some clarification and has helped satisfy one of his concerns. He said his major concern before was that it looked like more equity was being taken out of the project, but it has been shown where the money is being put back. He is not at zero funding for the project, but would like to ask some additional questions. Dennis said their long-term plan would be to buy the units back and become the owners. Richman asked what the term of affordability is for tax credit units. Dennis said 15 years minimum. Richman said he would like to make sure the commission is comfortable with the affordabillty period, and he is concerned with the recurring cost to buy back the units. He said he is also concerned with the relatively high developer fee. Considering the level of risk in this acquisition is minimal, 20-25 percent of the total non-acquisition costs seems high. Greazel asked what happens to the units if this is not funded. Dennis said they would try to find funding to rehab them. Otherwise there is a chance they would be sold. Greazel asked what the Fellowship would do with the money if they were sold. Dennis said they would have to pay back the private debt, recapture the HOME funds and reinvest them. Greazel asked why they would be sold, since there is no net gain. Dennis said the units are at a level where it would be difficult to maintain housing quality standards. Greazel asked how long the Fellowship has owned the units and how they were purchased. Dennis said all of the units have been owned at least ten years. They were purchased originally with CDBG and HOME funds. Greazel asked if a reserve was required for repair or improvements. Dennis said there was no requirement for a reserve. They did rehab the units, but it has been difficult to maintain them because rents are controlled. These particular units are ones that have been owned for more than ten years that the Fellowship feels are good candidates for extensive rehab, neighborhood improvement and would be attractive to investors. Greazel asked about the project development fee. Dennis said they generally take 15 percent of the project cost, since they have to do all the rehab activities with hiring contractors and putting out bids, etc. Housing and Community Development Commission Minutes March 9, 2006 Page 13 Anthony asked for opinions on whether the project should be funded jointly with CDBG funds or some other way through city. Niblock said it seems like an unusual request. He asked if something similar has come up. Long said the peninsula project. Niblock asked if there was a positive response. Long said yes. Anthony said no prediction could be made in this case. Greazel said he is concerned about the request for money to fix up a home and sell it, even if it keeps it affordable. He asked if a similar request has ever come before the commission. Hightshoe said to her knowledge a low income housing tax credit preservation project has never come before the commission before. Richman said he views it as a rehab project, and transferring ownership to a new entity is not a concern. He is interested in how much the city would be willing to contribute. Hayek asked for clarification whether the special application to the city is being done because of something with this particular project or is it simply to seek out additional funding. Long said it does not qualify for HOME funds, however it needs local commitment for funding. The Housing Fellowship is willing to pay an interest rate slightly over what it costs to purchase the bond and requests the difference be placed back in the CDBG/HOME pool of funds. They are trying to match what city council says is the investment policy for a for-profit entity. The additional money would then go back to the commission, because HCDC funding is being reduced. Dennis said Steve Atkins was receptive to the proposal and they will hopefully have an answer very soon. However, they decided also to pursue funding through HCDC in the meantime. Richman said the return would not be a substantial amount of money. Dennis agreed, but noted it would be a start. Richman asked if the units could be maintained at the proposed rent for the period of affordability. Dennis said yes, it is required. Richman confirmed that the combination of reserves up front along with ongoing profit will maintain the units. He asked if there would be additional money there to maintain other projects. Dennis said yes. Anthony said tax credit programs are the largest source of funds for affordable housing. Iowa City had not been attracting those funds until recently, for a variety of reasons. Richman said an option for future projects for the city would be to do a combination of four percent credits and tax-exempt bond financing. Anthony said this project is a bit more complicated than it seems and needs more consideration. Richman said the question for the commission is whether CDBG funds would be allocated, and if so, how much. Shaw added that decision needs to be made without consideration of whether the city will also provide funds. Hightshoe announced that the Qualified Action Plan for L1HTC projects does contain standards for construction that we could consider for future construction projects. If interest, will discuss at a subsequent HCDC meeting. Hightshoe said the commission members should send final ranking sheets and recommendations by 9:00 a.m., March 15. Member can email, fax, or call in their proposed changes. Long said he would send a reminder to the commission members. Adiournment There being no further business to come before the committee, Shaw moved to adjourn. Hayek seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. s:fpcdlminuteslHCDCJ2006103-09-06,dOC = o .. '" '" .. e e o u - = ... "0 e .. Q.. 0 o ... - ... ... ~ t ... \Q ~ ~ g ,e<<lN .. "0 = = = ... e :t: e -< o U ~ CJ) = .. '" = o = ~ I ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: I r'l I Q I \Q ~ .... ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: -- N 0 Q 0\ ~ ~ ~ I .... ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: ;..:: I -- .... 0 0 0 I Q I '" l"- 00 00 l"- l"- \0 00 \0 \0 E ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- [; .~ - - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- E-<~ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0'\ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .:<: .:<: - = ~ ... '" ... ~ ... N .. <<l .:<: ~ 0 <<l <<l e - 0 ... <<l eo: ..c ... ~ -= -= ... '" = -= .. .. - C-' ... - - .. rJ1 Z rJ1 .. = ... <<l ~ eo: ~ -< ~ ... - '" 8 ... ... eo: "0 ... = t .c = -= <<l e <<l = ~ <<l .. - -= .. <<l - ... 0 - .. - .. <<l ~ - .. ... 0 .. -= 0 Z = ... ::.:: ..:l ~ ~ Eo-< >< .., "0 '" .... '" '" ;:l 0I).n u ::: E ~ '..;:j Q) ~_~~:::S '" i:i i:i :::s ro ~~~i~ II II II II II >.. ~:::s ~;..::OOZ IJ:r MINUTES Iowa City Airport Commission March 9, 2006 Iowa City Airport Terminal- 5:45 PM APPROVED Members Present: Randy Hartwig, Chair; John Staley; Howard Horan; Greg Farris, Janelle Rettig Members Absent: Dan Clay Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: David Hughes, Jay Honeck, Harry Wolf, Ron Duffe DETERMINE QUORUM: Chairperson Hartwig called the meeting to order at 5 :48 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Hartwig opened nominations for Chair ofthe Airport Commission. Staley nominated Randy Hartwig for this position. Horan gave some history on how the Airport Commission handled this in the past, stating that they tried to rotate who was in the Chair position every year. The members discussed how it has come about that Hartwig has been in the Chair position for going on three years. Staley moved to nominate Hartwig for Chair ofthe Airport Commission; seconded by Farris. Motion passed 4-0; Hartwig abstaining. Hartwig opened nominations for Secretary of the Airport Commission. Horan nominated Greg Farris for this position. Horan moved to nominate Farris for Secretary of the Airport Commission; seconded by Staley. Motion passed 4-0; Farris abstaining. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 9, 2006, MEETING: Chairperson Hartwig asked if there were any additions or changes to the above-named minutes. Hartwig asked David Hughes for clarification on Item B, about halfway down, where it says, 'Hughes also spoke about the survey that they have been waiting for the F.A.A. to give their,' stating that it should be, '... to give their review on the initial work.' Hartwig also noted that under Chairperson's Report, where he mentioned the Iowa Public Airport Association of which "they" are a member - this should state, "the Commission is a member." Also, where it states "the upcoming show," that it was not a show but a meeting with legislators. Staley moved to accept the minutes of the February 9, 2006, as amended; seconded by Hartwig. Motion passed 4-0; Rettig abstaining. Airport Commission March 9, 2006 Page 2 PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: A. FANIDOT Projects - Earth Tech - David Hughes- 1. Runway 7/25 - Hughes stated that since the last meeting, the contractor completed the concrete work on the box culvert and has started backfilling ofthe box. Hughes stated that it looks good, and the second phase is in the works. Members asked various questions regarding the upcoming construction season. Hughes stated that along the same lines of the 7/25, there is an approved contract for the 405 surveys, the obstruction surveys. They have also secured the aerial mapping company. The discussion continued with members asking Hughes questions about time frames and progress to date, as well as what can be expected. 2. Taxi-lane North Tee's - Hughes stated that Earth Tech will be continuing the design phase for the pavement rehabilitation. 3. ASOS Relocation - Hughes discussed the impacts of the F.A.A. study and the relocation of ASOS. He states they have been working with the F .A.A. on this to start the process of relocation. They hope to get this out to the triangle area of the field. Hartwig also brought up the Mormon Trek issues, and the original thought that the runway closure would have to occur before the extension construction can begin. He states that this will be approximately the first of August. Rettig asked about the closure of the runway, and Hartwig responded to her questions, giving a brief history of the Airport's plans. 4. Hangar B & C Floors - Hughes explained that the previously installed slabs would have to be removed after all. He initially thought that the repair could be done without removing them but water drains to the rear and so they need to be removed. This will increase the cost by $13,500 and that there is sufficient funds in the grant to pay for this additional cost. Horan moved to approve the change to the order for the Hangar B & C floor project; seconded by Staley. Motion passed 5-0. B. Eastern Iowa Big Kids Toy Show - Hartwig noted that Clay had asked him to put this on the agenda, but Clay was unable to attend this evening's meeting. Honeck gave a brief summary of the event and stated they are still getting sponsors. c. Aviation Commerce Park - Harry Wolf from Iowa Realty was present to speak to the members about the status ofthe Wal-Mart sale and the ensuing lawsuits. He brought up the topic of selling versus leasing. Wolf addressed the marketing aspect of the Commerce Park and members discussed how they would like to proceed. Hartwig asked the members for their input, and asked Wolf what he needs from them to proceed with marketing more aggressively. Questions were asked of Wolf, in regards to the current market and what his thoughts are in regards to leasing versus selling. Rettig stated that she would like to see this land Airport Commission March 9, 2006 Page 3 either sold or leased, as soon as the Wal-Mart deal is decided, so the airport can clear its debt and stabilize the budget. (TAPE ENDS) Wolf stated that he would report back to the members at upcoming meetings what type of requests he receives on this property. D. Airport Operations: Strategic Plan-Implementation; Budget; and Airport Management - Hartwig stated that one of the members ofthe Commission should attend the next City Council meeting. Horan volunteered to do this. Hartwig then discussed the budget, addressing the month of February. He addressed several lines in the budget: reimbursement of expenses; other commissions; personnel. Rettig asked questions regarding Jet Air and other's contracts, and Hartwig responded. Hartwig also addressed the high electricity charge, which he stated that he had Tharp check into. Tharp found out that this was an accounting error. Staley asked about the sewer utility and water utility charges, and explained how these are internal expenses within the City. Hartwig gave Rettig some quick background information on a couple of other line items, as well. Hartwig stated that he had met with Deb Mansfield at the City and that perhaps it would be a good idea for the Airport Commission members to meet with her to