Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-10-13 Info PacketCITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET MISCELLANEOUS IP1 Council Meetings and Work Session Agenda October 13, 2011 IP2 Summary of Pending Work Session Issues IP3 Memo from Assistant Transportation Planner: Court Street Traffic Calming Neighborhood Meeting IP4 Memo from Director of Housing & Inspection Services: Council Pending Item — North Side Resident Email Entitled "Dude Housing ... a Growing Concern for the Near North Side" IPS Civil Service Entrance Examination — Special Projects Assistant — Cable TV IP6 Memo from the City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show IP7 Memo from the City Clerk: Municipal Leadership Academy Information DRAFT MINUTES IP8 Historic Preservation Commission: September 8, 2011 IP9 Housing & Community Development Commission: September 15, 2011 I = 1 It IN City Council Meeting Schedule and CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas October 13, 2011 www.icgov.org ♦ TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:00p Special Work Session • Board of Appeals By -Law Changes [item # 14] • Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [October 6 & 13] • Council Time • Summary of Pending Work Session Issues [IP2 ] • Upcoming Community Events /Council Invitations 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE SUBJECT TO CHANGE ♦ TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1 5:30p Special Work Session 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting ♦ MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21 5:30p Special Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall ♦ TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 22 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Special Formal Council Meeting ♦ TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29 Beckwith Boathouse 1:00P -5:00P Special Work Session — Strategic Planning Session Terrill Mill Park 5:00p -7:00p Orientation (current and incoming Council) ♦ WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30 IC School District 4:00p Joint Meeting Administrative Offices ♦ MONDAY, DECEMBER 5 Emma J. Harvat Hall 2:00p -5:30p Special Work Session — Strategic Planning Session 5:30P Regular Work Session ♦ TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting 10-13-1 1 IP2 SUMMARY OF PENDING WORK SESSION ISSUES 10/13/11 Space Needs Study /Master Plan — Draft Report (NOVEMBER 21) Issues of Immigration and Building Safe Communities — Follow Up (NOVEMBER 21) Meeting With Parks & Recreation Commission re: Farmers' Market Strategic Planning Committee Report (NOVEMBER 21) Recommendations from Partnership for Alcohol Safety re: Changes to 21 Ordinance Exceptions (Pending additional information from the P.A.S.) Performance Evaluations of Council Appointed Employees Neighborhood Housing Issue — Owner- Occupied Homes with "Renters" Review Function of Boards /Commissions: Explore Possible Consolidations October 18 (Combined) November I (Combined) November 21— 22 December 5 — 6 CITY OF IOWA CITY Z ®p MEMORANDUM Date: October 13, 2011 To: Tom Markus; City Manager From: Kent Ralston; Assistant Transportation Planner Re: Court Street Traffic Calming Neighborhood Meeting Introduction: On October 5th, staff held a meeting with residents who live on Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue. The purpose of the meeting was to try and gain a consensus on a set of traffic calming measures preferred by the neighborhood as part of the adopted Iowa City Traffic Calming Program. History /Background: Residents of Court Street between Summit Street and Muscatine Avenue submitted a petition in February 2011 requesting that staff conduct an updated traffic study in the neighborhood, evaluate lowering the existing 16 ton truck embargo to 5 tons, and repave their portion of Court Street with brick. After discussing these issues at their May 20, 2011 City Council work session, Council did not support lowering the existing truck embargo or repaving this portion of Court Street with brick — citing both enforcement and budgetary concerns. However, the Council did support offering the neighborhood a set of alternative measures including changing of on- street parking designations, increasing enforcement, installing electronic speed limit signs, and erecting strategically placed wayfinding signage. The Council also directed staff to reevaluate the appropriateness of the existing traffic calming policies, specifically a 3,000 vehicle per day maximum threshold that precluded the neighborhood from taking advantage of the City's traffic calming program — this portion of Court Street had an average daily traffic (ADT) of approximately 3,800 in 2009. After reevaluating the appropriateness of the 3,000 vehicle per day maximum threshold, staff indicated to Council that relaxing the threshold would be recommended so long as traffic calming solutions sought by the Court Street neighborhood would be engineered to slow traffic rather than divert traffic to other local streets. While slowing traffic would be advantageous, diverting traffic to other local streets not designed to handle larger volumes of traffic may be unsafe. At their August 2011 meeting the Council voted unanimously to relax the 3,000 vehicle per day maximum threshold citing that traffic calming solutions pursued should be designed to minimize diversion of traffic to adjacent local streets. Discussion of Solutions: Those present at the neighborhood meeting were able to formulate a general consensus on a set of traffic calming measures they wished to pursue — in order of support: 1) speed humps, 2) speed enforcement cameras, and 3) a combination of chokers and bulb -outs. Staff indicated to the neighborhood that although they would, in staff's opinion, be a good candidate for speed enforcement cameras, that such cameras cannot yet be used in Iowa City and would require an ordinance change. Staff also indicated to those present that the use of speed humps was not consistent with the recent change in the traffic calming criteria for streets exceeding the 3,000 vehicle per day threshold as they have been shown to divert traffic to other nearby streets; simply shifting the traffic burden. October 13, 2011 Page 2 Recommendation: Unless a majority of Council provides further direction at your October 18th work session, staff plans to proceed with preliminary designs for intersection bulb -outs and chokers (mid -block bulb -outs) for Court Street. Please keep in mind that a 60% majority of a formal neighborhood survey, as well as the assurance of a safe and effective traffic calming design is still needed to satisfy the policies provided by the adopted traffic calming policy. The City Council will have the final authority to grant or deny the neighborhood's request. 0 1P 4 -. CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM 1P4 Date: October 10, 2011 To: Tom Markus, City From: Douglas Boothroy, Director of Re: Council Pending Item – North Growing Concern for the Near N Issue: Inspectio)p Services e Resident Email Entitled "Dude Housing ... a Side" Whether or not to consider additional regulations to address a North Side resident's concern about parent non -owner occupied housing. Background: have attached to this memorandum the "Dude Housing email" and Stan Laverman's (Senior Housing Inspector) response of June 9, 2011. In general, Laverman describes various ongoing code enforcement activities, UniverCity neighborhood partnership with its focus on promoting owner - occupied housing in the near - campus neighborhood, states all property (both owner and non -owner occupied) must fully comply with zoning and nuisance codes, and that Housing Inspection Services is dedicated to ensuring neighborhoods remain safe, vital, and attractive places to live for both renters and homeowners. Laverman encourages the North Side resident to provide him more information about the problem properties so that he can investigate the issues raised; however, this information has not been provided. Since August 1, 2011 the City has addressed 39 criminal nuisance property violations and one was a parent non -owner occupied home ( "Dude Housing "). Last year, we are aware of five parent non -owner occupied homes cited with criminal nuisance violations out of a total of 309 properties. I don't believe these numbers indicate that parent non -owner occupied homes are a significant problem. When nuisance property complaints are received on parent non -owner occupied homes, we contact the parents to inform them about the incident, investigate whether or not the property is owner - occupied, requires a rental permit, and do a site visit to determine if there are any exterior nuisance code violations. This enforcement approach has been effective; parents have been appreciative of being informed, seem to have followed up with their sons and /or daughters concerning the criminal nuisance behavior and repeat offenses are few. Recommendation: Staff does not recommend adopting additional regulations concerning parent non -owner occupied homes. hisa d m in /mem /no rth sid e092011. d oc From: stephenksmithaa hotmail.com To: regenia- b ail eyAa Iowa- city. org Subject: "dude" housing... a growing cancer for the NearNorthside Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 07:36:03 -0500 Dear Councilperson Bailey, Hello! We hope you are well and the burdens you carry don't strain your trapezius! I'm Steve Smith. My wife and myself live at 431 N. Van Buren St. (gray house, corner of V. Buren/Fairchild). There is a persistent problem, and we don't know if anything can be done about it. Here's the issue: wealthy parents buying their little boys houses in the Near North side, and their boy is a freshman college student who then rents out rooms to his buddies -- making the house, essentially, a mini fraternity house or dorm house. The greedy parents are happy, because they get the ever - increasing equity after sonny -boy leaves and they sell. The problem with letting this type of property transfer occur in our neighborhood is that it's slowly beginning to make us single - family folk reconsider staying in this neighborhood. Becky and I enjoy the mix of some student housing (big old houses that have been sub - divided into rooms for a long time). Slowly but surely, there is a dwindling number of families, retirees, working folks, etc. because of "dude -dom ". If the "boys" (and most are freshman and uncivilized, screaming drunk and taking up the streets pretending they're Coach Ferentz's new quarterbacks) live here, they often are loud, get drunk and scream at each other, walk past our house yelling and being totally oblivious that their egos and "id" are not compatible