HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-11-10 Info Packet� � 1
k�m Sh ,,�
CITY OF IOWA CITY
www.icgov.org
CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
MISCELLANEOUS
November 10, 2011
IP1 Council Meetings and worK,ession Mijullua
IP2 Memo from Assistant City Manager: Legislative Priorities
IP3 Occupy Iowa City Update: Revised Conditions of Public Assembly Permit (Amended in
accordance with action of the City Council on November 1, 2011)
IP4 City Council Economic Development Committee approved minutes of October 18, 2011
IP5 Iowa City Police Department Bar Check Report — October 2011
DRAFT MINUTES
IP6 Historic Preservation Commission: October 13, 2011
IP7 Historic Preservation Commission: October 17, 2011
IP8 Housing & Community Development Commission: October 20, 2011
IP9 Senior Center Commission: October 20, 2011
6:00p Special Work Session
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting (continue work session if necessary)
11 -10 -11
IP1
City Council Meeting Schedule and
CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas
November 10, 2011
www.icgov.org
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE
♦ MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21
Emma J. Harvat Hall
5:30p Special Work Session
♦ 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
3:15p -6:30p Special Work Session — Strategic Planning Session
♦ TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6
Emma J. Harvat Hall
4:30 -6:00p Reception for outgoing Council Members
Lobby Conf. Room
6:00p Special Work Session
7:00p Regular Formal Council Meeting (continue work session if necessary)
r
ter CITY OF IOWA CITY IP2
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 10, 2011
To: City Council
From: Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager
Re: Legislative Priorities
Please find attached a copy of Resolution #10 -496 by which Council adopted your legislative
priorities for 2011, as well as a copy of the 2012 Legislative Priorities of the Iowa League of
Cities. These are provided for your review in anticipation of a meeting with our area legislators
prior to the 2012 session.
In addition, the Metropolitan Coalition discussed 2012 priorities at its meeting on August 25,
2011 but those have not been finalized. The discussion included the following as possible
priorities:
a. diversifying revenue sources;
b. Chapter 411(police /fire pension system) restructuring and keeping the system sound;
c. preservation of TIF as an economic development tool;
d. extension of the 6% historic tax credit;
e. adequate funding for public transportation infrastructure (road use tax revenue);
f. negative effects of the Krupp decision allowing commercial rental complexes to be
converted to Co -Op and taxed as residential properties;
g. general concurrence with the priorities of the Iowa League of Cities.
With Council's concurrence, a discussion of your legislative priorities will be placed on your
December 6, 2011 work session agenda. A resolution reflecting those priorities will then be
prepared for formal Council action.
cc. Tom Markus, City Manager
Marian Karr, City Clerk
Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney
M� E - 6-10
13
1
Prepared by: Dale Helling, Asst, City Manager, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356 -5013
RESOLUTION NO. 10-496
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY OF IOWA CITY
2011 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES
WHEREAS, the Iowa City City Council seeks to encourage legislation that enhances economic
development and opportunity in Iowa City as well as the State of Iowa; and
WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City and other cities play a critical role in the future of the State; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the citizens of Iowa City that the City Council establish legislative
priorities and convey said priorities to State legislators who directly represent Iowa City, as well as
to other State legislators.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Iowa City City Council hereby outlines its
legislative proposals to the Iowa City area legislative delegation for the 2011 Iowa State legislative
session as follows:
ALCOHOL - LOCAL REGULATORY AUTHORITY
The City seeks support for greater local determination in regulating the licensing, sale, service,
and consumption of alcoholic beverages. A "Home Rule" approach will allow local government
to more effectively address alcohol related problems and issues that are of particular concern in
their respective communities.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The City supports the preservation of existing economic development incentives, as well as
policies that would enable us to expand our economic development efforts. Of greatest
importance is the retention of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) in its current form without further
changes or restrictions. We also support a local option of raising the Hotel -Motel Tax from a
maximum of seven percent (7 %) to nine percent (9 %).