go over the budget and answer any questions they may have. He stated that he would meet with Tharp and set something up. Rettig asked about previous minutes where the Airport Commission discussed sending Tharp to some future training. Hartwig noted that the members agreed to sending him, at that meeting. E. Corporate Hanger Contract - Don Gurnett - Consider a resolution approving a three-year lease for Corporate Hangar #34 - Tharp noted that Gumett's lease expired technically at the beginning of the month, and that they have negotiated a preliminary agreement for the Commission's approval. He explained that the rent would essentially increase $20.00 per month. This lease would be effective March l, 2006 through February 28, 2009. Members asked Tharp questions regarding Gurnett's previous lease and Tharp responded. Rettig moved to consider Resolution A06-05 approving a three-year lease for Corporate Hanger #34; seconded by Horan. Resolution approved on a 5-0 vote. F. Kim Brogan Agreement - Horan stated he had received a message from Brogan. She indicated that she would continue with the lease as written until its expiration in May. Brogan expressed interest in continuing to rent the United Hangar, on a monthly basis after the current agreement expired. G. Subcommittees' Reports - Farris stated he took some pictures for the airport regarding the flooring project. Hartwig noted some distress in the runway pavement, Hughes commented he was going to speak with the FAA to inquire regarding funds for repair work. Farris noted, he and Tharp are still working on Airport Commission March 9,2006 Page 4 the wireless connection. Farris noted he was going to bring in a computer for the room and test it. H. Chairperson's Report - Hartwig welcomed the new commissioner, Rettig. Hartwig noted a change in a towel system for the restrooms, to make them cleaner. COMMISSION MEMBERS' REPORTS: Horan inquired regarding the discussions of the Hagen parcel. Dulek responded that the appraisal was complete but a question regarding an easement had come up. That issue has now been resolved and that offers to buy and lease should be ready for consideration by the next meeting. Rettig distributed some pamphlets regarding contact information for the elected officials which is made by the Library. STAFF REPORT: Tharp noted he had returned from the Iowa Public Airport's Association Day on Hill event. He noted the main topics of discussion were funding levels, and a dedicated source of funding. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: April 13, 2006 @ 5:45 P.M. ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 8:46 P.M. Randall D. Hartwig, Chairperson Date Airport Commission March 9, 2006 Page 5 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 lMeetin!! Date TERM 1/12 2/9 3/9 4/13 NAME EXP. Daniel Clay 3/1/08 --- --- --- Randy Hartwig 3/1/09 X X X Greg Farris 3/1107 0 X X John Staley 3/1106 X X X Howard Horan 3/1108 X X X Janelle Rettig 3/1112 -- -- X KEY: X = Present o = Absent OlE = AbsentlExcused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member APPROVED~ MARCH 2006L...2!ll2L. MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION MARCH 21, 2006 G08/9- SENIOR CENTER Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 3:07 PM Members Present: Betty Kelly, Bob Engel, David Gould, Jay Honohan, Jo Hensch, Sarah Maiers and Nancy Wombacher Members Absent: None Staff Present: Michelle Buhman and Linda Kopping Others Present: Lynn Campbell and Betty McKray RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: To approve the February minutes as amended. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Kelly/Maiers. The following changes were made to the February 21,2006 minutes: the Call to Order Time was changed to 3:05 p.m.; Julie Seal's name was removed from the list of Staff Present at the meeting; and the titles of the Commission standing committees were corrected to read 1) Fundraising, 2) Promotion, and 3) Community Relations and Outreach. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Betty McKray presented the Senior Center staff with a thank you card from participants in the nutrition program who enjoyed the broadcast of the Iowa men's basketball game during the first round of the NCAA tournament. This game was shown on the large screen in the Assembly Room on Friday March 17,2006. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS Maiers will write the web article from today's meeting and report to the City Council. Wombacher will write the article from next months meeting REVISED COMMISSION OPERATING PROCEEDURES:STANDING COMMITTEES ASSIGNMENTS AND PLAN OF ACTION - Hanahan Following a brief discussion, the following committee assignments were made: 1. Fundraising: Maiers, Engel and Honohan 2. Promotion: Gould, Hensch and Wombacher 3. Community Re/ations and Outreach: Wombacher, Honohan and Kelly 1 APPROVED MARCH 2006 Kopping will determine how each committee will be staffed. Commissioners agreed that the objective of the initial committee meeting will be to designate a chairperson and establish goals. Commission responsibilities outlined in the 2003 Council Resolution (NO. 03-287) and the Center's 2005 Strategic Plan will serve as guidelines when establishing committee goals. Once the goals have been established, committee members may solicit volunteers willing to help them achieve their specific goals. Committee chairs shall report on committee activities at the Commission meeting immediately following the standing committee meeting. ADJOURN FOR A MEETING OF IOWA CITY SENIOR CENTER FUND INC. Motion: To adjourn for a meeting of the Iowa City Senior Center fund Inc. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Kelly-Hensch RECONVENE THE MARCH 21,2006 MEETING OF THE SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION OPERATIONAL REVIEW-KOPPING The Center nominated New Horizons Band Director Don Coffman, SHIIP volunteer Elsie Foerstner and Voices of Experience Director Richard Tiegs for the Governor's Volunteer Award. Kopping is pleased to announce that all three have been selected and will be recognized in May of this year in Des Moines. The School of Social Work received a grant from John A Hartford Foundation to implement the Practicum Partnership Program. The Center agreed to serve as a partner in this program by providing a field site for second year MSW students. The goal of the Practicum Partnership Program is to expose students to the continuum of services available to older adults. Other Johnson County field sites are UIHC Geriatric Psychiatry, Oaknoll, and Hospice. Because of our involvement in this project, the Center will benefit from a significant level of MSW student support over the next three years. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Gould mentioned he had received some questions via email that he was unsure of how to respond. One question concerned the computers currently being used in the Computer Lab. Kopping informed Gould that the computers have been recently upgraded and are in good working condition. When funds are available consideration will be given to installing IBM compatible computers and equipment in the lab. The second question pertained to the use of the Assembly Room on Sunday afternoons. Kopping explained that there is a small group of people who have signed an after-hour room use agreement that enables them to play Euchre in 2 APPROVED MARCH 2006 the Assembly Room on Sunday afternoons when the facility is closed to the public. The agreement outlines the policies, procedures and responsibilities associated with using the space after-hours and identifies a person who assumes responsibility for the group. Each room use agreement relates to a specific group. Kelly thanked Kopping and Honohan for their participation during the AARP forum earlier this month. Honohan reported that he attended the City Council meeting. He provided councilors with a packet of information on Center members, major funding sources, participation counts from 2002 to 2005, and a list of programming partners. This information was distributed in the Commission meeting packet. He recommended that others provide similar information when updating the Council on the Senior Center. Motion: To adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 7-0. Wombacher/Maiers. 3 APPROVED MARCH 2006 Senior Center Commission Attendance Record Year 2006 Name Term 1/24 2/21 3/21 Expires Bob Enqel 12/31/08 X X X David Gould 12/31/08 X X X Jo Hensch 12/31/06 X X X Jay Honohan 12/31/07 X X X Bettv Kellv 12/31/07 X OlE X Sarah Maier 12/31/06 X X X Nancy 12/31/06 OlE OlE X Wombacher Key: X= 0= O/E= NM = Present Absent Absent/Excused No meeting Not a member 4 MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MARCH 8, 2006 EMMA J. HARVA THALL - IOWA CITY, CITY HALL ~ 5b 7 APPROVE MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Alexander, Michelle Shelangouski, Ned Wood, Michael Wright. MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Leigh STAFF PRESENT: Robert Miklo, Sarah Walz, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: Dick Brown, Mary Lee Dixon, Nestor Lobodiak CALL TO ORDER: Vice-chairperson Alexander called the meeting to order at 5:02 CONSIDERATION OF THE FEBRUARY 8.2006 MINUTES MOTION: Shelangouski moved to approve the February 8 minutes as submitted, Wright seconded the motion. The motion passed 4:0. SPECIAL EXCEPTION EXC06-00003 Discussion of an application submitted by First Presbyterian Church for a special exception to permit installation of a columbarium, a structure containing niches for storage of cremated remains, for use by the church members for property located in the Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5) zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue. Walz said that religious institutions require a special exception in the RS-5 zone. She said that any expansion of the existing church on this property also requires approval of a special exception. She noted the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance was updated in 2005, and Columbaria are listed as an accessory use, by special exception, for religious facilities. Walz said that while the prior special exception is due to be challenged in district court, the church has chosen to avoid the delay of a trial and has reapplied for a special exception under the provisions of the new Zoning Ordinance. She noted that it is required that religious institutions have access to a collector or an arterial street and have a minimum front and side setbacks of 20 feet and a minimum rear setback of 50 feet. She noted that the existing church with the proposed columbarium will meet or exceed all of these requirements. Walz said the standards also indicate that proposed religious use should be designed to compatibie to adjacent uses. The proposed columbarium is located away from direct view from residential properties and is small in comparison to the church buiiding; it measures 5 feet high and has a diameter of 7-10 feet. In addition, she said that to the wide setback, existing trees and shrubs provide screening along Rochester Avenue. She noted that the church anticipates no significant increase in traffic and therefore proposes no additional parking to accommodate the columbarium. Walz said that in Staffs view, the columbarium will have no significant adverse affects of the livability of nearby residential uses due to noise, glare from lights, late-night operations, odors, or litter. Talking about the general standards requirements Waiz said that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Walz said there is an existing church on this property. in Staffs view the expansion of this religious institution to include a columbarium will have no foreseeable effect on public health, safety, comfort or welfare. She said the proposed columbarium is relatively small in scale (5 feet high and a radius of 7-10 feet) when compared to the existing church building. Walz noted the columbarium will be located at least 50 feet away from Rochester Avenue and will not be highly visible from adjacent residential properties. She said although the columbarium may generate occasional visitors, traffic associated with its presence is not expected to increase significantly from traffic already generated by the existing church services. Walz said the church has indicated that the proposed columbarium will not change the intensity of use of the property by its members and does not anticipate any need for additional parking. The specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properly in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 8, 2006 Page 2 neighborhood, Walz said the columbarium will not be highly visible from the street or neighboring properties. She noted the church property and the proposed location for the columbarium are screened by established trees and bushes along Rochester Avenue, and the front setback is more than the required 20-foot minimum setback. Walz noted that the traffic generated by the columbarium should not exceed the type of traffic that is generated for memorial or funeral services, which are already a part of church's function. She added that the applicant has provided information on property values of homes located next to cemeteries and supporting statements from other churches that have established columbaria. Walz said that even though cemeteries are more intense uses than columbarium, the information submitted by the applicant indicates that the presence of a cemetery in a residential neighborhood in the Iowa City area has not had a diminishing affect on property values. Establishment of the specific proposed exception will 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. Walz said the surrounding residential properties are already fully developed. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities have been or are being provided. Walz noted that adequate utilities, access and drainage are in place to serve the existing church on this property, and the columbarium will not increase demand on these facilities. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed so as to minimize traffic congestion on public streets. The Church, Walz said, has two driveways onto Mt. Vernon Drive and one onto Rochester Avenue. She noted the proposed columbarium would be located to the west of the driveway onto Rochester Avenue. She noted the traffic associated with the columbarium should be negligibie. Except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. Walz said the proposed addition complies with the dimensional requirements for religious institutions in the RS-5 zone. She noted that minimum 20-foot front and side setbacks and the 50-foot rear setback are met or exceeded by both the church building and the proposed columbarium. The proposed use will be consistent with the short-range Comprehensive Plan of the City. Walz noted the Northeast District Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies this area as appropriate for institutional uses, which would include religious institutions. Staff recommends that EXC06-00003, an application for a special exception to allow a columbarium addition to a religious institution in the Low-Density Single- Family zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be approved, subject to general compliance with the plans submitted with the application. Shelangouski asked if the church is currently setback 50 feet. Walz said the setback for church building is well over 50 feet, and the columbarium itself will be setback about 50 feet. Alexander asked if the placement of statuary or monument would require a special exception. Miklo said the building official would determine if the monument would be an accessory use. Holecek said she does not believe the placement of statuary requires a building permit. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Brown. 2905 Saddle Club Road, NE, said he Would be happy to answer any questions the Board might have. Alexander asked if the memorial for the remains be at the church. Brown said the funeral ceremony would be at the church anyway. Wright asked if the columbarium will be constructed and the containers filled will the church consider the expansion of the columbarium. Brown said that expansion would be a possibility, but the church would have to reapply for a special exception. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 8, 2006 Page 3 Shelangouski asked if the church has any plans for landscaping around the columbarium. Brown said there plan on having a garden, but nothing concrete had yet been decided. Sheiangouski said the foliage along Rochester Street is bare during winter, and asked if the church has plans of planting some evergreen bushes. Brown said there will be a memorial garden around the columbarium. Dixon, 241 GreenMountain Drive, said that she has been a realtor in the Iowa City area for over 25 years. She added that she worked with many buyers and sellers and has done hundreds of presentation to homeowners in regard to establishing the market value or property value of their homes. Dixon said that in order to approve the request for a special exception it must be shown that its existence will not impair property values in the neighborhood. She said the question is how to find out if the columbarium will have an impact. She said there is a standard method used in both appraisal practice and real estate practice which looks at property adjacent to cemeteries and compare them with similar properties not adjacent to cemeteries. Dixon said that the data submitted does not have comparable properties or control group valuations to ascertain if indeed there is an impact on property values. Dixon noted that infonmation regarding the 704 Reno Street was submitted. She added the property is located near Oakland cemetery. She said the property sold in November 1977 for $214,000. She added that it sold again in October 2003 for $190,000, and sold again on the same day in October for $185,957. Dixon said these sale figures show a decrease in value. Dixon said the property at 1026 St Clements Street was also submitted. She noted the property is adjacent to St Joseph cemetery. She said the property was listed for $250,000 was sold with $205,000. Dixon said that statistics compiled by the local board of realtors show that property in the area sell for 97%-100% of their listed price. She noted that the St Clements property was sold for 82% of the listed price, value far below the local averages. She said that statements have been made that the columbarium will not diminish property values in the neighborhood; however the methods used to support the statement were incorrect and not reliable. Dixon said she discussed with the local real estate appraisal and an individual from a Chicago area firm whose main duty is to research property values throughout the United States. She noted that both agreed that values of existing property located near cemeteries must be compared with similar properties not located near a cemetery before making a statement in reference to the effect the cemetery or a columbarium has on property value. She requested that the application be denied until further research is done. Lobodiak, 229 Green Mountain Drive, said the methodology used for determining the impact on property values is not correct. He said that Brown has looked at properties adjacent to cemeteries and indicate whether they increased in value. He said that as indicated by Dixon values of existing property located near cemeteries must be compared with similar properties not located near a cemetery. Lobodiak said that a second issue refers to multiple columbaria. He said that at the hearing in 2004 there was some discussion about the intent of placing multiple columba ria on the north side of the church, and moving towards south when the north side fills up. Lobodiak said that a third issue is that there are two special exceptions from the church on the same issue. He noted that the special exception approved 4;1 in 2004 is currently pending in District Court, and will go to trial in October. He said that he looked at the Code annotated trying to find a case where a Court has addressed the issue of multiple special exceptions, but could not find any because the Board of Adjustment applications are not multiple. Holecek said that the current application is materially different since the law has changed. She said the prior application was under the interpretation that a columbarium could be a facility related to the use of a religious institution. She added that currently the zoning code has changed such that columbarium is specifically addressed in the code, and allowed as accessory use to a religious institution by special exception. Brown said he talked with appraisals in Iowa City if there is a difference in property values located by cemeteries, and determined there is no difference. He added he provided infonmation about houses located on Catskill Court, which are directly abutting a cemetery, and all increased in value when sold. Wright asked if there is another church in Iowa City with a columbarium. Brown said there is one, but is not located in a residential area. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 8, 2006 Page 4 Wood asked Dixon to re-explain the situation of property located at 1026 St Clements Street. Dixon said that the property was iisted for sale for $250,000 but was sold with $205,000. Dixon said that statistics compiled by the local board of realtors show that property in the area sell for 97%-100% of their listed price. She noted that the St Clements property was sold for 82% of the listed price, a value far below the local averages. Miklo said he has information about the 1026 St Clements Street property. He said the property was marketed as a development site but the property has restrictions in terms of sewer and street access and it was not likely to be redeveloped unless considerable amount of money were spent on updating the infrastructure. Wright asked if the decrease in property value for the property located at 704 Reno Street was due to decline in condition of the property. Dixon said she hasn't had the opportunity to see the home until 1997 when it was in nice condition. Brown said that the house on Reno Street was sold at share sale which indicates that the seller did not have the property on the market to the point he could put a price on it and try to get it. He said that the houses on Conklin Lane have seen an increased in sale price. Dixon said that the methodology used to say there is no negative impact on property values was incorrect, invalid and unreliable. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Alexander said that she does not know how valid it is to make comparison with properties bordering cemeteries versus properties that border a church that has a columbarium. Holecek said there is a letter from a church that has a columbarium and no impact on property values. Shelangouski said the letter is from Des Moines which is growing similarly to Iowa City in terms of property values. Shelangouski said she can see the comparison with a cemetery. Alexander said a columbarium seems like a different type of use. Wright said that cemeteries are usually huge as compared to the columbarium. MOTION: Wright moved that EXC06-00003, an application for a special exception to allow a columbarium addition to a religious institution in the Low-Density Single- Family zone at 2701 Rochester Avenue be approved, subject to general compliance with the plans submitted with the application. Wood seconded the motion. Shelangouski will vote against the application. She said most of the burden has been met; it will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. She said the surrounding properties are fully developed so the proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. She said there are adequate utilities, egress and ingress are appropriate, however, there is no proof that it will not substantially diminish or impair property values. She said she would like to see a comparison between property values and not just what have sold in the area. Wright said that he was the dissenting vote at the last meeting, however due to changes in the zoning code will vote in favor of the application. He said that the application had met the specific standards in terms of access to an arterial street and setback requirements. He said that it should not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare, and 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 the key word is substantially. He said that given the evidences provided from Des Moines showing no negative effect he judges the columbarium will not substantially diminish the property values. Wright said the surrounding properties are fully developed so the proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property. He added that utiiities are in place, adequate ingress and egress are appropriate and the application is in accordance with the comprehensive plan. Alexander will vote in favor of the application. She said the key piece to address is the substantial effect on property values. She added that she does not believe columbarium is equivalent to a cemetery. She Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes March 8, 2006 Page 5 said there is no comparable situation in Iowa City, and the only evidence that could be used is the one provided from Des Moines. Wood will vote against the application. He said he believes the property values will be affected by the columbarium. He noted all other standards are met, but he is not convinced the property values will not be affected. Motion fails 2:2, Shelangouski and Wood opposed. Holecek said that one member of the board is absent and the applicant has the option of taking the matter in front of the entire board. The applicant would need to ask for reconsideration in front of the entire board, and someone from the opposed side would make a motion to reconsider the application. OTHER Miklo said they have passed out a new zoning map and a blow-up of the central area around downtown. Alexander asked what level of evidence is needed for Board's decisions. Holecek said that this is something they are trying to find out through the appeal made to the Iowa Supreme Court in the Sheller House case. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION NONE ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:00 PM. s:/pcdlminUleslboal200603-08-06.doc - C"C Ql .. E 0 _ U III Ql ::sO:: ..... Ql CD "Cuo <CO _IlIN O"C "CC .. Ql Ill=: 0< m 00 ~ 0 >< >< >< >< ~ M 0 0 00 0 >< >< >< >< >< ~ N 0 - - >< >< >< >< >< ~ - 0 '" r- OO ~ 0 - E .~ 0 0 0 - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - " >< 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f-~ - - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 .. ... :i " '1:l ..c: '" = ]1 = ..c: ~ 11 " .. " ~ '1:l " " 0 = ...l :;;: " Ql 0 Ql " = E " ~ ..c: 8 " ..c: 00 .. ... '1:l '" " " ~ " :;1 Z ::0:: u z -0 " '" = OJ) ~ .S ~" C==E~ ~tl)tl)~ ou Vl IZI 0 o;:;;::;;:Z II II II II >. ~~ ~><OO:z City ofIowa City Parks & Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 - 5:00 P.M. Recreation Center Meeting Room B c:: FINAL I CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 5:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Gustaveson, Judith Klink, Margaret Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Matt Pacha, Jerry Raaz, John Watson, John Westefeld MEMBERS ABSENT: Phil Reisetter STAFF PRESENT: Terry Trueblood, Terry Robinson, Mike Moran OTHERS PRESENT: Del Holland RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Moved by Pacha. seconded by Westefeld to accept the proposed art from John R. Coyne for Wetherby Park. Unanimous. Moved by Klink. seconded bv Pacha to approve the "Birds In Flil!ht" public art proiect for South Sycamore Greenway. Unanimous. Moved by Pacha. seconded bv O'Leary to accept the proposed dOl! park names as follows: Lucky Pawz PlaYl!round for the larl!e section and Emma's Run Al!i1itv and Traininl! Area for the al!i1ity and traininl! section. Unanimous. OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: Moved by Klink seconded bv Westefeld. to approve the February 8. 2006 minutes as written. Unanimous. Moved by Pacha. seconded by Westefeld. to have staff report prol!ress of the Sand Lake Recreation Area conceptual plan at their rel!ularlv scheduled Parks and Recreation Commission meetinl!s. Unanimous. PUBLIC DISCUSSION No public discussion. Parks and Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 Page 2 of 6 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PUBLIC ART FOR WETHERBY PARK AND SOUTH SYCAMORE GREENWAY: Wetherby Park: In accordance with policy, the Parks and Recreation Commission is to approve any public art project to be placed in parks prior to going to City Council for their approval. As this is somewhat of a new policy, the Wetherby Park public art project has already been approved by Council. Although out of order, it now is presented to the Commission for their review. Included in the Commission packets was the detailed description of this sculpture. In summary it is a weathervane where Isaac Wetherby is represented photographing the surroundings of the park. Part of this art project also includes replacing the rails. Trueblood noted that there needed to be an alternative to the rails in this shelter as they were easily kickedlbroken etc. by vandals. The proposed railing for this art project will be metal as opposed to wood, and much sturdier than the previous rails. Moyed by Pacha. seconded by Westefeld to accept the proposed art from John R. Coyne for Wetherby Park. Unanimous. South Sycamore Greenway: Commission reviewed photographs of the proposed "Birds In Flight" public art proposed for South Sycamore Greenway. There is some question whether this item needs approval by Parks and Recreation as Sycamore Greenway is technically not a park and is under jurisdiction of Public Works, however, since Parks staff maintains the traiVgreenway Trueblood felt it would be advisable for Commission to review. The exact location has not been determined at this time; however, staff is considering placing it at the bottom of the drainage way where it will be easily seen but not easily assessable. Moved by Klink. seconded by Pacha to approve the "Birds In Flh!ht" public art proiect for South Sycamore Greenway. Unanimous. DISCUSSION OF SAND LAKE RECREATION AREA AND COMMISSIONS' INVOLVEMENT IN THE CONCEPTUAL PLANNING PROCESS: The City Manager has authorized hiring a firm to develop a conceptual plan for this area prior to City taking ownership. The purpose of this item is to discuss the level of involvement the Commission would like to take in this process. Trueblood did not have a proposal at the time of this meeting. Typically there are a series of neighborhood association meetings where commission members are invited; however, as this is more of a destination park versus a neighborhood park, there will not be neighborhood association involvement. There will, however, likely be some public meetings scheduled. Trueblood suggested that staff can update Commission at our regularly scheduled meetings or they may opt to be involved during the entire process, attending meetings with the consultant, etc. Moyed by Pacha. seconded by Westefeld. to have staff report prOl!ress of the Sand Lake Recreation Area conceptual plan at their rel!ularly scheduled Parks and Recreation Commission meetinl!s. Unanimous. Parks and Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 Page 3 of6 REPORT ON PLANS FOR CITY PARK CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION: Mike Moran reviewed plans for the City Park Centennial Celebration with the Commission. He reminded members that these plans are all in their preliminary stages at this time. As May is "Older Americans Month", AARP will be cosponsoring a number of events in the park during the week of May 22. These events may include a family softball tournament, horseshoe tournament, water walking at City Park Pool, a pool sharks competition, tennis and bocce ball events. Saturday, June 10 has been designated as "City Park Centeunial Family Fun Day." Events planned for this day include free or 10~ swimming and carnival rides, historical games, lunch (either free or for a minimal fee), entertainment ongoing on the hour, skateboard demonstrations, and a re-dedication ceremony. During July, staff will work in coordination with the Jaycees for activity promotion during their 4th of July celebration. During the week of July 17-24, the Iowa City Community Theatre will perform a production of "State Fair". August 19 has been designated as "Welcome Back to School Night" at City Park Pool from 6-8 p.m. Activities to include movies, music, swimming and snacks for kids and families. Other promotional activities are in the works that include website development, media releases, utility bill inserts, neighborhood newsletters, banners and flyers to name a few. The Centennial Celebration committee meets every other Thursday at 2:00 p.m. Anyone is welcome to attend. Next meeting is March 23. REPORT ON FEBRUARY 22 MEETING WITH BOYS BASEBALL BOARD: On February 22 John Westefeld, Matt Pacha, Mike Moran and Terry Trueblood met with six members of the Boy's Baseball Board to discuss various concerns and issues. The board reported that the building construction is coming along and will be open at the beginning of the 2006 season. Trueblood again offered staff assistance with this project to help meet this deadline. Scheduling concerns were discussed with the board, namely scheduling more fields than what is needed. Staff made suggestions such as staggering start times to help with parking issues. The Boys' Baseball Board indicated they would discuss this. Trueblood mentioned that there is a great need for better communication between Boys Baseball and Parks & Recreation Staff. He suggested that perhaps a staff liaison be put in place. The Boys Baseball Board was not agreeable to this suggestion. Pacha noted that he has been notified by 4 members of the public who said they had not received any registration information this year through the school district. One of those people stated she Parks and Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 Page 4 of 6 had contacted Howard Villhauer who stated they had not distributed them through the school. However, Moran noted that the schools no longer distribute such information anyway Pacha directed these people to the form on the web site. Pacha stated that staff needs to make a plan of action decision if some of these issues are not resolved. Westefeld stated that it was good to have met with the Board to bring these issues to their attention as well as having them on record. Westefeld also noted that he had the opportunity to be in City Park 5 weeks ago and then again during this past week and that there had been no obvious or visible progress on the Boys Baseball building. Trueblood stated that City staff will be keeping a close eye on the progress and will move forward if no progress is noted. O'Leary expressed his disappointment in this organization, stating that this may be the year to enforce changes in their practices. He feels that their failings have given Parks and Recreation a bad name. Trueblood stated that staff will maintain close involvement with the Boys' Baseball Board. He will draft a summary of the meeting stating staffs understanding of the outcome of this meeting and expected action to be taken by the board. A post -season meeting will then be scheduled to revisit these issues. UPDATES WITH REGARD TO FINAL APPROVAL OF FY07 OPERATING BUDGET AND FY06-FYIO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET: Trueblood noted that there were no changes to the approved budget. The Council's final approval of the budget is scheduled to occur at their March 7 meeting. CONSIDER NAMES FOR TWO SECTIONS OF THE DOG PARK: Trueblood reminded Commission that they had already approved naming the entire dog park the "Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park" to honor Dean Thornberry who contributed most of the money to construct this facility. At that time DogP AC indicated they would be returning to request names for the individual sections of the park based on a specific level of contribution. The suggested names are: I) Lucky Pawz Playground (for the large section, and, 2) Emma's Run Agility and Training Area (named in honor of a donor's dog). They are still hoping for a contributor for the small dog section. Moved bv Pacha, seconded bv O'Leary to accept the proposed dOl! park names as follows: Luckv Pawz PlaVl!round for the larl!e section and Emma's Run Al!ilitv and Traininl! Area for the al!ilitv and train section. Unanimous. COMMISSION TIME O'Leary stated that he is looking forward to the Centennial Celebration of City Park. Raaz reported that Jeff Harper is moving forward on the disc golf course and will be contacting Terry Robinson about tree removal. They are planning a practice round soon (without baskets). Parks and Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 Page 5 of 6 CHAIR'S REPORT: No report. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: DOl! Park: Trueblood reported that the Dog Park continues to progress and they are planning on a spring opening. Recreation staff, ITS and Animal Control staff are working together on pass registration procedures. Bocce Ball: Recreation staff has received a request for formation of a Bocce Ball Leagues. Staff agrees that this is possible and will continue working on this. PIN Grants: PIN Grant requests will be available for Commission Review at the April meeting. Girls Softball Lil!htinl! Proiect: The Girls Softball lighting project is progressing nicely. The lights have been ordered. City Park Horseshoe Courts: City Park horseshoe courts are being rebuilt. Nine courts were removed from inside the railroad tracks due to safety hazards. Four new courts will be added to the west side and two to the east side of the existing courts. City Park Cabins: Preliminary restoration cost estimates carne in at $20,000-$25,000. Due to this high cost, the smaller of the two cabins may be demolished. The final decision is pending at this time. Anl!el of Hove Statue: The installation and dedication of this statue is expected during the month of April, 2006. Ral!brai Uvdate: Trueblood contacted the Parks and Recreation Director in Coralville asking if there is a need of assistance for RagBrai. He has not heard back from them at the time of this meeting. However, he has been contacted by an Iowa City resident who will be hosing 18-20 bicyclers during this event who was wondering if they could spill over into Scott Park. He gave tentative approval for this, pending more details. Al!enda Items: Trueblood reminded Commission members that if they have a request for an agenda item to be sure to bring that to Gustaveson or his attention. He also discussed the possibility of placing this as an item on our monthly agenda. ADJOURNMENT: Moved bv Pacha, seconded bv Raaz to adiourn. Unanimous. The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Parks and Recreation Commission March 8, 2006 Page 6 of 6 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 TERM NAME EXPIRES 1/11 2/8 3/8 4/12 5/10 6/7 7/12 8/9 9/13 10/11 1118 12/13 Craig Gustaveson 1/1/07 X X X Judith Klink 1/1/07 OlE X X Margaret Loomer 1/1/08 X X X Ryan O'Learv 1/1/10 X X X Matt Pacha 1/1/09 X X X Jerry Raaz 1/1/08 X X X Phil Reisetter 1/1/09 OlE X OlE John 1/1/07 Watson X OlE X John Westefeld 1/1/10 X X X KEY: X= 0= OlE = NM= LQ= Present Absent AbsentlExcused No meeting No meeting due to lack of quorum Not a Member FINAL MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2006 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL C[ Members Present: Lisa Beckmann, Paul Retish, GeoffWilming, Scott King, Beverly Witwer, Sara Baird, Martha Lubaroff, Sehee Foss, Kate Karacay. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers, Ryan Bobst (human rights staff volunteer). Call to Order Beckmann called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. Consideration of the Minutes of the Januarv 24.2006 Meeting Minutes MOTION: Witwer moved to accept the minutes as submitted, and King seconded. The motion passed on a vote of9-0. Recommendations to Council There was no discussion. Contribution to SUDDort the Kenneth Crniel Human RilZhts lnternshio Prol!ram Witwer stated that the internship program was already in place but after the death of Cmiel the University of Iowa (herein after U of I) Human Rights Department decided to rename the internship program after Cmiel to honor his memory. Witwer continued that Cmiel had done so much for Human Rights in this town and that the Commission never had the opportunity to honor him before his untimely death. Wilming wanted more background information on the internship and whether it was in dire need of funding. Witwer explained the internship is a program for U of I juniors and seniors to go do human rights work around the world. The program has been very successful for students who get field work experience in human rights. Retish wondered if instead of making a contribution, the Commission at the annual award breakfast should create a new award in Cmiel's name which would be awarded to a college student. Beckmann liked the idea because the regular human rights breakfast focuses on adults and then the youth awards focuses on youth so this award could fill the gap between the regular breakfast awards and the youth awards while also building a bridge that links the Commission more closely with U of! students. Witwer mentioned she would like the Commission to honor Cmiel in some way and this was a fine way to do it. Beckmann also hoped this would lead more people to attend the breakfast. Witwer requested a letter to go to the family for any input they may have about the award. She would also like a press release and a letter to Amy at the U of! Human Rights Center. Lubaroff added the family should be invited to the Breakfast. MOTION: Retish moved to create an award in Kenneth Cmiel's name to recognize a college or graduate student, and Beckmann seconded. The motion passed on a vote of9-0. Interim Director of the Universitv of Iowa Center for Human Ri!!hts Witwer stated she was the representative from the Commission on the committee to help fmd a new director for the Center. Witwer mentioned there was a meeting to talk about the interim director and there was great determination to get a new director by June. Currently there is an internal search within U of I and applications are due March 29th. Retish added he was one of the four people who started the Center and it was supposed to have been an intellectual place for the study of human rights, a place to shelter human rights workers who had been persecuted within their own Countries, and lastly it was supposed to be a place to promote activism both locally and nationally. Retish would like to see the focus of the Center remain to be those original goals and would like to see more activism. Retish would like to see a director placed in the position that would follow these goals. Contribution to Law Students going to New Orleans over spring break to help with Hurricane Katrina Relief Foss stated 45 law students are going down to New Orleans for ten days over spring break. Half will do legal work; the other half will do manual work. Foss said at this time most of the honsing and transportation costs are covered and thought it would cost about $20,000 roundtrip. MOTION: Retish moved to contribute $100 to the Equal Justice Foundation to help with Katrina, and Beckmann seconded. The motion passed on a vote of9-0. Youth Awards Bowers mentioned ads for the Youth A wards were featured in the Press Citizens Heart and Soul Edition, handed out at Cultural Diversity Day, and are displayed in City buses. Bowers also mentioned she has sent two packets of Youth A wards information and nomination forms to each school in the District. Beckmann asked what Commissioners had contacts at the schools in the District to do follow-up calls. Retish said he would call Roosevelt, Tate and Mayors Youth. Wilming said he would call Lincoln, Longfellow, Kirkwood, and Hom. King will contact Coralville Central and Hills. Lubaroff said she would call Hoover, Lemme, and Marm. Sara would contact Lucas, Twain and Wood. Witwer will contact West, City, Regina and Southeast. Foss will contact Wickham. Kate will contact Perm, Van Allen and Willowwinds. Beckmann will contact Northwest. Witwer reminded Commissioners to not just talk to Principals but also to Counselors, Teachers etc. Movie Series Undate Bowers said that it was difficult to fmd anyone to sit on the panel for the screening of the Lost Boys of Sudan; Baird added that a group discussion would be better because then no one would be on the "spo!." Bowers will get refreshments for the even!. Bowers said July 19 was open at the Iowa City Public Library to show the film I'm Still Here: The Truth About Schizophrenia. Witwer thought the Alliancefor the Mentally III would probably love to do a panel with the Commission after the screening. Speaker for Breakfast Beckmarm mentioned the last time this topic had been broached was in November. Beckmarm reminded Commissioners who had spoken in the recent past like, David Skorton, Kevin Burt, Silome Raheim. King thought a good idea would be the Middle Eastern Muslim Community. King thought this would be good because of some of the human rights issues involved and also because of the misunderstandings some Non-Muslims hold. Karacay remembered someone had nominated Pak from Thai Flavors and thought he was phenomenal and would be a great speaker because he embodies the spirit of human rights. Retish stated Pak won an award a few years ago at the Breakfast and it would be nice for him to come back as the Keynote Speaker. Retish also thought it may be a good idea to have the Dubuque Human Rights Commission come and discuss what it took for them to get Sexual Orientation as a protected class passed in their City. In the same way, King thought the controversy in Cedar Rapids when they refused to endorse the anti bullying program would be a good topic. MOTION: Retish moved to ask Thai Flavors to be the Keynote Speaker for the 2006 Breakfast, and Karacay seconded. The motion passed on a vote of 9-0. Calendar Bowers stated at the last meeting the goal was to get a list of various Places of Worship and ask each what would be the days in which they could not participate in events. Beckmarm questioned whether the list was exhaustive. Retish asked about an all faith organization which perhaps could facilitate getting dates from different religions and faiths. Retish does not want to reinvent the wheel and feels there are various interfaith calendars already available. Beckmarm reminded the Commissioners the whole point in doing this was to make the City more secular. She suggested maybe going to a City Council meeting and talking to City Offices. Retish thought maybe the Commission should write a letter to all the faiths/religions. Read Cases Commissioners read one case where no probable cause was found. ReDocts of Commissioners Retish reported the Human Rights Education Committee will do Building Blocks for Employment (hereinafter, BB) on March 28'h at "The Spot" located at 1030 Cross Park Ave, 5:30-8:00 p.m. in Iowa City. Retish explained that the Human Rights Education Committee is a spin off of the Commission. The Committee tries to run education programs in the community that concem human rights and in the past have sponsored movies and cultural events. BB is for people who want to improve their current job and/or obtain employment. Retish said letters have been sent out to ask employers to attend; if no employers attend then the event will not happen. Retish also hopes to stagger volunteers so as to utilize all the help. He also encouraged all Commissioners to come help. Retish suggested moving the Commission meeting also scheduled for the 28th to another night and/or starting an hour later. 2 Foss said the turn out for the last BB was very low and whether something could be done to increase participation. Bowers stated car pools and vans had been used in the past to try to increase participation. Retish added he hoped the location change would also add to an increased turnout for this event. Bowers said she would talk to the Transportation Director to see whether there were any available bus tickets. MOTION: Beckmann moved to attend BB in lieu of having a formal March meeting, and seconded by Foss. Motion passed on a vote of9-0. Retish also mentioned his concern over the lack of transportation-buses for persons who live at the Regency Trailer Court; Retish is trying to get the Johnson County Board of Supervisors and the Iowa City Council to discuss this matter. Retish asked all Comntissioners who think this is an issue to contact the Board of Supervisors. Retish stated Rod Sullivan has been very supportive of the idea. Retish would like to see an effort by the Board of Supervisors and the City Council to provide transportation. Beckmann mentioned there is a neighborhood ceuter at Regency that is funded by the Hills Community School District and perhaps the person who oversees that center would be of some assistance and could come talk to the Conunission at a future meeting. King reported there was a meeting for Non-English Handout Materials. King said the meeting was very productive however; the project would not meet its August 2006 deadline because of additional areas to include in the handout. Beckmann was not opposed to broadening the horizon but thought the original plan of providing information to international parents in their native language would still be something that could be completed by August 2006. King agreed the basic information could be completed by August. King also reported he was unable to attend the Governor's Conference on Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, Bisexual Youth because the conference had filled up by the time he had submitted his registration. Bowers mentioned the Comntission had sponsored two students from City High to attend the event. Witwer would contact the school to get reports from the students who attended the conference. Witwer reported on Commissioner Karacay's recent appointment as Director of the United Nations Association. She also stated the Bullying Program was still in the initial stages. Witwer and Bowers will do follow up with Jane on this matter. Witwer would also like at the very least to have a program at Kate Wickham. Wilming reported that he too felt lack of transportation is a big barrier to employment. Wilming said his company has a lot of jobs available but often can't hire someone because they either lack transportation or lack a valid driver's license. Wilming thinks a lot about this issue and would like the Comntission to think of ways they can help. Status of Cases Bowers updated Commissioners on the status of cases. Adiournment There being no further business to come before the Commission, Witwer moved to adjourn. Lubaroff seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.m. 3 Board or Commission: Human Rights ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2006 {Meetin Date TERM NAME EXP. 1/24 2/28 3/28 4/25 5/23 6/27 7/25 8/22 9/26 10/24 11/28 12/26 12/27 Lisa Beckmann 1/1/07 X X X Paul Retish 1/1/07 OlE X X Geoff Wilming 1/1/07 X X X Sara Baird 1/1/08 X X X Bev Witwer 1/1/08 X X X Scott King 1/1/08 X X X Martha 1/1/09 X X X Lubaroff Sehee Foss 1/1/09 X X X Kate Karacay 1/1/09 X X X KEY: x = Present o = Absent DIE = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member NMNQ - No meeting, no quorum 4 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THURSDAY, MARCH 16,2006 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM ClliWJ FINAL MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Carlson, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Brennan, James Enloe, Justin Pardekooper, Jan Weissmiller STAFF PRESENT: Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Suzanne Bentler, Steve Long, Helen Burford, Russ Garrett, Don Otto CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Weitzel called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: 335 North Clinton Street. Don Otto introduced himself as a green homebuilder and the owner of DPO Construction in Iowa City. He said he is very concerned about sustainability, green construction, indoor air quality, energy efficiency, etc. Otto said he noticed today that there is a notice of demolition on the house at 335 South Clinton Street, to the northwest of the post office. He said he is opposed to the demolition of that building. Otto said the house was beautifully built by craftsmen in 1881 and is a solid home that has been beautifully maintained. He said it is a beautiful part of this town, and to see that building go would be a really unfortunate thing. Otto said he understands the right of an owner to do what he wants with his own property, as long as it fits within the rules, but in this case, he believes the building is part of the City. He said that as a citizen of this town, he thinks the town will be diminished if the house is removed. Regarding the green effect, Otto said that the best thing to be done for green would be to not build this again. He said the money would not have to be spent twice, and the fuel for construction would not have to be wasted twice. Otto said the building is certainly serviceable. He said the owner has a right to income, but Iowa City would be lessened if the building were removed. Maharry recommended that Otto speak about this at the City Council open forum session. Otto said he did not know much about the history of the building but said it is a beautifui part of the City and is in a very public, central part of the City, and in that sense, it is a public building. Terdalkar said the next City Council meeting would be held on Tuesday. Terdalkar said for a historic property there is a GO-day hold before a demolition permit is issued. This permit application was submitted on March 14th and the as the property is not a registered historic property the hold is only for 7 days. Burford said that Tom Bender contacted her and would like to see the house moved. Weitzel said that the developer/owner would like to move the house, but Weitzel did not know if that would be feasible. Otto said the house is not a registered landmark property and is not in a historic district. Weitzel said the house is at least potentially eligible. Maharry said that per City ordinance, the homeowner would need to give consent for the property to have landmark status. McCallum asked if there are other buildings around this one to be razed. He said that the buildings around it are not really historic. McCallum said if this is a landlord situation in which the owner is combining lots to maximize that corner, it would be difficult to salvage this property. He said this gets back to incentives - if the house is being torn down on its existing, small lot, why would the developer be redeveloping that and would he get the same density. Weitzel said the lot is commercially zoned and has a fairly high commercial density. Terdalkar informed that it is zoned CB-5. Weitzel said that if the City had a nearby lot to trade, that might be a feasible solution to keeping the house. He said, however, that the open lots near this location are privately owned. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 2 Weitzel asked Burford if she had spoken with the University about the lot across from the President's house. Burford said she made two inquiries, but with President Skorton leaving, no one wanted to make a commitment regarding that lot. Svendsen asked if the building is to be razed and then new construction put on the lot. Ollo said he had heard that the owner intends to construct a six-story building, but he was not certain of that. Burford said the owner has offered $10,000, the equivalent of the demolition costs, to put toward moving the house. Burford said the movers she discussed this with in Washington County had given an estimate of $100,000 to move the house to within a one-mile radius. Svendsen said one of the issues here is that to allow the future owner in a new location to be able to take advantage of the federal investment tax credits for the property, it would be a good idea for the Commission to go on record and offer an opinion as to the property's eligibility in its current location. She said the property has not been surveyed. Maharry said that moving the house would therefore require an empty lot within one mile of the site. McCallum said that he has an empty lot at 819 College that could be used, if the City would give him an occupancy permit for the building and give him higher density. Weitzel stated that there are two options: keep the building in place or try to move it. He suggested that the Commission come to some conclusion about the eligibility of the property and then discuss the two options. Carlson said he walks past the property every day, and it appears to be in perfect condition. He said that in his opinion, the building is absolutely eligible for National Register listing under Criterion C for architecture. Weitzel said that because the building is across from the Courthouse, there also has to be some kind of local history related to the property. Svendsen agreed with Carlson and said that under Criterion C, it doesn't mailer who lived there. She added that the house meets the true definition of a landmark property. Weitzel said he agreed with Carlson regarding eligibility. The consensus of the Commission was that this is a significant structure. Carlson asked if there would be any chance to speak with the owner to delay demolition of the house. Burford said that the owner contacted Friends and the Johnson County Historical Society when this issue came up. McCallum said the owner is a realtor. Weitzel said the Commission should assume that the owner will not delay demolition but added that the owner should still be contacted. The Commission expressed support to the efforts of Don Ollo in saving the structure. Summit Street House. Russ Garrell said that he is a contractor in Iowa City. He said he has a potential client who would like to put an addition on the back of a house on Summit Street. Garrell said that the rules state that the deepest one can be on Summit Street from the back of the curb to the back of the house is 125 feet. He said the rules state "street," and he believed that referred to the curb. Garrell said it is unclear whether this actually refers to the curb or the sidewalk. Weitzel said that he thought it would have to be from the front of the lot line. He said it is ambiguous, but he thought that legally, one would have to go from the front of the lot line, because that is where setbacks are determined from. Weitzel said that the sidewalk is almost always within the City property. Garrell said that he would have to locate the lot line, but that would solve his first problem. Garrell said he also would like an opinion on the addition so that he could present it formally at the next meeting. Weitzel suggested that Garrell work with Terdalkar and then fill out an application. Update on Preservation Plan. Svendsen [the historic preservation planning consultant working on the Historic Preservation Plan Update] said that she spent Tuesday in Des Moines talking with the State Historic Preservation Office staff about Iowa City and its many different perspectives. She said it was felt that the Commission is doing a good job, although there are a few areas that need to be worked on. Svendsen said she received some commitment from the State staff to work on elements of gelling the plan updated. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 1S, 200S Page 3 Svendsen said she has already conducted some interviews. She said she and Weitzel discussed a variety of issues relating to the operation of the Commission, the ordinance, and getting the Montgomery-Butler House National Register nomination completed. Svendsen said she has spoken with other City staff people, including the person referring Section 106 cases, and also spoke with Burford. Svendsen said she is in the process of scheduling the neighborhood strategy meetings and is considering the last two weeks in April and the last two weeks in May. She said there will be four meetings, beginning with three residential neighborhood meetings to be held at Longfellow School, Horace Mann School, and Lincoln School. Svendsen said that the fourth meeting tentatively scheduled for May 17th would be held in City Hall. She said the meeting would be held for downtown property and business owners and others with an interest in downtown and would be heid from 7:30 to 9:00 a.m. Svendsen said that the meeting would be held during a three-day visit by the Colorado consultants. She said the meeting would include discussions on the difference between a National Register district and a local ordinance district. Svendsen said that because the downtown area has already been certified as a cultural and entertainment district, it would behoove property owners to consider having the area become a National Register district to take advantage of the tax credits at the state and federal levels. She said that other financial incentives would be discussed at the meeting, and information would be disbursed and gathered. Svendsen said she would be preparing a presentation about other communities to show what has been done successfully. Svendsen said that when the consultants are visiting, they would hold a session with the Commission, tentatively scheduled for Monday, May 151h She said there would also be an evening social event while the consultants are visiting. Svendsen said she is still looking for more interview subjects. She asked Commission members to e-mail her with the contact information of people to whom she should speak. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION: Certificates of Appropriateness: 520 South Governor. Terdalkar said this is an application for the replacement and relocation of windows and the installation of some new windows to the house at the back, which appears to be a second addition to this house. He showed where windows would be moved and added and where three large windows would be installed and a new door installed. . Long said that there is a good-sized backyard here with a grotto that was built in the 1960s. He said the purpose of the project is to open the house to the backyard to enjoy the backyard more. Long said the project involves renovating the kitchen and turning a bedroom into a sun room off of the kitchen. He said they would be using identical windows. Carlson said that where the three windows are proposed for the sunroom, one drawing shows a one over one sash, but the other sketch shows two over two. Long said that they would be using the divider. MOTION: McCallum moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 520 South Governor Street, as proposed. Ponto seconded the motion. Carlson said he had a slight discomfort with the row of three windows there when there is nothing similar to that on the house. He added however, that he understood that this is an addition, and therefore more leeway could be allowed. Carlson said he would be happier with two windows, but if three windows are acceptable to other Commission members, he would be okay with that. Ponto said that three windows would be acceptable to him and added that the windows give the feel of a sunroom. Maharry asked if the windows would go all the way up to the roofline or if there would be headers as on the other windows. Bentler said they would have the same molding on the top as the other windows. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 4 517 Grant Street. Weitzel said he would recuse himself from voting on this item. Carlson took over as Chair of the Commission for this application. T erdalkar stated that the packet contains the two memos and a letter from the appiicant as well as the applicant's letter to the City Council. He said that all of the information should be considered as part of the application. Carlson said that the Commission discussed the general issues regarding this item at its last meeting, before he sent the Commission's memo to the City Council. He said he got the impression then that, although there was some reluctance, the Commission was more or less willing to go aiong with the kind of compromise that was proposed, to retroactively approve a certificate of appropriateness, given the nature of the circumstance, which involved confusion on the part of Commission members as to the exact interpretation of guideline 4.11, which the Commission is now working to clarify. Carlson said that for the purposes of 517 Grant Street, the Commission seemed to agree that it could be said that what is there now is not so different from what it would have approved anyway. He said the Commission seemed willing to agree to let this one go, knowing that in the future with a similar case, the Commission could be more specific. Maharry suggested that the Commission emphasize that the finished project may have not been distinct from what the Commission would have approved. Weitzel said, as a point of information, that a lot of details were presented to the City Council that the Commission never had the advantage of being able to discuss at the first meeting regarding this property. Terdalkar said that the applicant sent the letter to the City Council and not to the Commission. Maharry suggested that it shouid have been forwarded on to the Historic Preservation Commission, knowing that the letter had to do with historic preservation. Weitzel stated that Svendsen is going to look at these types of work flow issues, as this was in the RFP that Terdalkar submitted. Weitzel said the CLG is still there for supplemental funding for other parts of this project should it run on. Carlson said the Commission has not yet applied for the CLG grant, and Weitzel confirmed this. Weitzel said the application would be due in August; however, the grant cycle begins in April. Maharry asked if there were a certificate application before the Commission. Carlson confirmed this, stating that it basically consists of the original application, the letters sent to the City Council, and Carlson's memo to City Council. Terdalkar said he called the applicant, but she was not ready to apply. He said that he proposed to apply for her, and that was acceptable to her. Carlson stated that because the final result is not much different from what the Commission probably would have approved with a lower pitch of some kind, because the project did not actually involve removing historic material but merely covered over historic material, and because the Commission was internally divided as to the exact interpretation of Section 4.11, he felt that in this narrow case, the Commission could make a special exception. MOTION: Maharry moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 517 Grant Street, as discussed at the Commission's previous meeting and reiterated at the present meeting and for the reasons discussed by Carlson, with the comment that he is disappointed that the applicant did not direct the correspondence involving the Commission to the Commission. McCallum seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-0-1. with Weitzel abstainina from the vote. Weitzel again took over as Chair of the meeting. MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 9. 2006 AND FEBRUARY 22. 2006 MEETINGS. February 9. 2006. Carlson said that he had typographical corrections, not substantive changes, to the minutes of February 91h and would submit them to Terdalkar. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 16, 2006 Page 5 MOTION: Maharry moved to approve the minutes of the February 9, 2006 Historic Preservation Commission meetin9, subject to typographical corrections to be submitted by Carlson. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. February 22. 2006. Weitzel stated that on page three, in the first full paragraph, the last sentence should be changed to "... from the beginning, his concern was because of the potential to set a general precedent." He said that on the same page, in the fourth full paragraph, the last sentence should be changed to, "...this instance is something most architectural historians..." Carlson said that on page three, in the eighth paragraph, the second sentence should be clarified to read, "Weitzel said the proposed CLG grant request that the Commission is talking about doing in the future, that was specified in the HRDP, was designed to look at those kind of staffing/work flow issues." Weitzel said that in the last paragraph on page three, the second sentence should be changed to read, "...and the Commission's action could be to take no further action, but the Commission..." Carlson stated that on page four, in the ninth paragraph, the fourth sentence should read, "...that the Commission should not trouble the owner for another application." MOTION: Carlson moved to approve the minutes of the February 22, 2006 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, as amended. Ponto seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 6-0. OTHER: Historic Preservation Awards. Burford said that in preparation for this year's awards, 56 properties were reviewed by the Chair, Terdalkar, and herself. She said she also contacted most of the painting contractors in Iowa City and Johnson County, as well as past winners, to see if they had properties done during the past year that they would want considered. Burford said she also contacted people in the Melrose District to see if there would be a nomination. She said that there were also word-of-mouth referrals for these nominations. Burford distributed a chart showing the categories of awards that have been presented since 1993. She stated that 201 awards have been given in the last 13 years, 49% of which were given for painting and exterior finishes, although the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook does not regulate painting or color choice. Burford said the Commission may want to consider making some guidelines and establishing a method for securing nominations for future awards to make them more objective. She said that Svendsen has discussed on numerous occasions what color schemes may be appropriate for different styles of houses, and some of her comments are on tape so that there is a body of evidence for the Commission to use as a reference tool. Maharry said that he felt that awards are inherently subjective. He said that otherwise there are simply criteria, and if the criteria are met, one receives an award. Weitzel added that there are guidelines for historic paint colors that could be made available on the website. He said people then have the option of following the guidelines, and if the guidelines are followed, then the Commission has the option of granting an award. Maharry said that in the past, some people have felt snubbed, because they weren't given an award when they applied for one. He said that now, everyone who applies pretty much receives an award. Burford stated that there should be a definition to separate stewardship from rehabilitation. She said that it is difficult to find people who actually make an investment in stewardship, in really taking care of a place. Burford suggested the Commission encourage stewardship by recognizing people who take on big projects. Weitzel said he feels that stewardship implies a long-term, continued maintenance of a property, although it does not necessarily involve a rehabilitation, for example a house that has been kept up over a long period of time. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes March 1S, 200S Page S Burford said that the addresses of the past award winners are clustered in specific areas, which shows that one project can affect another. Weitzel agreed. Burford said the Margaret Nowyscz Award has not been presented since 2001, when it was given to the Englert Civic Theatre Group. She stated that in the past the award has been given to Commission members, architects, and community activists. Burford said she could not find a definition or criteria for the award, although she thought she had come across it at one time. Burford said that, after reading past programs, there was a category called historic landmarks added three years ago. She said that each of the approved districts and properties that had received national or local recognition was listed on the program. The Commission looked at the list of properties provided by Burford, and Commission members discussed additional properties as well. Maharry stated that the landscaping category had been added without being announced in any press release so that people did not have a chance to apply for that award. Burford said there are currently 29 people on the list, with two more added by Commission members. She stated that a previous presentation of 20 awards took about one hour. The consensus of the Commission was to try to keep the awards down to a reasonable number to keep it competitive. Weitzel said the comment was made at the last presentation that people in Friends of Historic Preservation, the Commission, and City staff should not receive the awards. Maharry agreed and asked to have his property removed from the list under consideration. McCallum pointed out that recognition of good work also has the effect of seeding neighborhoods. Maharry and Weitzel agreed. Weitzel pointed out that the awards would encompass all of Johnson County this year, instead of just the City of Iowa City. Maharry suggested that Commission members drive by properties still under consideration and discuss them at the next meeting. He pointed out that the selection process is ahead of schedule this year. Burford said that there would be a significant number of activities in May regarding national historic preservation. Terdalkar said that the awards presentation would be held on Thursday, May 11th, which is normally the Commission's regular meeting night. Burford said the awards ceremony would be held at Old Brick. Terdalkar asked if the Commission would need to hold another meeting in May, and Maharry said he thought there would probably need to be another meeting. Terdalkar said that Svendsen and the consultants would be in Iowa City during the third week in May. Weitzel suggested the Commission hold a meeting on the third Thursday in May to meet with Svendsen and the consultants and also consider certificates of appropriateness after discussions with the consultants. Elliott Memo to Carlson. Carlson said he distributed this memo for the Commission's information. He added that Elliott, as a private citizen, had sent the memo to Carlson, as a Commission member. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte s:/pcdlminutesIHPC/2006103-16-06.dOC c .2 III .!!! E"C E ... o 0 ug en:: .2 Gl \0 -,,= I'llc= ~I'lll"l Gl"C III C ~ Gl 0..::: ,,<( 'i: o - .!!! :I: .. UJ UJ 0 ~ - x OX x x 0 x X M 0 N UJ x b!:!x x x x x 0 x ~ - N 0 0 ~ x x x x x x x x 0 X N '" X X X X X X X X 0 X ~ - 00 '" <- '<> <- '" '<> <- <- '<> '" E .g '" 0 '" 0 '" '" 0 '" '" '" ~ Q. '" 0; ~ 0; ~ ~ 0; ~ ~ ~ ;-&1 ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N M M M M M M M M M M " E . " t Q. ~ . .e . . . " ;; .fl '5 .. . ~ . . . . . ... u . . 00 l:l " . "t: . . . . ... ;; 00 '. ~ " . .. :;; :;; " '. '" u " . . ~ ~ '" .. .. z :E o:i ...; :E :E :E ...; ...; ...; ,.; .", " ... on " G 0.0..0 x.S s f5~~ ~ 5 5 ~ coj ~$$zo ~<r:<r: z II II ~ r:e:::s ~xOOZ Se(/I) MINUTES Youth Advisory Commission (YAG) March 30, 2006 - 7:00 P.M. Harvat Hall, City Hall FINAL Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Abboud Kamps, Ziegenhorn (7:05), Bleam, Subramanian, Stubbers, Nelson, Keranen Members Absent: None Others Present: City Council Liaison Correia; UISG Student Council Rep. Schreiber Staff: City Clerk Karr, and Temporary Staff Joelle Osterhaus (Intern) Recommendations to Council (effective onlv after seDarate Council action) None ADDroval of Minutes Moved by Bleam, seconded by Kearnan, to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously, 6/0, Ziegenhorn absent. Election of TemDorarv Chair (Ziegenhorn arrived) Council liaison Correia explained that facilitating the meeting is not something that the liaison or staff should continue to do. Until the by-laws are adopted, by the Commission and City Council, a temporary chair should be elected. City Clerk Karr explained the process of nominations and voting. One may nominate others or themselves, and then everyone has a vote after the nominations cease. Subramanian nominated Kearnan, Bleam seconded. Kearnan nominated Subramanian, and Subramanian seconded. No other nominations were made. City Clerk Karr explained that it would take four, a majority of those present to elect a temporary chair. City Clerk Karr called for a vote on the nomination of Kearnan as temporary chair, and announced the vote, 6/0, with Bleam, Abboud Kamps, Ziegenhorn, Stubbers, Subramanian and Nelson voting in the affirmative. City Clerk Karr called for a vote on the nomination of Subramanian as temporary chair, and announced the vote as Kearnan voting in the affirmative. City Clerk Karr declared Kearnan temporary chair. Chair Kearnan now presiding. Discussion with City Attornev City Attorney (CA) Eleanor Dilkes stated