with living in peace with their neighbors -- houses close together. In the "olden" days gone by, one COULD live close to ones neighbor because the neighbor WAS a neighbor and was conscious of being a GOOD one. I have been told that there is an ordinance to prevent "nursery houses" for us to "raise" someone else's kids..... call the police... tell them to be quiet .... over and over. They are spoiled rich kids, and quite frankly, raising one family is enough for us. We shouldn't have to "raise" and civilize other folks kids. So here's what happens. To get around whatever ordinance or law there is about single- family ownership, Papa and Mama in Illinois decide that rather than put their little darlings in a dorm, they can treat our neighborhood like a dorm, buy the kid a house, put his name on the title as 1 % owner with Mom -zie and Pop -zie as the true absentee owners. So basically, Junior and his buddies have skirted the regs, and have made a lovely nuisance house for us all to endure. Is:,there no way to prevent this from happening? I see so much work going into making this an historic district. The city makes programs available to keep the houses well- maintained by low - interest loans. We all want this neighborhood to thrive and to keep its unique nature. Don't let parents turn nice homes into fraternity houses. But if you allow absentee ownership of houses, they will immediately turn into there "dude" houses. I was talking with one of our neighbors across the street, and she said she and her husband were getting to the point where they were debating whether or not to stay. They love their old house as do we. They've sunk money into making it a nicer place (as have we). All that's threatened by this silliness of the Game of Titles going on under the council's "nose ". Mrs. Keith across from us has grown infirm and has just moved to assisted living, and HER house is now on the market. So now we wait, shivering with fear that it will become another "dude" house, directly across from our houses. I beg you and the council to consider that making historic district designations, putting up Goosetown signs, etc. etc. are not enough. We need action from the council to keep these mini - dorms from destroying the character of our neighborhood. Once a house is a single family unit, it should not be secretly made into "multi ". Because, if you do NOT act, I guarantee that soon, people like the Smiths, our friends the Dreiers may be forced out by this silliness. And if we go, what happens to the Packers next door? They have a baby and Eva who's about 6 or 7, and who wants to be surrounded by screaming dudes from all sides. I'm sure it's not pleasant for folks with little kids. If there are ordinances /zoning on the books that aren't being enforced, then let's enforce them. If there are not in place the correct ordinances to keep these nuisance houses from growing like a cancer, then the NearNorthside is doomed to dorm -dom. Period. No more families. No more trick or treaters. No more kids for Horace Mann. Or two sons had such a wonderful youth, roaming the alleys in safety. Walking to school only 3 blocks away. That's priceless for a family. And having a front porch to sit on and meet your neighbors. This is very unique and a vanishing way of life in America, where everyone doesn't know their neighbors, and they face inward living on sidewalk -less subdivisions and never meeting anyone. And we truly do enjoy the well - behaved students walking by-- especially during the fall when it's football time. It's fun to live in a mixed neighborhood where the "kiddies" have a few places, but only a few. If the City of Iowa City keeps a blind eye to this, then no matter what ordinances you pass on keeping the houses looking "original" or trying to preserve them..... the "kids" will destroy it all if it's only them who are left. They don't give a damn about the houses. A house to them is just a place to "crash ", process beer through their systems, and scream bloody epithets that resonate up and down the block. Thank you for your time, Steve Smith (and for Becky), 431 N. Van Buren St. 52245 354 -1895 Stan Laverman From: Steve Smith <stephenksmith @hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 201110:59 PM To: Stan Laverman Subject: RE: Follow up email to "dude" housing... a growing cancer for the NearNorthside Thanks so much for the detailed information. I have heard from many on this issue. More than I realize - -it's obvious this is a big concern to many of the "permanent" residents of the N.N. Side. Several things contribute to the "dude" houses: 1. big university stuffed into a small town w /the U. smack dab in the middle. 2. recent laws /ordinances that force drinking out of fraternity houses and downtown. 3. lack of available on- campus housing (when I was at U. of Neb., all students have to live ON campus for the first two years, at least. No enough dorm rooms, I guess. 4. lack of a workable ordinance /law that would help promote single - family occupancy, not pseudo - families (one dude who "owns" the place with his parents off -site, and out of state, often). The nuisance housing is, to me, the last resort. It's trying to solve the problem without solving it, for it's after the kids buy the place and move in. You know, it's sort of ironic that the City is trying to make this area an historic district, be obsessive about siding vs. wood siding... minutia like that, when if we're not careful, it will all be a moot point -- facades with vomit on the lawns -- historic preservation? Maybe if the vomit and beer cans are "antique ". I have an idea. Since you have access to what properties are owned by whom, and probably statistics - -keep a map of which houses turn over most often? Perhaps you at Housing Inspection could compile neighborhood data and how many houses have been owned by the same owner (and owner occupant) for X number of years. If you see a property that seems to change hands rather quickly over time, you could focus your efforts on those houses. I have a feeling that once a house becomes a "dude" house, it stays a "dude" house. Maybe the council should integrate the way it makes ordinances - -and see if one action precipitates another unwanted outcome. The drinking thing is something you at Housing have no control over. But driving the kids "underground" which means into the N. N. Side and other neighborhoods adjacent to campus is just going to keep killing neighborhoods, no matter how hard the Council wants to keep things historic. Families have moved out because of this situation. And others are thinking of doing so. Of course, money rears it ugly greed -head. None of us wants our houses to fall and we loose equity if a neighborhood is in slow decline. But I have a feeling that this may be happening. I wish I were a lawyer or a specialist in these matters, because I only know what I have to deal with, and I'm sure that you and the Council... no one wants to see Iowa City loose some of its most important and unique areas to live. Or, if no one cares, then let it all become one big dorm. Just "rope" it off, declare the houses within the area a student - ghetto, and write'm off. Too bad. A way of life... neighbors living closely to their neighbors... porches facing out to greet and meet those who live around us... well, if all we get in return is epithats and beer cans and our little school kids subject to constant curse words from uncaring uncivilized dudes..... what do you think will happen, is happening and will continue to happen? If you have any influence, any sympathetic ears of those in power, ask them to see the Near North side and campus - adjacent neigbhorhoods, and at least have this situation as part of the consciousness. It's the least we can ask. I thank YOU for your time and attention and hard work on this. You are doing your part. Let's hope others can join you! Many thanks, Steve Smith 431 N. Van Buren St. From: Stan- Laverman @iowa-city.org To: stephenksmith @hotmail.com CC: Doug - Boothroy @iowa - city.org; -43dfb @iowa - city.org Subject: Follow up email to "dude" housing... a growing cancer for the NearNorthside Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 18:27:52 +0000 Mr. Smith - I appreciated talking to you by phone on Thursday, June 2. As we discussed, the issue of parent - purchased non -owner occupied homes that you identified as a Northside Neighborhood issue also occurs in other neighborhoods in Iowa City. At this time there are not city regulations that control whether or not property in low density residential zones must be owner occupied. Let me assure you that all residential property must comply with City zoning and nuisance laws. Concerning when a property is considered owner occupied or rental, the current housing code reads that as long as a resident of the dwelling has an ownership (at least 1 %) in the property, it is treated as owner - occupied. I have briefly researched how other university towns handle this issue and found that East Lansing, MI, home of Michigan State University, requires a 25% interest to be considered owner - occupied. However changing the ownership interest to 25% may not have any impact on the number of parent purchased non -owner occupied homes in Iowa City. Any proposed changes in Iowa City housing code would require further research by city staff with discussion and action by the city council. For your information Limit Liability Companies(LLC) are NOT considered owner - occupied even if a resident of the dwelling was a member of the LLC. We need to make sure the ordinances we have on the books are being enforced. A good place to start would be to verify any properties identified as nuisance properties are in compliance with our housing and zoning code. If you could supply me with those addresses, I would be happy to research those properties and report back to you. The occupancy standards are the same for owner - occupied and rental properties. However, with rental properties, we have floor plans, the availability of information disclosure forms, and systematic inspection that help us keep an eye on occupancies. Last year we did proactive neighborhood sweeps for basic housing and zoning code violations. As time permits this summer we will continue this action in neighborhoods close to the University of Iowa Campus. This code enforcement sweep will look at all properties, both owner and non -owner occupied, for code compliance. In the past year we've also become more diligent in our monitoring of Craigslist to find over - occupancy situations and properties being rented without permits. This has brought a number of properties to our attention, and we're continuing to work to bring more properties into full compliance. We continue to