IOWA LEAGUE OF CITIES and METROPOLITAN COALITION PRIORITIES
Iowa City, as a member city of both organizations, supports the legislative priorities set forth by
the Iowa League of Cities and by the Metropolitan Coalition for the 2011 legislative session. Of
particular concern is the rapidly rising cost to employers to support the Municipal Fire and
Police Retirement System and we support efforts to control future costs to the member
municipalities.
Passed and approved this 16th day of November , 20 i _•
14 ' A
Resolution No. i o -496
Page 2
ATTEST:��
CITY RK
oved by
�J J
City Attorney's ffice
and seconded b Mims the Resolution be
It was moved by ('hampi on y
adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Bailey
--— Champion
v Dickens
x Hayek
— x Mims
-- x Wilburn
x Wright
X
Wpdata/mgr /asst/res/2011legis prior.doc
W
O
a
d
m
J
N
O
N
u v v d C v
O 0 N C ,y h O. !� r
�° ° Ca u O C ✓ . V O d C v v u d v a
C. y O C O N O C U M v
t3 XI m 7b A N K C o 'j
c u 0 ^C N v v �
R a W v o u° u 4,, u
N �� � � � � bC H .� F C as v O vi L Q +� O • � � v � � D
sy-i a 1. " .d u U ti k v �bA
W v C A C n O O b
v
brj
g 0 n O ti C G aCi y 3
lzs
� » y u ,� ",�; y . � ce bA � i 'vCi � C � CO u � ✓O C C � O bA � �" .r
U .°C ..d C '� •ti C cue C��'' Ste". •0 '� �„ J; ,,aa,• `...
CL.
aCi C a v v v �✓ w U
ovv uc C vi ° v y M: tz a`i -1:1 4
to
cr
cl
N
ca '��„ 'cOa u b • u ^' ate+ v v ',a .«;'a V.•,
° o v• o
r.
°
o w. u. o o ti v
v
fi K r3 v X S].
G„ u N
C v U u v C e v
Q v y7 N S] v
G✓ y
o
v
q a a x v a
C N w o v v.
o y U
� � a cj C
CG o U b 0 cd °
w O
Conditions of Public Assembly Permit (Amended in accordance with action of the City Council
on November 1. 2011)
1. Time, date and place of permitted activity: From October 26, 2011 to February 29, 2012
in east and south quadrants of College Green Park with the exception of the gazebo and
the sidewalk between the two quadrants (the quadrants are depicted on the attached
diagram).
2. One portable toilet shall be placed on the sidewalk between the east and south
quadrants. No other object or obstruction shall be placed on or across the sidewalk.
3. Pedestrian traffic shall not be impeded except for the portable toilet.
4. From 10:30 pm to 6:00 am, permittee shall ensure persons do not interfere with the
tranquility of the residents and inhabitants in the adjacent neighborhood and not
unreasonably interfere with their tranquility from 6:00 am to 10:30 pm.
5. Tents designed for sleeping six or less persons are allowed and shall be staked at least
three feet from the sidewalk. Additionally, two arctic tents with a capacity of no more
than 10 persons are allowed, subject to approval of the City's Fire Department, and shall
be staked at least three feet from the sidewalk. There shall be no electric devices in the
tents. Any tent that does not comply with this provision is prohibited and is subject to
removal without further notice. No tent is allowed in the west or north quadrant.
6. No person is allowed to be in the west or north quadrant between the hours of 10:30 pm
to 6:00 am.
7. Solar panel is allowed. Use of artificial lighting shall cease between the hours of 10:30
pm and 6:00 am.
8. Cables, tents, ropes, and other items shall not be attached to any tree, bench, pole, the
gazebo, or other fixture in College Green Park. Any such item is subject to removal
without further notice.
9. Until further notification, tents shall be moved at least every four days to avoid damaging
the grass.
10. Signs shall not be attached to any tree, bench, pole, the gazebo, or'other fixture in
College Green Park. Signs attached to any tree, bench, pole, the gazebo, or other
fixture are subject to removal without further notice.