she was open to questions throughout the discussion. CA Dilkes explained that as Iowa Law states the business of government is to be done in the "open", with some limited exceptions. She explained that all City Boards and Commissions, including Youth Advisory Commission, is a government body --_._--~_. -,-,---~,----",---~-~,--'-"------_._'''--'--'-'--- Youth Advisory Commission March 30, 2006 Page 2 and therefore is subject to those laws; and documents as well are also to be public documents, with limited exception. The City Attorney distributed two handouts "Open Meetings, Open Government" from the League of Cities, and her memo "Open Meetings, Public Records and Commissions Meetings". CA Dilkes explained that open meetings are generally anytime when four of the commissioners are talking about business, then it is subject to being an open meeting and that means that it is illegal for commissioners to have that conversation unless the public has been given notice of meeting, right to attend, and minutes have been kept. Subramanian asked about if they met at school and talked, would that be a problem. Dilkes explained that it cannot be business related at all; no problem if it's social. Dilkes explained that emails pose a problem because it is so instantaneous and responses can be done quickly and therefore can be problematic. She advised to avoid using email communication where there are, or could be, four of you talking simultaneously. City Clerk Karr asserted that she was overly-careful with Council emails and often cuts and pastes multiple times to avoid the potential or the appearance of sending or receiving a response from four members. CA Dilkes encouraged commissioners to use the safest route and rather than email amongst each other, just email once directly to City Clerk or staff because when communication goes through the Clerk there's a record and can respond to the inquires. In response to Kearnan, CA Dilkes explained that a quorum was a majority of the body. For the YAC four would be a quorum. You can't have a meeting without a majority; and a majority of those present, or a majority of a quorum is needed to pass something. UISG Student Council Rep. Schreiber encouraged commissioners to read Robert's Rules of Order because it is a good guide for order of a meeting. CA Dilkes explained that the State Code will be the starting place for the commission by-laws and then Robert's rules will be the second place. Robert's Rules are handy for an issue or procedure that we are unsure about and looks to the Rules for guidance, however, some things about it just make sense like not interrupting others, majority for a meeting, and so on. CA Dilkes and City Clerk Karr shared a copy of "I Move That...." , a booklet on parliamentary procedure published by Iowa State University, and stated copies could be made available if requested. CA Dilkes explained that public records were anything in writing, generated in any form, and is a public record which has to be provided to any person who requests it. She suggested that a good way to keep track of emails is to make a folder for all Y AC items or not retain them. Also Dilkes said it was a good idea to put at note on your emails, if you're communicating with the public about YAC matters, that emails to and from you are subject to the Open Records law as well. City Clerk Karr explained that unlike a phone call, an email is a document. The City Attorney noted that there are different City boards and commissions, and as the name suggests, the YAC is here to make recommendations to Council on matters within .."m_______"~___"_______._,___.___.~_._.__.~~.M.___.__'--.-----.. Youth Advisory Commission March 30, 2006 Page 3 their purview. Some commissions have more independent roles from Council established by Iowa Law, but all are subject to the open records laws. CA Dilkes explained the public discussion item on an agenda was a time when the public can come and make a comment or suggestion, but it is not a time for the' commission to discuss that item or issue because the public has not had notice of that discussion and would need to be put onto another agenda. The Chair should ask commissioners at that time if they were interested in discussing the item at another meeting and if it looked like there was interest, than they could put it on an upcoming agenda. City Clerk Karr suggested if approached about a potential Y AC item recommend they come to a meeting or submit something in writing that can be submitted and shared with the commission. Bv-Laws Subcommittee Reoort Commissioners Bleam and Stubbers passed out their first draft of by-laws and explained their process. Changes were made as follows: 1. Commission could choose to put a nickname, "Y AC", in by-laws 2. Language of resolution would be used as the mission and then specific purposes added 3. Membership section was revised to reflect four individuals, ages 15- 17; and three individuals, 18-21, all serving 2 year terms. See resolution for clarity. 4. Council liaison assumed as ex-officio members so does not need to be included, but may be included as a source of information. 5. Meeting section changed quorum number to four. Notice of meetings changed in accordance with Iowa Code. Strike last paragraph. The date, location, and time changed striking all after City Clerk and kept section e as a mechanism if the chair is out of town, ill, etc. Section f, strike "at least monthly unless otherwise indicated" as it sets a minimum. Part e also changed to chair or two members. 6. Elections section changed new year to read January 1 and majority vote of the commission 7. Officers section changed chair appointing committees or public relations persons to approval of the commission. A part of their duties of the vice-chair will include acting in the absence of the chair 8. The duties of the secretary would be limited to the preparing minutes, forwarding them to the clerk, and assisting the chair and vice-chair. The City Clerk will handle records, correspondence of commission, announcements, distribution and posting of minutes and agendas, and so forth. 9. Resignation shall be given in writing to the City Clerk. Absences will be seen as excused if notice is received by the City Clerk prior to a meeting. In addition, processes for recommending dismissal will be discussed by the commission, and voted upon and in cases of a super/extraordinary majority (2/3 of the commission, or 5) voting in agreement forwarded to the City Council for cases of unexcused Youth Advisory Commission March 30, 2006 Page 4 absences, misconduct, and other instances that may arise not mentioned here, when seen fit. The final decision on dismissal will be up to the City Council. 10. Committees section changed Board to Commission for consistency. No more than four changed to three for serving on a committee. 11. Amendments section changed that amendments would be submitted to the commission (not the chair) at least 30 days or one month prior to adoption. 12. Clerk Karr and Liaison Correia brought up electronic meetings and voting and the Iowa Code which already covered that. Must show impractically or impossibility of participating in person to be admissible. Also cannot have quorum of members present via electronics. Commissioners determined not to clarify that any further. It was noted that there should be plenty of notice to the City Clerk so as to set-up for such meetings. 13. CA Dilkes said individual commissioners should be careful about when they say they are representing the commission or just their individual opinion. The Commission as a whole should be consulted if a commissioner signs correspondence as a Commissioner. CA Dilkes commended Y AC for writing their own by-laws and taking ownership of that rather than asking her to do it as other commissions have done. Commissioner Bleam will make an updated draft for the next agenda and staff will put the motion to approve them on the next agenda. Schedulina introductions with City Council After discussion Commissioners agreed to direct City Clerk Karr to prepare a proclamation for National Youth Service Days. YAC members would introduce themselves to the City Council at the Council meeting of April 18, and accept the proclamation. Commissioners should arrive at 6:45, fifteen minutes ahead of the meeting, for a brief reception with Council. Discussion of five top themes/proiects Subramanian indicated that she thought the commissioners could interact with community more by going to volunteer activities, like the Ronald MacDonald House run. She felt it would put them out there for improved communication. Stubbers said she'd also had that on her list. Kearnan noted her idea about working with Mecca's alcohol awareness media campaign as another way to volunteer. Nelson noted he'd made a top five list. The first item was creating a mini-grant program that the commission could facilitate so youth could be supported in a long lasting manner. He then mentioned that he thought the teen center was a great idea. He was also interested in expanding the live music events downtown to later hours or more Youth Advisory Commission March 30, 2006 Page 5 frequent to be more accommodating to youth. Indicated he was very in favor of the on- line digital drop box as well as cleaning up the Iowa River - at least in some way. Kearnan asked about the teen center definition and asked if it would be different than UAY teen center as more of a night club setting, or a cafe. Subramanian and Liaison Correia mentioned that a group could came to talk later about issue areas, recreation opportunities, and so forth. Liaison Correia also mentioned getting Parks and Recreation in as another resource. Kearnan noted that she thought that although the cleaning of the river was a lofty goal, action by way of recommendations now would still gain them a louder voice sooner rather than later. City Clerk Karr suggested researching more of the logistics about certain projects to see what is already being done in those areas of interest. Subramanian recalled that the UAY was a major component in initiating this commission and their coordinator there, Janie Jeffries, was wondering how UA Y could be incorporated into what the commission does. Kearnan noted that the UA Y was fundraising and thought that might be a way to help them out. Stubbers thought that this could be another part of getting involved in the community. Members noted this was a way in which the commission would be recognized in the community. Name tags or t- shirts were mentioned for Commission visibility. Commissioners expressed an interest in developing a logo for a more professional presentation on letterheads and so forth when soliciting help from people, etc. Kearnan noted that the City's logo, while great, might not represent the goals of this group. It was agreed that it be discussed at the next meeting. . Clerk Karr mentioned that the City Manager wished to be a resource and would be available to speak to the Commission. Liaison Correia suggested he could present information on many aspects of city government. Stubbers and Bleam requested that a top five list of things to accomplish in the next year be done as soon as the by-laws are finished. Kearnan summarized and said that with the by-laws, concrete ideas, a logo, and getting out in the community, they'd be well on their way to that. Public Discussion None Set next meetinQ time Majority agreed to meet in two weeks, 6:30 p.m., April 13. Liaison Correia stated she could not attend. This meeting will be right before the introductions to the Council and therefore the commissioners chose to prepare for that by including it on their next agenda. Prepared by Osterhaus and Karr ."---_._~--------"-~.,~_.._---"--~-_._.,_._.~--~._._..-----... = .~ ~ .~ 8 6f.o1\C =~<:> Uf.o1~ tu ~ =z< .~..( ~ ..~"-' 'tlz...... <f.o1 ;9.... =.... =< >< 'Qi' .... " ~ ~ .~ .... .. .. 6 <:> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'tl .., .. ... '" .. = ..c '"' ""6 .., ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f.o1 .S ~ - 0 "'i:i~ .., .... .... ., c = = = .. .. .. .. = " 0 r- r- "" "" r- r- "" '" '" '" .... "00 ~ .. ..c ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ..c = = en - - - - - - - ~ < < z z "E ~ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... f.o1 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" II II II E f.o1 - - - - - - - II II .... N N N N N N N 0 ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... f.o1 ~ () ~ 0 - t:'~ = 0 Z " 00 = .~ .. .!:QN f.o1 ... = = > ~ = = " '" ..c 6 'tl '" .~ ... - -00 ... .. = - .. <("'<0 = .. 6 ~ .. .. = .. = ~ 9! " " = 6 = ..c " ~i3Q) z ... " -= ... '" .....c -= = ~ 'tl ... ..c ..c "'..c .~ " '"' '" ... .. ~~~ " .. '"' = - :::J~Cl = ~ = = .~ .. " .~ ~ - " .... ~ ~ OCllCll < ooN 00 00 ~ ... 00 Z >-:20.. .__._----~._---_._--_._--_..- ~_._".w____._._______ ._.__~._.________._._~_.."_,..~__._._.__.._."_..w..._____n____ ._."_..._____n~