work with the police department to enforce the criminal conduct section of the housing code. Criminal charges related to disorderly house, disorderly conduct, drugs, alcohol, and violent criminal behavior are all violations of our housing code. The police department has taken a zero tolerance stance on disturbances in the neighborhood, and while it does take some action on the part of the neighbors to report the disturbances, from a City standpoint we've found the process to be effective. You expressed some exasperation with the need to educate students every year about what is expected behavior in Iowa City neighborhoods. Iowa City housing inspection staff has tried different ways in the past to get useful neighborhood information out to new renters. We know that paper and fliers are not as effective with a new digital- driven generation. Housing Inspection has been looking into getting that information to new student renters in a more digital - friendly way, and that is an ongoing process. You also expressed some concern that properties being put on the market now will change to parent -owned and non - owner occupied dwellings. Once again, I would encourage you to contact the listing agent and make sure they know about the need for rental permits in Iowa City and the occupancy standards we enforce. While a real estate agent should be aware of these requirements, it doesn't hurt to be proactive in these situations. You can also direct them to our office to get a more in -depth understanding of the requirements. The City understands the need to have balance in our neighborhoods. The UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership is a cooperative effort between the City of Iowa City and The University of Iowa focusing on neighborhoods located near the University of Iowa campus that retain a single - family character and a demand for single - family housing but that also have a large renter population. The program is dedicated to ensuring that neighborhoods surrounding the University of Iowa campus remain safe, vital, affordable, and attractive places to live and work for both renters and homeowners. You can find out more information about this partnership at www.icgov.org /univercity. I appreciate that you enjoy living in a neighborhood with a mix of residents. Hopefully we can all work together to keep Iowa City's neighborhoods a desirable place to live. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions or if you have information on nuisance properties you would like me to investigate. Regards- Stan Laverman, Senior Housing Inspector Stan Laverman City of Iowa City Senior Housing Inspector stan-laverman@iowa-city.org 356 -5135 office 530 -4076 mobile 10/06/2011 16:03 October 6, 2011 3193350202 UIEMPLOMENT TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — SPECIAL PROJECTS ASSISTANT — CABLE TV PAGE 02 1 � I 1 -1 P5 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826 (3 19) 356.5000 (3 19) 356 -5009 FAX www.ltgov.org Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Special Projects Assistant — Cable TV. Mary Bryant IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION • tD 1 t) I I Lyra W. Dickerson, Chair r -- CITY OF IOWA CITY IP6 'CUT DUM Date: October 12, 2011 To: Mayor and City Council From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Re: KXIC Radio Show We are booked through October 26 but need to schedule for the next few weeks. Please take a look at your calendars and come prepared to help fill in the schedule at your work session: November 2 November 9 November 16 November 23 November 30 U:radioshowasking.doc r CITY OF IOWA CITY _ M E M(J RA N D U M IP7 Date: October 6, 2011 To: Mayor, City Council, and Council Candidates From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk J( KV- Re: Municipal Leadership Academy 2011 -2012 Attached is information on the Municipal Leadership Academy presented by the Iowa League of Cities, Institute of Public Affairs, and Iowa State Extension. Please let me know if you are interested in attending. Municipal Leadership Academy 2011 -2012 Downloads /Links • Online Registration • MLA 2011 brochure • Sponsor: Iowa League of Cities • Sponsor: Institute of Public Affairs • Sponsor: Iowa State University Extension • Workshop Fee and Cancellation Policies Leadership in city government involves making policy decisions that affect the day -to -day lives of citizens. It is vital for mayors, council members and other city officials to understand the essentials of city government. The four -part Municipal Leadership Academy (MLA) provides municipal officials with a curriculum to assist them in effectively meeting the requirements of their elected role. The program offers a comprehensive overview of Iowa municipal government and is presented by the Iowa League of Cities, Institute of Public Affairs and Iowa State University Extension. Basics covered during the series include: • city finance and budgeting • meeting procedures • nuisance abatement • economic development • municipal law • employment and personnel issues • land use and zoning Attending the MLA is the first step new officials should take toward success in public office. From open meetings to city finances, these sessions are designed to quickly bring new officials up to speed on municipal issues. Current elected officials or appointed city officials will find value in the up -to -date information on municipal operations and networking opportunities the sessions offer. In addition to learning the basics, of city government, making connections is crucial in city leadership. Whether the city is seeking connections to resources or wants to connect to other cities for ideas and experience, MLA provides opportunities for both. The attendance of veteran city officials as participants gives a newly elected official the chance to learn from those that have served. Best Value! League members and associate vendors can attend the first three parts of the MLA series for only $115 /person. MLA Part One This session can serve as a jump start for newly elected officials so they can be informed about their new position before they take office in January. The session covers the basics of city revenues and expenditures; effective city councils and meetings; a review of state ethics laws including how to prevent fraud and abuse, and an overview of essential municipal laws that affect day -to -day city business. As part of your registration fee for MLA Part One you will receive a copy of the Iowa Municipal Policy Leaders' Handbook published by the Institute of Public Affairs, a $29 value. MLA Part One Price: $65 /person if city is a member of the Iowa League of Cities $130 /person if non - member MLA Part One Locations: Thurs., Nov. 17, 2011 (Spencer) Clay County Regional Events Center 800 West 18th St. (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat., Nov. 19, 2011 (Cedar Rapids) Clarion Hotel & Convention Center 525 33rd Ave. SW (10 a.m. - 2 p.m.) Thurs., Dec. 1, 2011 (Red Oak) Red Coach Inn 1200 Senate Ave. (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat., Dec. 3, 2011 (Ottumwa) The Hotel Ottumwa 107 E 2nd St. (10 a.m. - 2 p.m Thurs., Dec. 8, 2011 (Charles City) Sleep Inn & Suites 1416 South Grand Ave (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat., Dec. 10, 2011 (Johnston) Hilton Garden Inn 8600 Northpark Dr. (10 a.m. - 2 p.m.) MLA Part Two Thursday, January 12, 2012 (6 -8:30 p.m.). This session will continue to prepare city leaders for their role in the budget process. Leave with a better understanding of the city's role in economic development and land use and zoning issues faced by cities. Part Two will be conducted over the Internet; we encourage the mayor and entire council to watch this session together on Thursday, January 12, 2012 (6 -8:30 p.m.). However, to ensure credit is received, individuals must register separately. MLA Part Two Pricing: $25 /person seeking credit MLA Part Three This session will present strategies to improve your city through various community betterment initiatives and nuisance abatement programs. An overview of personnel and city planning issues will be provided in this session. The session will also include discussion on pending state legislation and the hottest topics affecting cities at that time. MLA Part Three Price: $65 /person if city is a member of the Iowa League of Cities $130 /person if non - member MLA Part Three Locations: Thurs., April 12, 2012 (Washington) Knights of Columbus 606 West 3rd St. (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat., April 14, 2012 (Manchester) Delaware County Fair Grounds - Pavilion 200 E Acers St. (10 a.m. - 2 p.m.) Thurs., April 19, 2012 (Cherokee) Western IA Tech Comm. College 200 Victory Dr. (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat., April 21, 2012 (Mason City) Clarion Inn Hotel 2101 4th St. (10 a.m. - 2 p.m.) Thurs., April 26, 2012 (Atlantic) Cass County Community Center 805 W 10th St. (4 - 8 p.m.) Sat. April 28, 2012 (Altoona) Adventureland Inn 3200 Adventureland Dr. (10 a.m. - 2 p.m.) Part Four @ the League's Annual Conference & Exhibit Part Four of MLA is attendance at the League's Annual Conference & Exhibit that will take place September 26 -28, 2012 in Sioux City, Iowa. To assist you in continuing your development as a leader, a number of the workshops at the conference are designated specifically for MLA participants. Separate registration for this event will be required. If you attend three or four parts in the MLA series you will receive special recognition at the Annual Conference & Exhibit in 2012. Additionally, after the Conference you will receive a certificate in the mail and the League will provide a news release so that your accomplishment can be recognized locally. Name or fail out this form and return it with the proper fee to. Iowa League of Cities, 317 6th Ave., Suite 800, Des Moines IA 50349 or fox the form to: €515) 244 -0740. t tic lr aIleodee rrxist fill trrrt a senora le, form. Title Address City Zip Email City /Organization Represented Phone You are entitled to the League member fee if you area city official or have recently been elected to a city office, (Please Indicote below the locorion you plan to attend). E] Please sign me up For the Part One MLA Session only. Cost for members: 565 /person. Cost for non -city officials: $130 /person. ❑ Please sign me up for the Part Two MLA Session only. Cost for members: $25 /person. Cost for non -city officials: $50 /person. ❑ Please sign me up for the Part Three MLA Session only. Cost for members: S65/person. Cost for non -city officials: S 134 /person. I plan to attend the First Three Parts of the MLA series. Only available to League members. Cost for members: $115lperson. Checks should be made