Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-01 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION January 18, 2011 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL APPROVED =�b(l Members Present: Orville Townsend Sr., David Brown, Dianne Day, Diane Finnerty, Howard Cowen, Connie Goeb. Members Absent: Harry Olmstead, Martha Lubaroff, Wangui Gathua. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Others Present: Peter Small. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): No. CALL TO ORDER Day called the meeting to order at 18:00. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Peter Small asked about the Sanctuary City information sent to Council. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE November 16, 2010 MEETING: Cowen, moved to approve. Goeb seconded. The motion passed 6 -0. ELECTIONS Day was elected Chair for 2011 Cowen, moved to appoint. Townsend seconded. The motion passed 6 -0. Goeb was elected Vice Chair for 2011 Townsend, moved to appoint. Brown seconded. The motion passed 6 -0. DELVING INTO DIVERSITY Bowers reported on a program that is still in the planning stages that will look at diversity issues and how they relate to this community. DIVERSITY DAY Commissioners will participate in this event but will defer to the February meeting date concerning staffing. LISTENING PROJECT Commissioners will place this item on the February agenda for Commissioner Olmstead to discuss. SPEAKER'S BUREAU Commissioners Day and Goeb reported on the possible speakers for the Bureau and also asked Commissioners to look over the brochure for any additions or deletions. YOUTH AWARDS Bowers reported that the Youth Awards will be held on May 11, 2011. Human Rights Commission January 18, 2011 Page 2 SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATES Having gained three Commissioners, Commissioners decided to group into areas of interest and will discuss more at future meetings. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS Cowen reported that the University of Iowa Dental School received a grant from the Safe Schools /Healthy Schools Grant to help children in the Iowa City Community School District receive dental care. Day mentioned that she will be attending a Pickleball tournament in the near future. STAFF REPORTS Staff of the Commission will be participating in an Off Campus Housing Fair in February and also speaking to a class at the University. ADJOURNMENT Townsend moved to adjourn. Goeb seconded. The motion passed 6 -0 at 19:10 Human Rights Commission January 18, 2011 Page 3 Human Rights Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2011 (Meetin Date NAME TER M EXP. 1/18 2/15 3/15 4/19 5/17 6/21 7/19 8/16 9/20 1o/18 11ns 12/20 Dianne Day 1/1/12 X Wangui Gathua 1/1/12 O/E Martha Lubaroff 1/1/12 O/E Howard Cowen 1/1/13 X Constance Goeb 1/1/13 X Harry Olmstead (8 -1 -2010) 1/1/13 O/E Orville Townsend, Sr. 1/1/14 X Diane Finnerty 1/1/14 X David B. Brown 1/1/14 X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent /Excused NM - No meeting /No Quorum R = Resigned - = Not a Member 4b 2 YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION FINAL Sunday, January 9, 2011- 4:00 PM HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL Members Present: Jerry Gao, Alexandra Tamerius, Matt Lincoln, Caroline Van Voorhis, Sam Fosse, and Leah Murray Members Absent: None Staff Present: Marian Karr, Ross Wilburn Others Present: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 4.00 PM. ELECTION OF TEMPORARY CHAIR & VICE CHAIR: City Clerk Karr reported that the terms of the Chair and Vice Chair had expired and by -laws require election of officers in March. After discussion, the Commission decided to elect a temporary Chair and Vice Chair for a two month period until elections in March. Lincoln motioned to elect a temporary Chair for two months, which was seconded by Tamerius. The motion passed unanimously 6/0. Moved by Lincoln to elect Gao as temporary Chair, seconded by Tamerius. The motion passed unanimously 6/0. Lincoln then motioned to elect Tamerius as temporary Vice Chair for two months which was seconded by Van Voorhis. The motion passed unanimously 6/0. Jerry Gao chaired the meeting. MINUTES: Gao noticed a correction in the minutes of December 10. Instead of "12" applicants from Regina, there were "13," and the Commission amended "next person" and replaced it with "next time." Tamerius motioned to approve the minutes as amended. Lincoln seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 6/0. UPDATE ON VACANCIES: The Commission currently has one vacancy, Tate. BUDGET UPDATE: a) 2011 BUDGET City Clerk Karr mentioned that she had received receipts from Regina totaling $1,000 dollars leaving a balance of $898.03. b)2012 REQUEST Gao composed a 2012 budget request summary sheet. The Commission discussed a notable decrease of $1250 from the FYI I budget and the proposed FYI budget request. Van Voorhis recognized a correction in the proposed 2012 budget request, The Commission changed "serves" to "serve." Tamerius made a motion to approve the 2012 budget request as amended. Lincoln seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, 6/0. Karr mentioned that a memo was released for all boards and commissions inviting them to speak with the City Council on the proposed budget on January 18th. Karr stated that she reserved a slot for the Youth Advisory Commission at 8:15 to speak about their FYI budget request. The Commission stated that they would like to have the budget request summary in the Thursday Council packet the before the meeting. Tamerius stated that she would be able to address Council, while both Murray and Van Voorhis stated they might attend the meeting as well. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS: ■ The Commission discussed the Grant Programming Subcommittee. Tamerius abstained from the discussion due to a conflict of interest, and left the room. The Commission reviewed the GLOW YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION January 9, 2011 Paee 2 of 3 ■ No new updates on We)isite and The Commission next disXfami he You Recognition Grant. After several rounds of voting, Michael Sueppel and Andwell re chosen as the two winners for the Youth Recognition Grant. Karr suggested thauth ecognition Grant Subcommittee notify all applicants and winners with a letter. Kart draft the letters and send it to the Youth Recognition Grant Subcommittee for review val. It was agreed that a certificate and $250 check would be presented to the winners br ry 13 meeting. Due to the amount of applicants, Karr suggested all applicants a fame 'es be invited to the February meeting so they can see how the Commission operatesmmis 'on agreed and wanted to add "Youth Recognition Grant" to the agenda for the next agenda o talk about the process for next year. ■ The Commission deci�ed to make no new su 'Nommittee appointments until March. CITY COUNCIL Ur1JA i . Wilburn reported Council eceived their new City budget i December. There will be a public hearing on the overall budget on Fe ruary 15. Wilburn also stated that h will not be running for re- election this fall. IV1L.lJl liv vv.......� -. -- The Commission se a date for the next meeting, Sunday, Februa 13 at 4:00 P . Lincoln motioned adjourn, which was seconded by Tamenus. Th motion to adjourn passed unanimously, 6/0 5:12 PM. Minutes subry(itted by Lincoln. