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