out to Iowa League of Cities.Credit ca rds dre accepted online only. Registration for Part tour (Annual Conference and Exhibit) is separate and will not be available until Summer 2012. ................................................................... Part One Locations: ............................... ❑ Th u rs., Nov. 17, 2011 (Spencer) C) Thurs., Dec. 1, 2011 (Red Oak) 13 Thurs.,Dec.8,20111Cha des City) Clay County Regional Events Center Red Coach Inn Sleep Inn & Suites 900 West 18th St. (4 - 8 p.m.) 1200 Senate Ave. (4- 8 p.m.) 1416 Stauth Grand Ave (4 - R pm.) ❑ sat., Nov. 19, 2011 (Cedar Rapids) ❑ Sat., Dec. 3, 2011 (Ottumwa) ❑ Sat.. Dec.10, 2011 (Johnston) Clarion Hotel & Convention Center The Hotel Ottumwa Hilton Carden Inn 525 33rd Ave. SW 00 a.m. -2 prn.i 107 E 2nd St, (110 a,m,- 2 p.m,) 8600 Northpark Dr.0 0 a. m. - 2 p.m.) Part Two: Thurs., January 12, 2012.This session will be conducted over the Internet; we encourage the mayor and entire council to watch this session together. Cost of this sessinn is for intermet connection. However, those wishing to receive educational credit for this session will need t© register separately. Part Three Locatiions:. ❑ Thurs- April 12,2012 (Washingtnn) ❑ Thurs., April 14, 2012 (Cherokee)[] Thurs., April 25, 2012 (Atlantic) Knights of Columbus Western €A Tech Comm, College Cass County Community Center 606 West 3rd St. (4 - R p.m.) 200 Victory Dr. (4 - 8 p.m.) 8D5 W 1 Dth St. (4 - 8 p.m.) ❑ Sat., April 14, 2012 (Manchester) Q Sat., April 21, 2012 (Mason City) ❑ Sat. April 2a, 2012 (Altoona) Delawrare County Fair Grounds- pavilion Clarion inn Hotel Adventureland Inn 200 E Acers St(10 a.M.- 2 pm.) 2101 4th St. 00 a.m.- 2 p.m.) 320DAdventureland Dr. (10am. -2pin) Please now., the event a workshop must be. cancelled due to Inclement weather, the League will attempt to make that decision by 7a.m, the day of the event That declslon will he announced on the hnrne pate nfwww.inwalraqur.nrg. Ream- r.lxx k the Web site prior to departure if the event's status is in question.Workshops cancelled by the League will be rescheduled. Partklpants unable to attend the new date will receive full refunds. A Late fee of 530 K added to p- gistrttions completed within t day of the date ni the sPler led workshop. Call the League for accessibility or dietary accommodations, Learning the Essentials Leadership in city government in- volves making policy decisions that affect the day - today lives of citizens. It is vital for mayors, council members and other city officials to understand the essentials of city government. Ba- sics covered during the series include: city finance and budgeting meeting procedures nuisance abatement economic development municipal law employment and personnel issues land use and zoning Making Connections In addition to learning the basics of city government, making con- nections is crucial in city leadership. Whether the city is seeking connec- tions to resources or wants to con- nect to other cities for ideas and experience, MLR provides opportuni- ties for both, The attendance of vet- eran city officials as participants gives a newly elected official the chance to learn from those that have served. MLA Graduation . If you attend three or four parts in the MLA series you will receive special recognition at the Annual Confer- ence & Fxhihit in 2012. This session will continue to prepare city 'leaders for their Additionally, after the role in the budget process. Leave with a better understand - Conference you will re- ing of the city's role in economic development and land use ceive a certificate in the and zoning issues faced by cities. Part Two will be conducted mail and the League over the Internet; we encourage the mayor and entire council will provide a news re- to watch this session together on Thursday,-. January 12, 2012 lease so that your ac- (6-830 p.m.). However, to ensure credit is received, individuals complishment can be must register separately. recognized locally, This session will present strategies to improve your city through various community better- ment initiatives and nuisance abatement pro- grams. An overview of personnel and city platen ning issues will be provided in this session. The session will also include discussion on pending state legislation and the hottest topics affecting cities at that time. As part of your registration fee for MLA Part One you will receive a copy of the Iowa Municipal Policy Leaders' Handbook published by the Institute of Public Affairs, a $29 value. .................................... MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Andrew Litton, David McMahon, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim, Dana Thomann, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: Kent Ackerson, William Downing, Alicia Trimble STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Chery Peterson OTHERS PRESENT: Jeremy Faden, Mitchell Kelchen, Sarah Klemuk, Josh Moe, Andrea Rauer, Thomas Scott RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) None. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairperson McMahon called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA; There was none. CONSENT AGENDA: Certificate of Appropriateness — 30 N. Clinton Street. Peterson said that this church is a City landmark at the corner of Clinton and Jefferson Streets and is in the Jefferson Street Historic District. She said the project would involve removing the existing sign and replacing it. Peterson referred to a mockup of what the proposed new sign would look like. Peterson said that staff feels this is acceptable. Rauer, a representative for the church, said that it became apparent over the winter that the sign needed to be replaced. She said the church would like to take the sign down and release the two beautiful windows that are blocked by the sign that was put up 50 to 60 years ago. Rauer said that the proposal for the sign is in the packet. She said it would be a very vertical look for the front of the church. Rauer said they want to match the stone archways and around the windows. She said she has not discussed this with a sign maker until she was certain this was headed in the right direction. Swaim asked about the plexiglass. Rauer said that corner is in a very high traffic area. She said they didn't want to have something that has to be constantly replaced. Rauer said the new sign would actually be smaller than the old one. She said it has two faces and would fit right up against the tree at the corner and would not in any way impede the triangle needed to see at the corner, as it would meet the five -foot required setback. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 30 N. Clinton Street, as presented in the application. Male seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, ( Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 2 CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1141 E. Court Street Peterson said this is an alteration project in the Longfellow Historic District. She said it involves the replacement of all of the basement windows with metal -clad wood Jeld -Wen windows. Peterson said the windows would be a good fit except one of them, which would have to be extensively changed to accommodate an egress unit. Peterson showed photographs of the west -side window that would require a window well. She showed the other windows that would be replaced. Peterson said the application seems acceptable. She said she will still need confirmation on the number of windows and what the window well material will be. Klemuk, one of the owners of the house, said they could use stucco around the top of the window well to match the appearance. She said the basement walls are all stucco - covered. Klemuk said they have talked with their contractor about satisfying code. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 1141 East Court Street, with the conditions that the window specifications be provided for review and approval and the information on the window well material also be provided for review and approval. Litton seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). 435 Grant Street Peterson said this property is on the corner of Grant Street and Grant Court in the Longfellow Historic District. She showed the front of the house, which faces east, and coming around from the north side looking into the back yard. Peterson said this is an application to install a swimming pool in the back yard. She said it is an above - ground pool, but it is going to be cut down and submerged two feet. Peterson said the concern with this application is the fence and the design of the fence around the pool. She said the applicant was originally going to match the existing fencing. Peterson showed the current fence but said she does not think it is high enough to meet the code requirement. Peterson said that at this point, the applicant is planning to use that but also finish out the fence with a picket fence that she showed to the Commission. Wagner asked if the applicant knows that she might have to have a fence up to six feet high, for insurance purposes. Peterson stated that she checked the City Code requirements, and Iowa City only has a four -foot fence requirement. She said she did mention that to the applicant, who said her insurance agent is advising her. Peterson said staff recommends the original style of fence. She said that if that can't be replicated, then staff recommends that the new fence be installed to match the existing. Michaud asked if it is 15 feet in diameter and about three feet deep. Peterson said it is two feet in the ground. Miklo said the applicant intends to put the pool two feet in the ground and then berm up around. He said that one would not see the metal edge sticking above the ground. Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 3 Miklo said staff would not advise having two different styles of fence. Swaim said that the one style seems to work well with the house. Baldridge asked if the current fence would remain. Peterson said it could be salvaged if it was raised up to meet the code. She said the way it is now, she did not think it would comply. MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 435 Grant Street, provided the fencing around the new pool is painted and is either all picket style or all custom built to match the existing fence, and it complies with regulations. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0 (Ackerson, Downing and Trimble absent). 