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION January 9, 2011 Page 2 of 3 application again due to the fact that the original applicant did not reside in Iowa City. The new application, from a new applicant, states payment would be straight to the vendor Old Capitol Screen Printers and not to the person. There was a two dollar discrepancy in the desired amount from the first and second application. The first application asked for $898 while the second application asked for $896. The Commission decided to award GLOW $896. Moved by Lincoln to approve the GLOW application for $896. Van Voorhis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 5/0, with Tamerius abstaining. Tamerius returned to the meeting. ■ No new updates on Website and Advertisements. The Commission next discussed the Youth Recognition Grant. After several rounds of voting, Michael Sueppel and Andrew Yowell were chosen as the two winners for the Youth Recognition Grant. Karr suggested that the Youth Recognition Grant Subcommittee notify all applicants and winners with a letter. Karr agreed to draft the letters and send it to the Youth Recognition Grant Subcommittee for review and approval. It was agreed that a certificate and $250 check would be presented to the winners at the February 13 meeting. Due to the amount of applicants, Karr suggested all applicants and their families be invited to the February meeting so they can see how the Commission operates. The Commission agreed and wanted to add "Youth Recognition Grant" to the agenda for the next meeting agenda to talk about the process for next year. ■ The Commission decided to make no new subcommittee appointments until March. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Wilburn reported Council received their new City budget in December. There will be a public hearing on the overall budget on February 15. Wilburn also stated that he will not be running for re- election this fall. MEETING SCHEDULE: The Commission set a date for the next meeting, Sunday, February 13 at 4:00 PM. Lincoln motioned to adjourn, which was seconded by Tamerius. The motion to adjourn passed unanimously, 6/0, 5:12 PM. Minutes submitted by Lincoln. YOUTH ADVISORY COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2011 (Meeting Date) NAME TERM EXP. 1/9 2/13 Leah Mumay (VVest) 12/31/11 X Alexandra Tamerius 12/31/11 X Sam Fosse (City) 12131/31 X Jerry Gao (At Lange) 12/31/11 X Malt Lincoln (Regina) 12/31/11 X Caroline VanVoorhis (At Lange) 12/31/11 X Position Vacant (Tate) 12/31/11 - -- KEY: X = Present O =Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting /No Quorum - -- = Not a Member ..4b(3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION_ APPROVED FEBRUARY 3, 2011 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Josh Busard, Charlie Eastham, Elizabeth Koppes, Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Christina Kuecker, Loren Ditzler OTHERS PRESENT: Jesse Allen, Ron Amelon, Dave Larsen, Jane Driscoll, RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING /DEVELOPMENT ITEM: REZ11- 00001 /SUB10- 00016: Discussion of an application submitted by Rochester Ridge LLC for a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone to Planned Development Overlay — Low Density Single Family (OPD -5) zone and a preliminary plat for Rochester Ridge, a 55 -lot, 23.22 acre residential subdivision located at 2949 Rochester Avenue. Kuecker explained that this land is relatively flat and has been used for agricultural purposes. In the southern portion of the property is an area that has become a wetland, and a remnant of a blueline stream. She noted that there are some slopes in the southern portion as well. The applicant is proposing to rezone the area as a Planned Development Overlay to allow a Level 2 Sensitive Areas Review. Kuecker said that the property is located in the Northeast Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 2 of 9 District and that it is shown in the plan as being appropriate for single family residential. The surrounding areas are single family housing and staff feels the proposed development would be compatible with the nearby neighborhoods. The proposal is for a 55 -lot subdivision with two outlots. The outlot in the southeast corner would be the stormwater management area and Outlot B would be a trail connection to Rochester Ridge. Lot sizes for the development range from approximately 8,000 square feet to 18,000 square feet. The street pattern extends the streets that are already stubbed to the subdivision and surrounding areas, extending Westminster and connecting to Rochester Avenue. One of the major constraints of this property is the sensitive areas: a stream corridor, critical and steep slopes, regulated wetlands and a wooded area. As part of a Level 2 Sensitive Areas Review, the applicant is requesting to disturb 48% of the steep slopes, 57% of the critical slopes, 100% of the wetlands and 89% of the wooded areas. Kuecker noted that the applicant had submitted a letter explaining the reasons behind the requested impacts and the evolution of the sensitive areas on the property. Kuecker noted that the main reason behind the impacts on the sensitive areas is to make public improvements necessary to developing the land, such as stormwater detention. Kuecker pointed out the wetlands on an overhead map, noting the proposed subdivision impacts 100% of the wetlands. The Army Corps of Engineers would have to approve the disturbances to the wetlands and would also have to approve any mitigation. Kuecker noted that the applicant is currently pursuing wetland mitigation to the north of the property. The stream corridor is one that has been diverted into a culvert under Westminster Street just to the south of the property. The proposed subdivision would essentially wipe out that stream corridor by placing it in a culvert as well. The sensitive areas ordinance does have language that specifically allows essential public utilities to be within the sensitive area, and specifically allows things such as bridges, roads and culverts. In staff's opinion, the extension of Westminster is an essential public utility, as is the stormwater detention and extension of public streets. The steep and critical slopes would be disturbed in order to extend Westminster to the north. Staff feels the level of disturbance is necessary to allow for the extension of Westminster and allow for the reasonable level of development of the property. The applicant has proposed the disturbance of 88.9% of the wooded area. The sensitive areas ordinance allows for disturbance of 50% of the wooded area; anything beyond that must be replaced with a replacement tree for every 200 square feet of woodland that is removed. The applicant's proposal brings them close to the required number of replacement trees, but still needs to designations for approximately 150 more trees. The City Forrester has identified a grove of trees along Rochester as containing several trees requiring a tree protection plan, which the applicant has provided. The subdivision design does meet the requirements of the code. There are two cul -de -sacs in the subdivision, which are generally not encouraged; however, the topography and surrounding neighborhoods make these particular cul -de -sacs necessary. The Parks and Recreation commission did review the plat and determined that there was not any suitable land on the property for neighborhood open space. They have chosen to accept fees in lieu of a parkland dedication. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 3 of 9 The wetland mitigation plan has not yet been submitted to the Army Corp of Engineers or staff for approval. Staff feels that the general design of the subdivision is appropriate for the area, but does need to see the wetland mitigation plan prior to recommending approval. Staff is recommending deferral of the application until the wetland mitigation plan is submitted. Freerks invited questions for staff. Kuecker noted that there is a considerable amount of runoff from the neighboring property to the east that does run into the wetland area and has been a major contributor to the development of the wetland in that area. Eastham asked Kuecker to go over the right -of -way widths for the connecting internal streets. He said that he would like to know how many will be meeting the 60 -foot standard and how many will stay at the width of the old standards. Kuecker noted that the width of Westminster will be 50 -feet in the areas where it is stubbed and then will increase to 60 -feet on the other side of the intersection. The cul -de -sacs are considered low volume, so they have 50 -foot right -of ways. The rest of the streets will have the 60 -foot right -of -way. Eastham asked if Westminster would be stubbed so as to intersect with Green Mountain and Kuecker said that would be determined at the time that property was subdivided. Freerks noted that some of the replacement evergreens are proposed to be planted by the grove of oaks that has been identified as needing protection. She said this did not seem very practical to her. Kuecker said she would have to look at that more closely. Weitzel asked if the City had any estimates for the amount of stormwater coming on the site and leaving the site. Kuecker said that the total area of the property is 23.22 acres, with about 17 acres to the east draining onto the property. She said she was not sure what the rate would be for stormwater coming off of the site. Eastham noted that this meant that the stormwater management must be able to handle and additional 60% of land that is off -site, and Kuecker said that was correct. There were no further questions for staff from the Commission. Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Jesse Allen, Rochester Ridge, offered to answer any questions or concerns the Commission might,have. Weitzel asked if Allen knew how the stormwater detention facilities would impact the rate of water leaving the site. Allen said that the stormwater retention pond was designed to pick up the runoff from the property to the east in addition to the needs of the development; it has the capacity to manage both sites. Weitzel asked if Allen was then anticipating that it would reduce the amount of runoff and Allen said that he was. He explained that there would be a raised berm to help hold the water. Duane Musser, MMS Consultants, explained that the grading plan outlined the slope of the dam and the existing wetland grades. He said that there were currently two storm sewers that dump into the wooded area and rear yards of existing homes to the south. Musser said that that water will now be retained and conveyed underground. Eastham asked how big of a flood event that system could handle and Musser referred him to Engineering for that calculation. Musser noted that a lot of the impacts on sensitive areas in this development are due to the extension of Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 4 of 9 Westminster. Musser said that the only logical place to do the stormwater management is in the corner indicated on the site plans. He said there is a history of erosion and flooding in that neighborhood because the current streets were built before there were stormwater management requirements in place. Musser said that they are working with the property owner across Rochester Avenue to see about creating approximately three acres of new wetlands on his property. Musser said that weather - permitting, they will be out working on that and their Corp of Engineer permits once the snow is gone. Musser said that they will be moving forward with the mitigation plan. Eastham asked Weitzel to clarify his earlier question about the amount and /or rate of runoff. Weitzel said that when the property came before the Commission previously, neighbors expressed concerns that developing the area would worsen an already problematic runoff situation in the area. He said that his question was intended to determine if the plan would be contributing to the already- existing runoff problem. He said that his understanding is that the proposal should actually reduce existing problems. There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Payne moved to defer REZ11- 00001 /SUB10 -00016 until the deficiencies and discrepancies described in the staff report are addressed. Eastham seconded. Freerks invited discussion. Weitzel said that the application cannot be voted on until the mitigation plan is submitted. Freerks agreed, saying that the Commission is familiar with the property from its previous application. Plahutnik said that it all hinges on the water management. Weitzel commented that there appears to be some additional screening along the edges of the property that seems to address some of the concerns brought up the last time the application was before the Commission. Freerks noted that it is a complicated piece of property. A vote was taken and the motion to defer was passed 7 -0 ANNEXATION /REZONING ITEM: ANN11- 00001 /REZ11- 00004: Discussion of an application submitted by ILJ Investments for annexation and rezoning from County Agricultural (A) zone to Intensive Commercial (CI -1) zone for approximately 9.71 acres of property located on the north side of Mormon Trek Boulevard, northeast of its intersection with Dane Road. Miklo introduced Loren Ditzler, graduate student in Urban and Regional Planning and intern at the City's Planning Department, who has been working on this application. Ditzler explained that the land is currently being used for agriculture. The Iowa City corporate limit is along the western border of the property. The outlot was created during a subdivision process that took place in the autumn of 2010. At that time it was designated for development and annexation. Staff believes this application has met the three standard criteria for annexations. The first criterion is that the annexation falls within the adopted long -range planning boundary. The Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 5 of 9 second criterion is that the annexation will fulfill and identified need without imposing an undue burden on the City. This annexation will address the identified need for future commercial growth in the district plan. The third criterion is that the control of the development is in the City's best interest. Ditzler said that annexation will allow the land to be developed in a manner that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes that the rezoning complies with the Comprehensive Plan which identifies the property as appropriate for intensive commercial or office park use. The property just to the east is designated for future industrial development; this property could serve as a transition into that industrial area. The Intensive Commercial zone is designed for businesses that are land - intensive or light industrial. Generally these uses are not compatible with residential or less intensive zones. Just south of the property, the zoning is County Agricultural and Residential, so in order to shield that residential zone, any parking lots or storage areas would need to be screened to the S -3 standard. The property to the north is also zoned County Agricultural and Residential; it contains a residence and is intended to be park -land in the future. When the property to the west was rezoned, a conditional zoning agreement was enacted to provide appropriate transition from the residential /future park area to the intensive commercial. Staff is recommending similar conditions be placed on the rezoning of this property as well. Mormon Trek Boulevard is an arterial street, so it is appropriate to handle the traffic generated by this use; however, staff recommends that access points of Mormon Trek be minimized, with a maximum of three curb -cuts. There is adequate infrastructure for development in the area, though the developer would need to construct lateral water and sanitary sewer lines. Staff recommends approval subject to a 20 -foot wide landscape buffer along the north side of the property with a minimum of S3 screening standards and a 30 -foot height limitation for outdoor lighting. Eastham asked if the Mormon Trek right -of -way has been annexed yet, and if this application would do that. Miklo said it has not yet been annexed and this annexation would include Mormon Trek at least to the center of the right -of -way. Freerks opened the public hearing. Dave Larsen, representative of ILJ Investments, offered to answer questions; the Commission had none. Jane Driscoll, spoke on behalf of George Dane, her grandfather. Dane owns the property at 4120 Dane Road Southeast. She noted that she is joined by other members of her family, including her father, Francis Driscoll, who resides at the home at that address. Driscoll explained that the home was built by her grandparents in 1948. Their property is located north of Mormon Trek and north of the parcel in question. Driscoll said that she had appeared before the Commission approximately one year prior to address a similar situation for the property west of Dane Road. She said that it was evident to her and her family that the Commission had taken seriously the concerns they had expressed, based on the conditions placed on the rezoning of that five -acre parcel. Driscoll said that her family appreciates the Commission's efforts to address their concerns. Driscoll said that their property, which is the site of the family residence, has the highest elevation in the area and affords beautiful views in all directions. Driscoll said that years ago her Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 6 of 9 grandparents had designated the land to become a future park because they believe in preserving the land, the beautiful vistas and the sledding hills. The parcel under review is directly south of this future park. Driscoll said that her family's property is within the future growth area of the city, but does not wish to be annexed at this time. She said that she understands that annexation remains a voluntary option for the future. Driscoll said that the rezoning of the property is also under review. She said that it is her understanding that the applicant does not have a potential user for the site, and that the City's Comprehensive Plan suggests a CI -1 or CO -1 zoning for the property. The uses are to serve as a transition for future industrial uses in the area. Driscoll said that they realize that the property will not remain undeveloped forever, but that they do not think CI -1 is an appropriate transition between parkland and industrial zoning. She said that CO -1 is the more desirable zoning designation, and is more compatible with the current use. Driscoll said that they understand that while city ordinances would apply to any business in the area, the CO -1 zone would not require the use of outdoor sound equipment, use of delivery docks with their accompanying traffic patterns, or outdoor storage which required intensive outdoor lighting. A CI -1 would likely have all of those uses and would conflict both with residential and parkland uses. Driscoll said they agree with the conditions laid out in the staff report and would also like discussion of: limited hours of operation, directional and shielding requirements for lighting, and a requirement that any speakers be inwardly directed. Driscoll recommended the property be zoned CO -1, and have a conditional zoning agreement that reflected the concerns she had outlined. She noted that staff and commissions change over time and a conditional zoning agreement will document the present commission's intentions for the property. Koppes asked how big the future park will be. Kuecker indicated where the park was on the map. Busard asked when the property would become a park and Driscoll replied that it would revert to parkland at the point in time when the family ceased to use the property. Driscoll estimated that within the next 20 -25 years. Plahutnik asked if the 9.7 acres in question had been in control of the family relatively recently. Driscoll said that it had belonged to her grandfather's brother at one time. Busard asked if the family had had first right of refusal to purchase the property. Driscoll said that question involved an agreement between the brothers that she is not party to. Eastham asked Driscoll to recap her suggestions for the conditions to be placed on the zoning. Driscoll said that she suggested: 1) discussion of limited hours of operation; 2) all pole- mounted fixtures should have a 30 -foot height limitation; 3) exterior speakers should be inwardly directed or facing away from the neighbors. Freerks noted that the Commission did not generally impose limited hours of operation and asked Greenwood Hektoen if she had any comments on that subject. Miklo noted that with uses that require special exceptions, limitations are sometimes put on hours of operations. He said that the difficulty of doing it in a conditional zoning agreement is the issue of treating similarly zoned properties the same, as well as keeping track of requirements like that. Miklo said that if the Commission was interested in exploring that option he would like to have a staff meeting to discuss it. The public hearing was closed. Freerks invited a motion. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 -Formal Page 7 of 9 Koppes moved to defer ANN11- 00001 /REZ11- 00004. Eastham seconded. Payne asked if there was not already a city ordinance in place that allows only so many lumens to spill over onto neighborhood properties. Miklo said there is that requirement, and there is also a requirement that lights be downcast and shielded. He said that because those issues are already addressed by code he did not think it would be appropriate to include it in a conditional zoning agreement. The code would allow a height of 35 -feet for the lighting, and staff is proposing a limitation of 30 -feet in this case. Koppes asked if the code also covered the speaker noise issues. Miklo said there is a noise ordinance and staff would look into how it applied here and get back to the Commission. Freerks recalled that speaker noise was something that had been discussed with some of the other properties in that immediate vicinity. Busard asked if the Parks Department has agreed to take on this parkland. Miklo said that they have. Eastham noted that this parcel would be surrounded by unincorporated areas and asked