416 Fairchild Street Peterson said this proposal involves the addition of a ramp. She said the property is in the Northside Historic District. Peterson showed a front view of the house and the west side. She said the window at the far back is the window that would be converted to a door. Peterson said that is where the ramp would land, and then it would ramp back and down into the back yard, which she also showed a photograph of. Peterson said there is another door that would stay as it is. She said the ramp would be on the right -hand side and referred to the plan in the packet. Baldridge said the staff report states that the project is for a ramp at the northeast corner of the house. Peterson replied that that is an error. Peterson said that everything seems to meet the guidelines here. She said that information regarding the door and the door trim is missing. Peterson showed the window that would be converted into a door, and it is her understanding that the window well would be left as it is. Baldridge asked if the egress would then be directly west on the back wall. Peterson said it would not. She said there is a plan; there would be a landing at that door and then it ramps down to the north, where there is another landing and then there is a little bit of ramp that stretches back. Swaim asked about the design of the handrail for the first landing and if it would match the wooden railing on the front porch. Peterson said that when she spoke to the contractor, he was using the guidelines for handrail design and the simpler version, similar to the other. Scott, the owner of the house, said what he would probably do, unless it is identical to the front, if he changes it for the ramp, change the front to match the ramp. He said he doesn't really like what is on the front anyway. Scott said the wood trim /baluster is flat, so the snow sits on it so that it has to be painted every year. He said if that doesn't match with what he is proposing to use on the ramp, he will change out the front porch. Scott said the three questions, he gleaned from the staff report were the sidewalk to the west, landscaping plan, and the door trim. He stated that he plans to take the sidewalk out in front of the evergreen bushes there and then come around and skirt the west side of the ramp and come in back behind the ramp in the backyard so that the sidewalk is separate from the ramp. Regarding the landscaping, Scott said it would be his preference to probably do a vegetative buffer in front to the south, maybe skirt lengthwise the west side of the ramp. He said he does Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 4 not like the skirt totally, because then animals get caught underneath. Scott said he would certainly want to screen at least from the flat ramp, the deck, down to the ground on the south side. Scott said the sidewalk will then go on the west side. He does not think there will be enough room between the sidewalk and the ramp to do a vegetative buffer on the west side. He said he might skirt that. Swaim asked if the landing would stand out to the west farther than the bay window. Scott said he assumes that is true, because it is probably about not any more than 30 inches there between the foundation and the sidewalk. Swaim said the vegetation there, that will make the ramp a lot less visible. Scott stated he did not want it above the flat part of the ramp; he does not want a tree or two trees, because he doesn't want to block the vision for security reasons. He said he would put low evergreens, on the bottom — a couple of evergreens or whatever it takes. Scott said he does not know yet what kind of door will be used. He said he may go with a solid core, wood exterior door and paint it to match the house or the trim. Scott said the contractor is proposing an insulated half - light, steel door. He said he is not sure that is what he wants to do yet. Scott said the only thing he objects to in the staff report is where it refers to, "...new doors should include a wood screen door." He said that from a standpoint of access for a handicapped person, he does not really want a screen door here. Peterson said she was pulling out every applicable guideline. Scott said he does not have problems with the question on the sidewalk, which will be done, the landscaping plan, or the door trim. He said he will submit something to staff regarding the door and the door trim. Scott said he takes pride in the north end and also takes pride in the properties he owns. MOTION: Baldridge moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a proposal for 416 Fairchild Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: provision of plans for landscaping and /or a skirt on the sides of the ramp and provision of detail for door trim and specifications /literature for the new door. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). 332 S. Governor Street. Peterson said this property is in the Governor /Lucas Street Conservation District and is one of the Univer /City projects. She said the house was built in the 1850s. Peterson showed a photograph of the house and said the stone house faces left. She said the back has multiple wood frame additions. Peterson said the project includes reroofing, new gutters, most likely the removal of the chimney, siding repair on the south side porch, removal of the railing at the front and construction of a sidewalk out to the shared driveway. Baldridge asked if the sidewalk that extends would be removed. Peterson replied that is not in the plans, and there are no steps to it. She said there are no plans to replace the stairs there. Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 5 Swaim asked if the cement pad would remain but not the railing. Peterson confirmed this. Peterson said it was suggested to her that the first wood frame section could have been as early as the stone. Wagner, the contractor for the project, said one of the concerns is whether the chimney should be taken down or not. He said the little window underneath the eave on the gable on the second addition facing south will be gutted. Wagner said he will probably also be gutting the room next toward the front, and when he does that, he will be able to see what is underneath, and when he does that, he'll have a good idea if that might be as old. Swaim asked if this is the original chimney. Peterson said they are not certain. She said it has no modern -day function. Baldridge asked about the front door. He said the lintel would seem to be part of the original. Baldridge said then the other place in the corner obviously held another entrance. Peterson said the big dormer on the front also is not original. Michaud asked if there is any way to move the electrical wire around to the side of the house so it is not so prominent. Wagner responded that he believes it will have to stay. Swaim said she does not have any problem getting rid of the chimney. Wagner said the antenna will be removed along with the chimney. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 332 South Governor Street with the condition that the product information for shingles and siding be reviewed and approved. Baldridge seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0 -1 (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent and Wagner abstaining). 1130 Seymour Avenue. Peterson said this property is the Longfellow School. She said the gymnasium addition is on the west side of the school and was constructed in 1954. Peterson showed a before view as submitted by the applicant. She provided a photograph from a week ago, showing masonry repair and where the opening has been cleaned out. Peterson showed another view demonstrating the relationship to the rest of the school. Peterson showed a drawing from the original document, demonstrating how the window would have been built originally. She said the square panels were probably fixed, and the lower panels were operative. Peterson said that one of the products being proposed for this includes Kalwall, a translucent insulating panel with a grid look. She said the upper two corners are louvers, and she believes they are mechanical. Peterson said there are four operable hopper windows. She said there are ten vertical battens. Peterson said the staff recommendation is that the same material, maybe in different proportions, replicate the original look of the building. She said staff recommends emphasizing the five bay, not the ten, and then instead of just the four windows across the bottom, do a Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 6 window all the way across, more like the original and probably a little taller to match the proportion of the original. Kelchen, the consultant on this project, said they would like to minimize the number of operable windows because of air flow. He said the vertical battens would match the color of the panels, (can't hear), and on the alternating ones. ( Peterson said that Kalwall can put fixed windows in too; they don't all have to be operable. Peterson showed a sample of the product. She showed what would be the expressed grid look, just like the drawing. McMahon said it is nice to see they are not just bricking this in like so many schools have done. Wagner said that what was there before looked pretty bad. Swaim asked Kelchen if he is proposing insulated glass for the top. Kelchen said the top windows would all be insulated glass. Kelchen said that the insulating /R value of Kalwall is seven, whereas a window is going to only be about two to three. Swaim asked if the clear windows would stand as they are now, rather than as in the drawing. Peterson confirmed this. Wagner said the drawing just shows four. Peterson said she is comparing it to the original drawing in the packet, where there were ten windows across. MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 1130 Seymour Avenue with the following conditions: revision of the number and proportions of hopper windows and battens, specifically that there be ten windows across the bottom, as in the original; that the applicant provide information on the color of Kalwall components and prefinished louvers; and that the above is to be approved by staff and chair. Baldridge seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson Downing, and Trimble absent). 109 /111 S. Summit Street. Peterson said this is a resubmission of a garage application for a property in the College Hill Conservation District. She stated that the property is a duplex on the corner of Washington and Summit Streets. Peterson said the new garage would go to the north of the building. She showed a close view of the location where there is a steep bank. Peterson said the garage would be eleven feet to the north and would be set back from the face of the duplex five feet. She said the driveway would have to flow up from the sidewalk. Peterson said there is a mistake in the plan in that there are not meant to be double hung windows. She said there would be three. Peterson said there would be a partition wall down the center of the garage with one stall for each tenant of the duplex. Peterson said the eave height is seven feet nine from the finished grade at the duplex. She said what is different from when the Commission looked at this before is that there is no upstairs studio space; it is just a very tall garage. Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 7 Wagner, the contractor on this project, said the biggest change is that before the design had one pretty much staying at street grade or sidewalk grade going into the hill and in order to not have the roofline be three feet from or at the level of the bottom of those windows, that's why they thought to put a second story on it to get it up so it is at least halfway up the building. He said that a number of engineers looked at it and decided that it would just be way too much dirt to come out of there, and it was just too big of a project. Wagner said the engineers decided that one can come up — there is a house just to the south of this one that has a driveway that comes up, not as much as this one will but in an acceptable fashion. He said without having the garage sit so far into the hill, he shortened it up and pushed it back farther so one can drive up and get into it but still have the roofline where it was before. Peterson said that is the west elevation, and the driveway will be pretty steep. She said the back elevation in the packet shows a step down and retaining walls to the back doors. Wagner said the plan was drawn presuming that it would be ten feet into the ground, but now it might only be four, so it will have fewer tiers requiring the retaining wall. He said there will be the limestone walls, but because there won't be so much concrete everywhere, they thought they would put just pavers along either side to break it up a little bit so that it will be concrete, brick, and limestone retaining walls. Swaim asked if the ones going off to the left are a terrace, and Wagner confirmed this. Baldridge asked if the garage is just taller. Wagner confirmed it would be taller and would contain a storage loft. Baldridge asked about the access planned from the west. Wagner said that is no longer in the plans. He said there is no longer really a reason for it. Miklo asked Wagner if it would be possible to put brick down the center to kind of match the two sides. Peterson asked about the 30 -inch railing requirement. Wagner said that there is a black railing on the duplex, so whatever railing he uses on the garage will be fabricated to match, with the same color, material, and design. Swaim asked about getting from the garage to the house. Wagner said that most of the walking would be inside the garage, and there will probably be only one step outside. Michaud asked if this garage is being constructed to fulfill a parking requirement. Miklo said the parking was grandfathered in for the duplex. Wagner said the owner wants parking, no matter what, as there is currently no parking available there. MOTION: Baldridge moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a garage addition for 109/111 South Summit Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: window, door, and garage door specifications to be approved; product information for shingles and siding to be approved; product information for landscape materials to be approved; and use of brick trim in the center of the drive to break up the concrete. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0- 1, (Ackerson, Downing and Trimble absent and Wagner abstaining). REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY STAFF AND CHAIR: McMahon stated that this information is available in the packet and asked if anyone had additional comments. DISCUSS COMMISSION'S RESPONSE TO FEMA: Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 8 Regarding suggestions for mitigation measures to offset the adverse effect to historic properties, resulting from FEMA funded undertakings for The University of Iowa. Specifically, mitigation measures to offset the demolition of Henry Sabin Elementary School and demolition of the former Alpha Sigma Phi House. McMahon said that members of the Commission formed a subcommittee regarding this item. Peterson said that Baldridge, Downing, Michaud, and Wagner were on the subcommittee. She said the subcommittee discussed two FEMA projects — the one that would result in the demolition of the Sabin School and the other resulting in the demolition of the former Alpha Sigma Phi House. Peterson said she summarized the suggestions for mitigation in order of priority in a memorandum. She said that first was the funding of an elevator addition at Horace Mann or Longfellow School. Peterson said the second suggestion was a facility study of those two schools, focusing on the issues of maintaining them in the long term. Peterson said that for Alpha Sigma Phi, the strongest recommendation would be to fund a marketing study for the Saint Thomas Moore rectory/parish building, which is sitting empty and is for sale. Michaud said there is a sale pending on the building and asked if the suggestion should therefore substitute something for that if it is sold. Miklo replied that the recommendation could be left unless the building is sold. Michaud asked if there is a backup plan, if the building ends up being sold. Peterson responded that the Saint Thomas Moore recommendation was the strongest suggestion; the other ones all had drawbacks. She said the other suggestions included funding a historic preservation public education campaign for the Manville Heights District, funding the salvage and storage of architectural elements from the fraternity house, and funding a National Register multiple property nomination for historic fraternities and sororities in Iowa City with an education program. Miklo said the National Register nomination for fraternities and sororities was FEMA's suggestion. He said the committee seemed to be skeptical of the idea in terms of the difficulty of convincing fraternities and sororities to voluntarily be listed on the National Register. Miklo said FEMA came back with the idea of an educational program and more outreach with the building owners that might be more successful. He said their suggestion would be to do a National Register nomination and try to convince the property owners, which in some cases are corporations and other times are investors, that National Register listing is a good thing. Swaim asked if there are existing elevators in Mann or Longfellow. Miklo said there are not. He said the idea is that the three schools were built by the same architect in the same year, so there are similarities in terms of historic significance. Miklo said that as one is lost, the idea is what appropriate thing can be done to compensate for that loss to make the others more viable. Swaim asked about the studies that are proposed. Miklo responded that FEMA, or The University at FEMA's direction, would be responsible for coming up with a proposal. He said the City could be a party to the agreement or could just take the role of an observer. Wagner said the idea is to come up with a wish list and select the one thing that really would be ideal. He said the City might as well ask for as much as it can, and then if it gets half of what it asked for, that is still pretty good. Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 9 Peterson said that Downing did contact someone with the school administration who said that an elevator would be a great addition to Longfellow. Miklo said that elevators would be a great addition to both schools. He said the school district did receive an estimate for an elevator for Longfellow. Miklo said he believed the cost was in the range of $400,000. Swaim said she certainly agrees with suggestions one and two for Sabin. She said it is great way of continuing the likelihood of existence for the other schools. Swaim asked, regarding the fraternity house, what the drawback was for suggestion number two. Peterson said that the City has tried to get a district in Manville Heights for a long time. Swaim said, regarding suggestion four and FEMA's response regarding one -to -one contact, she is skeptical about ever getting that done. Wagner stated that the committee thought the ideas for the Sabin School were easier, because there are like properties that need assistance. Swaim asked about the status of Longfellow School. Peterson responded that it is on the National Register. Miklo said it is in the Longfellow Historic District and is therefore protected from demolition without the Commission's approval. Swaim said that Horace Mann is not protected. Miklo confirmed this. Swaim asked, if Horace Mann were nominated for the National Register, if the Commission would go through the same process of designating it locally. Miklo said it could. He stated that the National Register status would make it a more prestigious building and give more of a reason to keep it viable. Baldridge asked about the status of Preucil School. Miklo said it is on the National Register and is also a local landmark building. Baldridge asked if it would be possible to extend that status to Horace Mann School. Miklo answered that, given the history and the architecture of the two buildings, they would really have to have two separate listings. Wagner said that Horace Mann School is just outside of the Northside Historic District. Miklo said it is perhaps a block or two east of the district. McMahon asked if the Commission wanted to revise the list of priorities at all or submit the list as it is. Miklo said the list has to be submitted by September 11th on a form provided by FEMA. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve the suggestions for mitigation of the demolition of Sabin School as submitted to the Commission by its subcommittee. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). Regarding the list for the fraternity, Swaim said that if FEMA rejects the first three suggestions and funds suggestion four, that might be a gift the Commission does not want, if it is not expected to actually yield any nominations. Miklo said the City is not required to give four suggestions for each demolition. Wagner stated that he is all in favor of the educational projects. Swaim asked about anything educational that could be done regarding the fraternity and sorority houses and if that would have any clout with the actual owners. Baldridge said he thinks there is too much concern about potential restrictions involved with having an historic property. He said that is where education is needed — to teach people that it is in their benefit to do this. Swaim asked if such education would be beneficial in Manville Heights, if there has not been much support there. Baldridge said he believes there has been mixed support. Swaim asked if that neighborhood can be educated any more, or if the Commission wishes to educate whole other portions of the City instead. Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 10 Michaud asked about the statuses of the Chamber of Commerce Building and the Press - Citizen Building. Miklo responded that he believes the Press - Citizen Building is eligible for the National Register, but he did not know if it is listed. He said that there have been so many alterations to the Chamber of Commerce Building that it might not be eligible. Michaud asked about the status of the Davis Hotel. Miklo replied that it is on the National Register but is not a local landmark. McMahon asked Commission members if they would like to change the list of priorities. Swaim proposed deleting number four from the list. Miklo said the subcommittee was skeptical about including that suggestion in the first place, for the same reasons already given. Swaim said that the Commission could look to the work plan for suggestions. Miklo asked if, rather than specifying the Press - Citizen Building, the Commission would want to substitute nomination research and a proposal for other significant landmarks in Iowa City currently not suggested as such. Swaim suggested making that the second idea and moving the others down the list. Wagner and Michaud agreed. Peterson asked for opinions on just eliminating the third idea regarding salvage and storage. Miklo said that Friends of Historic Preservation has already taken that on so that it would be covered. Swaim said the first suggestion would then be the marketing study and then the National Register nomination would be second. She asked if the third one would then be the public education campaign. Swaim said the Commission could suggest two things only. Miklo replied that FEMA is not required to choose from the Commission's list. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve the suggestions for mitigation of the demolition of the Alpha Sigma Phi Fraternity house as submitted to the Commission by its subcommittee to maintain number one as listed, to list number two as to fund a National Register property nomination for other various significant structures in Iowa City, and to include as number three the historic preservation education program for the building owners of fraternity and sorority houses. Male seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). MOTION: Swaim moved to delete suggestion number four regarding the salvage and storage of architectural elements from Sabin School from the suggestions for mitigation of the demolition of Sabin School as submitted to the Commission by its subcommittee. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). Miklo said a cover letter would be submitted to FEMA along with the form with the suggestions. McMahon thanked those Commission members who served on the subcommittee. DISCUSS NOMINATIONS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS: Miklo stated that Helen Burford had provided staff with a list of potential properties eligible for historic preservation awards, which are tentatively scheduled for early November. He said the Commission needs to quickly decide which properties should be receiving awards. Miklo asked Commission members to e-mail Peterson or himself with addresses of any properties that might be eligible. Miklo said the Commission may want to form a subcommittee to handle the process. He said it is important for the subcommittee to go through the list and determine which properties are Historic Preservation Commission September 8, 2011 Page 11 actually eligible for awards and which are not. Swaim asked if Burford could send the list to Commission members, and Miklo said he would arrange for that. Miklo said that each property would be photographed, with as much documentation as possible, and then subcommittee members would decide which properties would receive awards. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR AUGUST 11, 2011: MOTION: Wagner moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's August 11, 2011 meeting, as written. Litton seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0, (Ackerson, Downing, and Trimble absent). PUBLIC COMMENT: Josh Moe said he is new to Iowa City, he works across the street now and he has worked in Cincinnati where he was involved in historic preservation. He said this was the first amenable Historic Preservation Commission meeting he had ever been to. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2011 NAME TERM EXP. 1/13 2/10 3/10 4/14 5/12 6/9 7/14 8/11 9/8 ACKERSON, KENT 3/29/13 X X X X X O/E X X O/E BALDRIDGE, THOMAS 3/29/14 X X O/E X X X X X X BAKER, ESTHER 3/29/12 O/E X X X X O/E O/E X X DOWNING, WILL 3/29/13 X O/E X X X X X X O/E LITTON, ANDREW 3/29/14 X X X X X X X X X McMAHON, DAVID 3/29/14 O/E X O/E X X O/E O/E X X MICHAUD, PAM 3/29/12 X O/E X O/E X X X X X SWAIM, GINALIE 3/29/12 X O/E X X O/E X X O/E X THOMANN, DANA 3/29/14 O/E O/E X X O/E O/E O/E X X TRIMBLE, ALICIA 3/29/13 X X X X X X X X O/E WAGNER, FRANK 3/29/12 O/E X X X O/E O/E X O/E X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting /No Quorum - -- = Not a Member MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 — 6:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bacon Curry, Andrew Chappell, Scott Dragoo, Charles Drum, Jarrod Gatlin, Holly Hart, , Rachel Zimmerman Smith, MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Cheryl Clamon, Michael McKay Tracy Hightshoe Nate Muller, Sandra RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: None CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Andrew Chappell at 6:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 16, 2011 MINUTES: Hart moved to approve the minutes. Zimmerman Smith seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0 ( Clamon and McKay absent). PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT: Hightshoe told the Commission that in the back of the packets staff included the Commission's Year End Report that is provided to the City Manager and City Council. The report identifies FY11 CDBG /HOME project accomplishments and Aid to Agency funding. The last part of the report identifies the FY12 CDBG /HOME projects starting July 1 st NOMINATION AND ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chappell stated that they need a chair and a vice chair. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 PAGE 2 of 7 Chappell nominated Michael McKay for another year as chair person. Dragoo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0 (Clamon and McKay absent). Chappell asked for any nominations for the vice chair. Zimmerman Smith nominated Andy Chappell. Gatlin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0 (Clamon and McKay absent). NEW BUSINESS: PUBLIC HEARING & APPROVAL OF THE FY11 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE & EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER): Hightshoe stated that every year it is a HUD requirement that project accomplishments are summarized and submitted to HUD. The report identifies how the City utilized our federal CDBG and HOME funds in relation to our 5 -year plan (CITY STEPS). The report also must include information about other programs such as Section 8 and other federal funding sources such as the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. FY11 was the first year of our 5 -year plan. For many the most useful part of the CAPER is the CDBG and HOME project accomplishment summaries found on page 24 and 34. Staff does not report beneficiaries or the leverage amount until the project closes. For example, if a prior year project was not completed until FY11, no beneficiary or leverage information would be reported in the prior year, but would be for FY11. If you notice no beneficiaries for FY11 projects, it is that the project was not complete and beneficiary/leverage information will be reported in the FY12 CAPER. This prevents us from duplicating beneficiaries and leverage amounts for the same project. Hightshoe apologized for the delay in distributing the IDIS reports. There was a problem with the federal system multiplying dollars spent on projects with multiple housing beneficiaries. The problem is now fixed and the reports emailed to commission members and placed online. The IDIS reports basically summarize the charts found on pages 24 and 34 based on income, race and type of activity. Chappell asked when this document must be submitted to HUD. Hightshoe stated that it needed to be submitted 90 days after the end of the program year. It will need to be submitted to HUD by September 30. Tonight is the public hearing for the CAPER. HCDC must recommend approval as is or with requested revisions. Chappell stated that since this was a public hearing he asked if there were any members from the public that would like to weigh in. There were none. Chappell asked if there was any discussion from the Commission. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 PAGE 3 of 7 Hightshoe stated that there was an error on the title page and apologized to Clamon. Andy Douglas is listed as a HCDC Commission member; however Clamon should have been listed. . Chappell asked about the annual commission report and who receives it. Hightshoe responded that it was for the City Manager and City Council. Chappell stated his concern was that it was titled Housing & Community Development Commission and if you look at FY11 project accomplishments it includes the economic development fund which the commission doesn't supervise, the Council Economic Development Committee monitors /approves, it looks like the Commission has something to do with these types of activities based on the report. Hightshoe stated that as the source of the funds is CDBG and the Commission in its general duties oversee or provide recommendations for all CDBG and HOME related activities, it is provided in the report. The Commission's duties are very broad as it relates to making recommendations to City Council on housing, jobs and services for low income residents. Drum stated he had some minor changes that he would like to have corrected in the report. Hightshoe stated that would be fine as long as minor, not substantive corrections that would require the commission to review and approve. Chappell asked if she was asking for approval on the report. Hightshoe stated that it would be approved subject to the corrections that Drum suggested. Chappell closed the public hearing. Zimmerman Smith moved to approve the report subject to Drum's minor corrections that need to be made. Drum seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0 ( Clamon and McKay absent). SELECTION OF PROJECTS TO MONITOR IN FY12: Chappell stated that normally they all keep track of the projects and they divide them up. The memo states that each member would need to take four to five projects. Gatlin stated he would take November. Zimmerman Smith stated she would take January. Drum stated he would take December. Hart stated she would take October. Hightshoe asked if she would take the two carry overs as well. Hart confirmed that she would. Dragoo stated he would take May. Bacon Curry stated she would take June. Hightshoe stated that staff would provide the last two: housing rehab and the economic development fund. Chappell stated he would take March. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 PAGE 4 of 7 Bacon Curry volunteered for the April carry over projects. Chappell stated that Clamon could take the April carry over as she doesn't have any at this point. Chappell stated that McKay, as Chair, has other events and meetings that he is involved with so it would not be necessary to give him any this time around. Hightshoe stated that she will fill in the chart and email it out to the Commission. The form includes the contact information for the project. Hightshoe welcomed Michelle Bacon Curry as a new commission member. Hightshoe stated that she emails recipients to let them know that an HCDC member will contact them before the scheduled meeting to get a project update. She stated Commission members typically do a phone interview or visit in person (staff recommends calling first) and then presents back to the commission what the project is, budget, status, etc. TIMELINE FOR THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF CITY STEPS: Hightshoe stated that FY12 is the second year of CITY STEPS. There is an annual review of CITY STEPS, the City's consolidated plan for housing jobs and services for low income residents. The Commission should review the plan's priorities and will need to decide to pursue an amendment, if necessary. If the Commission would like to pursue an amendment, staff would forward to the City Council and follow the process for amendments to the plan. Staff is scheduling at least two meetings to get public input. One of them will be at the Senior Center. Staff will email the Commission with the meeting information so they can attend; however, the meetings are not mandatory. Hightshoe asked the Commission if any of them had an idea about a different meeting or a different clientele that they would want to hear from. The meeting that is scheduled now will focus on the senior community. Last year it was a community mental health provider and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County. Chappell asked what kinds of options were available. Hightshoe stated that the Housing Authority is seeing if there are any public housing or Section 8 tenant meetings in the next month. She stated she emailed the school district to see if there were any family resource meetings at any of the schools that serve primarily low to moderate income students. The meetings will have to be done by October 19 so that she will be able to summarize the comments and forward to the Commission. Gatlin suggested the shelter house. Hightshoe stated she would contact them. She gave off a couple of other locations in which they have had meetings. Hightshoe stated that she has found many similarities for needs across several different clienteles and many fall within the high priorities of CITY STEPS. Zimmerman Smith asked if the idea was to get input from people who have already received assistance or from the community as a whole. Hightshoe stated they wanted input from the community, but also from low income persons who are in need of services and have utilized area services. Many times we also get input from social service providers and school and county employees. Chappell asked if staff would expect a vote at the Oct. 20 meeting. Hightshoe stated that if there are no changes to CITY STEPS proposed, there is no action needed. If commission members want to change a priority, then they would have to vote to recommend the change to City Council. Chappell requested that a summary of CITY STEPS priorities be sent to HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 PAGE 5 of 7 commission members before the Oct. 20 meeting. Hightshoe stated she will summarize the comments and email or mail the comments to members before the Oct. 20 meeting for their consideration. Chappell stated he encouraged all the members to review CITY STEPS and go through the priorities in CITY STEPS - Strategic plan (p. 91 to Appendix A — about 10 pages) before the October meeting. OLD BUSINESS: ALLOCATION PROCESS COMMITTEE — UPDATED: Chappell asked staff if they could send the Commission the application from last year so that everyone can see the old version and he stated he would be giving out the new version with the changes. Chappell stated that the subcommittee decided against dropping the entire process. They felt that they needed structure because there is a lot of material to digest and because the applicants need a process. The committee thought if they could change the evaluation criteria so that there is enough leeway and everyone could get behind the criteria themselves then there wouldn't be extensive disputes. Chappell stated that some of the changes that are in the evaluation criteria are to help make them more uniformed. All ranking forms, despite type of activity, will total 100 points, currently there are two different point systems. The ranking forms all have the same five categories, but not all of the questions are worded the same. It allows for the individual commissioner to see if the applicant has proven what they have set out to do. Chappell stated that they have fewer yes /no -set number of points and more that require a range such as 0 -10. Chappell stated that last year there were only two applications that showed innovation. The innovation question was only worth five points and there was talk that it should be worth more and so it has been brought up to ten points. The wording has also changed to give it more of a broad range. Dragoo stated that he has always been confused by what is being asked with innovation. Chappell stated that he hoped that the questions will be clearer in regards to whether the question is asking about the project or the entity. Some questions are better suited to ask about the entity, the financial questions, how well the project will be managed, etc. Chappell stated that when groups made good use of volunteers, they don't necessarily get as much credit as it doesn't translate to the specific project. The changes that are made try to t allow for that adjustment. Staff has not had a chance to review everything yet. With all the changes they are hoping for a more unified look. Chappell stated that in regards to housing this was the only one that had projects scoring under 60 points being dropped from consideration. Hightshoe stated that when you see a project with less than this amount, the project is not likely to get funding. Chappell stated that from there they looked at the other documents in the packet to make sure it was consistent with the documents that were just changed. What is not in the packet is the applicant guide. He stated he did not see any changes that would need to be made to the guide. The committee will have all three revised applications in the October packet for review. The thought is to bring these back to the committee for the October meeting so that in November there could be a vote to approve the changes. He told the Commission if they have any changes to email him so that he could bring it up to the subcommittee when they met again. Hart stated that she got involved because there were things that she wanted taken into consideration. Her concern was to not HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 PAGE 6 of 7 bias the ratings toward good projects that may not have some of the resource that some of the others can bring in or that may not be as interesting but are critical. If there is an opinion that some do not feel a question works or others do than that will be brought up to the committee as a whole. Hightshoe stated that the email that gets sent to the Commission will contain the three applications and the applicant guide. The last three pages in the applicant guide are the ranking forms. Drum stated that it seems to him that if there was more parallel between the questions that were being asked it would help. It would also be helpful that the applicant knows what we are expecting of them. Hightshoe stated that the commission should also be looking at the Aid to Agency application process as HCDC will be recommending a funding allocation this year as well. Due to several potential changes to the Aid to Agency process, Hightshoe stated staff would keep the commission informed. Hightshoe stated that more emphasis might be placed on agencies serving Iowa City residents, both in terms of CDBG and Aid to Agency projects. She did not know if it would be a criterion that they would want to review. Aid to Agency funds come directly out of the City's general fund. There are some agencies in Iowa City that predominately serve residents outside of Iowa City; however many agencies request 100% of the CDBG funding from the City. In October, we may want to discuss further. Chappell stated that another thing asked about is the services. If the agency received Aid to Agency funding from the City the last year and whether the funding could have been used for the project. Chappell asked for the commission comments to be sent to him by October 1 sc Bacon Curry asked if Aid to Agencies was an October allocation last year. Hightshoe stated she thought it was in November or December. Hightshoe stated before the allocation process begins, staff will need to confirm the process and amount available for distribution as there may be several changes. ADJOURNMENT: Drum made a motion to adjourn. Zimmerman Smith seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7 -0 (Clamon and McKay absent). HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVEOPLMENT COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2011 NAME TERM EXP. 116 2/17 3110 3117 4/21 6/16 9/15 BACON CURRY, MICHELLE 9/1/2014 X X X X X X X CHAPPELL, ANDREW 9/1/2012 X X X X X X X CLAMON, CHERYLL 9/1/2014 - - -- X X X X X O/E DRAGOO, SCOTT 9/1/2013 X X X -- -- X X X DRUM, CHARLIE 9/1/2013 X X X X O/E X X GATLIN, JARROD 9/1/2012 X X X X X O/E X HART, HOLLY JANE 9/1/2013 X X X X X X X McKAY, MICHAEL 9/1/2014 X X X X X X O/E McMURRAY, REBECCA 9/1/2011 X X X X X X -- -- ZIMMERMAN SMITH, RACHEL 9/1/2012 X X X X X X X Key: X = Present O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member