if that would have any effect on the light spill -over requirements of the code. Miklo said he did not think so as he believed that the requirement applied regardless of what was on the other side of the property line. Payne asked if the lights could get higher on the eastern side of the lot since it is further away from the residential property. Miklo said he did not believe so as even a County residential designation applied. Miklo said that staff will look into the lighting standards. Koppes said that she also thinks the noise issue will continue to come up. Freerks said that it has been an issue in the other industrial park in the city. Miklo said that the Comprehensive Plan does not call for residential in that area; the idea is that over time there will not be a lot of residential near the airport. Koppes said that the park will not be industrial, so it needs to be looked at very carefully. Weitzel said that the intent was for the airport to stay there indefinitely. Payne asked if there was something in the CI -1 zone that said that lights have to be dimmed after a certain time. Miklo said that car dealerships and other uses that are allowed to have brighter lights are required to dim them after a certain time. A vote was taken and the motion to defer was passed 7 -0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Set a public hearing for February 17th to amend the Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Southeast District Plan for property generally located south of Court Street, east of Sycamore Street & First Avenue, north of Highway 6 and west of the city's eastern growth boundary. Miklo noted that a draft of the plan had been distributed to the Commissioners and should be available on -line by February 4th. Miklo said that notices are being sent out to anyone who has participated in the process, and press releases are going out to spread the word that a public hearing on the matter will be held on February 17th Koppes moved to set a hearing for February 17th the amend the Comprehensive Plan to adopt Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2011 - Formal Page 8 of 9 the Southeast District Plan for property generally located south of Court Street, east of Sycamore Street and First Avenue, north of Highway 6 and west of the city's eastern growth boundary. Weitzel seconded. The motion carried 7 -0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: December 13 & December 16,2010: Weitzel moved to approve. Payne seconded. The motion carried 7 -0. OTHER: Miklo said there was a very good turnout at the Riverfront Crossings meeting last week. He said that staff will likely bring that before the Commission as a Comprehensive Plan amendment sometime within the next few months, with zoning ordinances for implementation to follow. Payne noted that she would not be present the week of February 28th. Koppes noted that she would be gone on the March 17tH ADJOURNMENT: Payne motioned to adjourn. Weitzel seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 7 -0 vote. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2011 FORMAL MEETING NAME TERM EXPIRES 1/20 213 2/17 3/3 3/17 4/7 4/21 5/5 5/19 612 6/16 7/7 7/21 8/4 8/18 9/1 9/15 10/6 BUSARD, JOSHUA 05/11 X X EASTHAM, CHARLIE 05/11 EASTHAM, CHARLIE 05/11 X X FREERKS, ANN 05/13 X FREERKS, ANN 05/13 X X KOPPES, ELIZABETH 05/12 O/E KOPPES, ELIZABETH 05/12 X X PAYNE, MICHELLE 05/15 X PAYNE, MICHELLE 05/15 X X PLAHUTNIK, WALLY 05/15 O/E PLAHUTNIK, WALLY 05/15 X X WEITZEL, TIM 05/13 X WEITZEL, TIM 05/13 X X INFORMAL MEETING NAME TERM EXPIRES 1/31 2/14 2/28 3/14 4/4 4/18 5/2 5/16 6/13 7/18 8/1 8115 8129 9/12 10/3 10/17110/31 BUSARD, JOSHUA 05/11 X EASTHAM, CHARLIE 05/11 X FREERKS, ANN 05/13 X KOPPES, ELIZABETH 05/12 O/E PAYNE, MICHELLE 05/15 X PLAHUTNIK, WALLY 05/15 O/E WEITZEL, TIM 05/13 X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting /No Quorum - -- = Not a Member 4b 4 MINUTES APPROVED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 - 6:30 PM EMMA HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Chappell, Scott Dragoo, Charlie Drum, Jarrod Gatlin, Holly Jane Hart, Michael McKay, Rebecca McMurray, Rachel Zimmermann Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Tracy Hightshoe, Linda Severson OTHERS PRESENT: Charlie Eastham RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. The Commission voted 8 -0 to recommend Aid to Agencies funding that continues the FY11 funding level for last year's applicants, funds five new agencies at their requested amounts, and reserves the remaining $7,197 as a contingency fund. AGENCY FY12 Request FY12 Recommendation Arc A SEI* $2,000 $2,000 Big Brothers/Big Sisters $40,000 $32,000 Compeer $32,000 $5,000 Consortium for Youth Employment $16,000 $14,000 Crisis Center $44,000 $40,000 Domestic Violence Intervention $52,850 $52,000 Elder Services, Inc. $55,620 $54,000 4 C's* $2,000 $2,000 Four Oaks* $1,000 $1,000 Free Lunch Program* $2,000 $2,000 Free Medical Clinic $8,000 $7,500 Housing Trust Fund $40,000 $8,000 ICARE $8,950 $8,950 Lifeskills* $1,500 $1,500 MECCA $43,000 $10,000 MYEP $15,000 $10,000 Neighborhood Centers $95,000 $60,000 Rape Victim Advocacy $12,600 $12,000 Red Cross $6,000 $6,000 Shelter House $39,050 $36,500 United Action for Youth $90,000 $60,000 Contingency $7,197 Total Allocations $606,570 $431,647 2. The Commission voted 8 -0 to recommend that the City Council not pursue a HOME Consortium unless Coralville, as the second largest municipality, is interested in participating. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 2 of 10 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Michael McKay at 6:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 10 & 18, 2010 MINUTES: Chappell moved to approve the minutes. Hart seconded. The minutes were approved on a 7 -0 vote (Zimmermann Smith not present at time of vote). PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT: Hightshoe noted that round three of the Single Family New Construction Program, which will fund 31 homes, will begin this spring. The intent of the program is to replace single - family housing that was eliminated due to flood related buy -outs. McMurray asked if this was the same as the UniverCity program and Hightshoe said that it was not. Hart asked how many of the homes in the UniverCity program had been rental stock and how many owner - occupied. Hightshoe said she was not certain; however she thought most of the homes considered did have an existing rental permit. (Zimmermann Smith arrives) REVIEW OF THE FY12 ALLOCATION PROCESS AND PROFORMA: Hightshoe stated that the online application process was up and running. She explained that this was the first time applications were being submitted online. Hightshoe said the system has been helpful in allowing staff to provide feedback to applicants prior to the submission of the application. Hightshoe said the first applicant workshop had been held December 28th and was attended by 10 -12 people. The next applicant workshop will be held January 12th following the Local Homeless Coordinating Board meeting. Hightshoe said that staff anticipates a lot of Public Service applicants this funding cycle due to the greater than usual funding amount for Public Services. McMurray asked why there would be so many additional applicants. Hightshoe explained that there is additional funding available for Public Services; typically the allocation is for between $10,000 and $15,000. This year there is approximately $100,000 available. McMurray asked if that had been well publicized and Hightshoe said that it had. Hightshoe stated that applications are due by noon on January 25th. There is a question and answer session for applicants and commission members scheduled for February 17th at the Iowa City Public Library. Once the number of applications has been determined, it can be better assessed how many meetings will be necessary to complete the question /answer session — if we need one or two meetings. The ranking sheets completed by commissioners should be turned in by February 28th. There are two meetings scheduled for March: one on the 1 0th and HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 3 of 10 one on the 24`h. She noted that due to timing of City Council's meeting schedule and HUD deadlines, the Commission will only have a few days after the March 24th meeting to revise its Annual Action Plan and submit their justification memo. City Council can review and approve the allocations at its May 3rd meeting, and work can start on funded projects as of July 1 st McMurray asked when the site visits were scheduled to take place. Hightshoe said that site visits had not been scheduled, but typically take place prior to the question and answer session. She said that they would likely do a lunch tour of Public Facilities projects the week before February 17th. She said that generally tours are not done for Housing projects because the locations are not always known, and that Public Services tours are not done to prevent issues with the confidentiality of service recipients. Hightshoe said that typically whatever Commission members are available to do so will tour four to six facilities over an extended lunch period (approximately 11:30 to 1:00). Hightshoe noted that if there were more than five Commission members who wish to go on the tour it would be considered a public meeting and she would have to know at least 24 hours in advance. Hightshoe explained that the proforma is the same as it has been for the last several years. She said that the proforma is only used for rental projects and is used to evaluate each project individually for its cash -flow, viability, and capacity to pay back debt. It is also used to compare projects to one another. Hightshoe said that a lot of research is required on the part of the applicant in order to complete the proforma and the document gives staff a good indicator about the project's overall viability and whether there is the possibility for loan repayment. McKay noted that Charlie Eastham of The Housing Fellowship had requested permission to ask questions about the proforma at this point in the meeting. Eastham noted that the ranking guidelines were useful for indicating categories; however, because the guidelines were published in 1996 any attempt to use the actual numbers in the guideline would be totally inaccurate. Eastham explained that some of the standards and requirements of the proforma wind up painting a less than accurate picture of the project as a whole. Eastham said that while it is prudent to use per -unit cost and operating expenses in evaluating the viability of a project, the goal for everyone providing affordable rental housing should be to have low rents. Eastham noted that the City's guidelines do not necessarily take that into account as there are no additional points awarded for low rents. There is no incentive to set rent levels below those required by HUD, an issue which Eastham thinks the Commission should address. Eastham said that for its last two projects The Housing Fellowship set its rents below the HUD standards and found that there was a huge market for that price range. Eastham said that the only way to get rents down to that level is to pay close attention to debt service and try to avoid as much debt service as possible. McKay said that he had been asked by a number of community members what role the Commission has in setting the guidelines and he had been unable to answer them as fully as he might wish to. McKay asked if it would be helpful to applicants to be provided more specific guidelines. Hightshoe said that the proforma is used to pick up any red flags in the project's financing and administration. She said that there is a question on the application that asks how the project will address affordability issues. McKay asked if the Iowa Finance Authority's expense ratios are available to applicants and Hightshoe said they are available in the Qualified Allocation Plan to anyone who wants them. Hightshoe said that she did not think at this point the City would require all housing providers to meet the guidelines of the Low - Income Housing Tax - Credit Program for all types of rental housing projects. McKay said he was not suggesting setting that as a requirement; rather, he is suggesting making the guidelines available to applicants. Hightshoe said that was definitely possible, though she cautioned that different projects and lenders have different guidelines. Hightshoe explained that after the allocation HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 4 of 10 process each year the Commission reviews the process and determines whether or not any aspect of it should be changed. She said that would be a good time to review Eastham's proposal that extra points be awarded for low rents. McKay said that Eastham's suggestion would be something for the Commission to at least consider at that time. DISCUSSION REGARDING FY12 AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING REQUESTS: Discuss Aid To Agencies Applications Hightshoe introduced Linda Severson to present and answer questions on this topic. Severson explained that Aid to Agencies typically provides operational costs to non - profit organizations in the community. She noted that agencies were permitted to use the funding in whatever way they needed to, and that few restrictions were in place in terms of what the money could be spent on. She said that the funds were used for anything from utilities to insurance to matching funds for federal grants. Severson said that the flexibility of the funds is very helpful to local agencies because many of their funding sources come with specific strings attached. In the past, Aid to Agencies applications were reviewed by two City Council members who then made allocation recommendations to the full Council. This year, Council has asked HCDC to review the applications and make recommendations. Severson explained that one joint application was used by agencies requesting funding from Iowa City, Coralville, Johnson County and /or United Way. In FY11, $415,915 was allocated to 15 different agencies and programs; a contingency fund of $9,318 was retained for that fiscal year. Severson said that the contingency fund is used for unexpected expenses. She noted that the contingency fund was not used every year, nor was it available every year. Severson noted that the Free Medical Clinic had applied for the funds one year due to an industry- driven, sudden and drastic change in their insurance premiums. Severson said that $1,500 in contingency funds had been allocated this year to help Shelter House deal with its bed -bug infestation. Severson said that, historically, Aid to Agencies has been a reliable and stable funding source to help agencies cover operational costs. Severson said that HCDC dollars typically help create or improve the environment to deliver community services and Aid to Agencies typically provides operational dollars. Severson said that Patti Fields of United Way and Amy Correia of Johnson County had spoken with her about discussing the Aid to Agencies allocation process and seeing if there are ways to change or improve it. Severson noted that if massive changes were going to be made to the process, then agencies would need as much lead time as possible, since this is a funding source upon which many agencies rely from year to year. Severson noted that $431,647 is available for FY12 allocations and asked where the Commission would like to start. McKay noted that there were a number of applications that were minimally different or the same as last year. He suggested addressing those applications first and then moving on to those requesting large increases in funding. Chappell noted that Amy Correia is a client of his on matters unrelated to her application. He said there is no conflict with his reviewing the application as far as he is concerned, but that if someone had concerns about the appearance of impropriety he could reevaluate that for the next year's allocation process. At this point, however, he does not intend to recuse himself as he sees no conflict. Hightshoe noted that if a Commissioner feels he /she may have a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest for the CDBG /HOME allocations then they can let her know ahead of time and she will have it reviewed by the legal department. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 5 of 10 McKay suggested beginning with The Consortium for Youth Employment. Severson explained that this was a consortium of a number of agencies that are youth - serving that pool funds to help get youth ready for employment. Severson said that the program involves both classroom and practicum work. She said that the youths are paid a stipend rather than wages, but that the hope is that at the end of the program the youth would be offered a job at the placement site. Even if a job is not offered, then at least the youth will have some background information and experience that could help lead to other employment. Drum noted that a number of these children are foster children that are aging out of the system. Severson said that typically these are at -risk youths who do not have a lot of experience or exposure to regular employment. McKay asked if anyone had a funding recommendation for this agency, noting that the request was for $2,000 more than was allocated n FY11. Chappell said that he had not seen any applications that had jumped out at him as deserving a big bump in funding at the expense of another agency. He recognized that this could be a function of his not having been through this process before. He said that his understanding is that there is a certain level of expectation attached to these funds, and that taking funds from one agency to give to another should probably only occur with some pretty clear reasons. Chappell said that the funding level allows the Commission to consider allocating to existing agencies at the FY11 level and to add in the modest funding requests made by new applicants. Chappell said that his own recommendations had allowed for a $10,000 contingency fund and slightly reduced funding for a few agencies that had received significant allocations in recent funding cycles. Zimmermann Smith said that everyone can be funded at the FY11 level. The Commission indicated a consensus that they would like to have a contingency fund for FY12. Zimmermann Smith asked what the contingency fund would be if everyone was funded at their FY11 level and the new agencies were also funded. Hightshoe said that would leave $7,197 remaining as a contingency fund. Dragoo commented that this allocation formula seemed remarkably fair and easy. Hart said her only concern was that some of these agencies would likely be back before the Commission for FY12 CDBG /HOME funds. McMurray noted that there would be more money for Public Services this year. Chappell noted that the Commission did not know what the agencies had actually requested in FY11. Zimmermann Smith said that she did not see anything in the applications that gave a significant justification for an extra $30,000 being requested. Severson explained that in FY11, MECCA was reduced from a $27,000 funding level to a $10,000 funding level with the rationale that MECCA was requesting less than 1 % of their overall budget and MECCA could absorb it. Severson noted that MECCA had not seen it exactly that way, and that the cut was probably the biggest one in the last five to eight years. Develop Aid To Agencies Budget Recommendations To Council Zimmermann Smith moved to fund agencies at their FY11 level, fund the five new agencies at their requested amounts, and to reserve the remaining $7,197 as a contingency fund. AGENCY FY12 Request FY12 HCDC Recommendation Arc of SEI* $2,000 $2,000 Big Brothers/Big Sisters $40,000 $32,000 Compeer 1 $32,000 $5,000 Consortium for Youth Employment $16,000 $14,000 Crisis Center $44,000 $40,000 HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 6 of 10 Domestic Violence Intervention $52,850 $52,000 Elder Services, Inc. $55,620 $54,000 4 C's* $2,000 $2,000 Four Oaks* $1,000 $1,000 Free Lunch Program* $2,000 $2,000 Free Medical Clinic $8,000 $7,500 Housing Trust Fund $40,000 $8,000 (CARE $8,950 $8,950 Lifeskills* $1,500 $1,500 MECCA $43,000 $10,000 MYEP $15,000 $10,000 Neighborhood Centers $95,000 $60,000 Rape Victim Advocacy $12,600 $12,000 Red Cross $6,000 $6,000 Shelter House $39,050 $36,500 United Action for Youth $90,000 $60,000 Contingency $7,197 Total Allocations $606,570 $431,647 Chappell seconded. The motion carried on an 8 -0 vote. Severson and Hightshoe noted that if the Commission wished to change the nature or the method for the Aid to Agencies allocation process to fall more in line with CITY STEPS or the United Way assessment then it would be helpful to give agencies as much advanced warning as possible about that. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FORMATION OF HOME CONSORTIA WITH CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALITIES: Hightshoe explained that in 2007 the Housing Market Analysis for the metro -area determined that there was a definite need for additional affordable housing. Hightshoe said that local governments are looking for ways to increase affordable housing not just in Iowa City, but throughout the whole area. The Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) has created a sub - committee to look at that issue. One strategy for increasing funding for affordable housing in the area is the idea of creating a HOME Consortium. Hightshoe explained that Iowa City is an entitlement city, which means that it is a city with a population greater than 50,000 people so it receives an annual HOME allocation for which we do not have to apply or compete for funds from HUD. A HOME Consortium would mean pooling the funding from contiguous communities and determining how much each community will get. Hightshoe said that the scenarios for a consortium that were presented to HUD indicated a funding pool of between $610,000 and $714,000 per year, depending on census data and which cities decided to join the consortium. Hightshoe noted that last year, Iowa City alone received $678,000. She said that joining a consortium would mean that Iowa City's actual HOME dollars to be spent in Iowa City may decrease (possibly substantially) and the consortia would have to determine how funds would be shared by the neighboring communities. Severson said that HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 7 of 10 when the idea was presented to neighboring municipalities, Coralville indicated that it is not interested at this time and North Liberty and Johnson County indicated an interest. Hightshoe stated that in the preliminary scenarios, if Coralville is not in the consortia, the total funding available may be substantially reduced. Hightshoe said that this is simply an idea that is being explored and HCDC is being asked for its input. Hightshoe stated the idea of a HOME consortium helps all the communities to start thinking about housing as a regional issue, but it may mean a reduction in funds to support housing depending on which communities are in the final HOME consortia. Zimmermann Smith said that if Coralville is not interested then it does not even make sense to discuss it. Hart said that she had a number of questions about this issue. First, she wondered if this would run up against the idea of a scattered -site policy and issues related to that that the City has agreed it wants to look into to. She said she also wondered how the funds would be allocated and who would be doing it. She said it concerned her that there could be fewer funds available for Iowa City. Hart said that a former City Council member with whom she was discussing the issue told her that HOME funds were already being used for projects in the wider area. Hightshoe clarified that HOME funds allocated to Iowa City could not be used outside of Iowa City, the one exception being Tenant -Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) administered by the Iowa City Housing Authority. She explained that communities that are not HOME entitlement cities can receive HOME funds by applying directly to the state. Coralville and North Liberty may have received HOME funds in the past through the State, but Iowa City has not awarded their HOME funds for projects outside its corporate boundaries. Hart said that she could not support such an idea without knowing a lot more about the allocation process that would be used as she was already concerned about funding for affordable rental housing in Iowa City and the implementation of scattered -site policies. Zimmermann Smith reiterated that it simply did not even make sense to discuss it if Coralville was not willing to participate. McMurray asked if Coralville had indicated why it was not interested. Severson said that Coralville's representative at the last JCCOG meeting had indicated that Coralville was not interested in a consortium and would be hiring its own consultant to examine affordable housing issues in their community. Hightshoe noted that there are three other HOME consortiums in the state: Waterloo /Cedar Falls, Omaha /Council Bluffs and Sioux City metro area. Hightshoe stated the preliminary interest from our neighboring communities was to use the HOME funds for owner - occupied housing rehabilitation. Chappell agreed with Zimmermann Smith that unless Coralville was interested it did not make sense to pursue it. McMurray asked what the benefits of a consortium would be. Zimmermann Smith explained that the idea was a good one in terms of thinking as a broader community; however, because the second largest community involved did not want to participate, there was no benefit to Iowa City because it would simply result in a decreased funding amount with only a limited ability to think and act more regionally. Severson said the Affordable Housing Committee also looked at different ideas. She said that one idea that was floated was having cities consider pre- approving housing designs as a way of reducing costs. Another idea that had been floated was inclusionary zoning, which was very controversial. Severson said that the idea of a consortium had been that while Iowa City might have to make some sacrifices in its affordable- housing funding, the consistency and scope of affordable housing policy that would result for the larger region might be worth it. Severson said that an application for a consortium would be due by March 1s' and would likely not be implemented until FY13, if the Commission chose to pursue the idea. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 8 of 10 Provide a Recommendation to City Council The Commission voted 8 -0 to recommend that the City Council not pursue a HOME Consortium unless Coralville, as the second largest municipality, is interested in participating. Zimmermann Smith seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 8 -0. MONITORING REPORTS: Habitat for Humanity — Land Acquisition (Chappell): Habitat purchased three lots, and has until June 30, 2011, to spend the remaining $19,000 of its $115,000 allocation. Habitat is seeking a home to purchase and rehabilitate, and is hoping to acquire that home no later than March. Hightshoe noted that Habitat had asked about the possibility of using the remaining funds for construction rather than acquisition and she had explained that such a change would have to go back before the Commission. Aid to Agencies — United Action for Youth, Elder Services Inc. (Chappell) The UAY funds spent so far were used as matching funds for federal grants to support homeless and runaway youth and to administer programs for victims of crime. The CDBG funds paid salary and benefits for five different positions. Elder Services said that they had expended approximately $23,000 in CDBG funds. Hightshoe said that during the year the CDBG funds had to be amended to cover a CDBG eligible activity, due to an unexpected change in their case management services. Johnson County Ag Extension District — New Construction (Drum) Drum noted that he did not follow up on his assigned projects this month as he had failed to look at the agenda prior to the meeting to see that it was his turn. He offered his apologies and said he would provide a written report prior to the February meeting as the February agenda will be very busy. Hightshoe said that Johnson County Ag. had begun construction. MECCA — Facility Rehabilitation (Drum) Deferred to February. Crisis Center — Operations (Drum) Deferred to February. FY07 & 08 Habitat for Humanity — Land Acquisition ( Dragoo) Dragoo said that all six lots for FY07 have been completed and are occupied by single families. One of the four lots has been completed and is occupied out of the FY08 funds. One of the remaining units is under construction and expected to be completed by May. The other two are slated for completion by Thanksgiving. He noted that the houses are being built "extra green' in order to save the occupants money over the long -term, and that the Commission has a standing invitation to tour the homes. ADJOURNMENT: Zimmermann Smith moved to adjourn. Gatlin seconded. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 9 of 10 The motion was approved 8 -0. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2011 PAGE 10 of 10 HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVEOPLMENT COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2011 NAME TERM EXP. 1/6 CHAPPELL, ANDREW 9/1/2012 X DRUM, CHARLIE 9/1/2013 X GATLIN, JARROD 9/1/2012 X HART, HOLLY JANE 9/1/2013 X McKAY, MICHAEL 9/1/2011 X McMURRAY, REBECCA 9/1/2011 X ZIMMERMAN SMITH, RACHEL 9/1/2012 X DRAGOO, SCOTT 9/l/2013 X Key: X = Present O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member