11. Permittee is not granted an exclusive use of the gazebo. Tarps or other material shall
not be attached to the gazebo and are subject to removal without notice.
12. All trash shall be collected and placed in or adjacent to park trash receptacles.
13. No amplified sound.
14. No open fire or flame except those fueled by propane units and approved in writing by
the Director of Parks and Recreation.
15. New lights are being installed in College Green Park. The installation of the lights shall
not be impeded.
16. No structure of any kind shall be constructed, built, installed or placed in College Green
Park, and any such structure is subject to removal without further notice.
17. Additional conditions as may be reasonably imposed by the Director of Parks and
Recreation.
IP3
i
i�
I�
IP4
MINUTES APPROVED
CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 18, 2011
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, 8:00 A.M.
Members Present: Regenia Bailey, Matt Hayek
Members Absent: Susan Mims
Staff Present: Wendy Ford, Jeff Davidson, Tom Markus
Others Present: Jody Hovland, Jennifer Holan
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
Hayek moved to recommend the FY13 funding request from Riverside Theater as
discussed. Bailey seconded the motion. Motion carried 2 -0; Mims absent.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Bailey at 8:00 A.M.
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2011,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING:
Hayek noted that the discussion concerning Lorenz 2.0 at the last meeting should note
that he abstained from the discussion.
Hayek moved to accept the September 20, 2011, meeting minutes as amended.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0; Mims absent.
CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION FOR FY13 FUNDING FROM RIVERSIDE
THEATER:
Ford addressed the Members, noting that staff from Riverside Theater are present. She
stated that Riverside has submitted a request for funding for the next three fiscal years,
in a declining amount of $30,000, for FY13, then $25,000 and $20,000 for the following
two fiscal years. Ford noted in her report the economic impacts that have affected
Riverside Theater. She noted that this is a critical time for the organization, as they
consider positioning the theater for permanent location. Ford related some of the
positive influences on the community, and wrapped by stating that staff is recommending
this declining- amount request. Riverside Theater staff thanked the Committee for their
consideration, noting they are proud to have produced professional theater in Iowa City
for the past 31 years and look forward to the ensuing 30 years.
Hayek asked Ford where the Economic Development fund stands currently. She noted
that the current balance is around $196,000. Davidson and Ford then responded to
Members' questions regarding the fund and the upcoming budget cycle. Bailey asked
Riverside staff how they believe the situation will change in those three years, and staff
responded that they believe expanded marketing will work in increasing their audiences.
Council Economic Development Committee
September 20, 2011
Page 2 of 4
Hayek moved to recommend the FY13 funding request from Riverside Theater as
discussed.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0; Mims absent.
DISCUSS FORMALIZATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND
POLICIES:
Davidson began the discussion, noting that this recommendation will help to formalize
the processes and policies that staff use when working on economic development
projects. He stated that it will be helpful in setting expectations for those who make
application to the City for financial assistance. Davidson then began a review of what
staff is recommending for the Economic Development processes and procedures. He
reviewed a 4 -step internal process highlighting specifics milestones. Bailey asked how
staff is handling the confidential aspect of such requests, and at what point such
information becomes public. Davidson responded, noting that staff works with an
outside contractor and follows confidential guidelines in these cases.
Discussion ensued with Davidson noting under Step 2, that staff evaluates projects by
looking at such criteria as whether or not the proposed project will enhance or harm the
image and /or reputation of the City. Bailey asked for an example, and Davidson gave
the example of the difference between a steel mill and a foundry and that a steel mill
would be less desirable and a foundry more desirable environmentally. Explaining Step
3, Davidson noted this is the point at which staff begins to obtain critical information
about the company making the request. Step 4 covers performance measures,
according to Davidson. One important point that staff has to impart to businesses and
developers seeking City assistance is that there is no entitlement to these funds. Bailey
asked for clarification on Step 2, noting that it states the evaluation stage information will
be taken to the Economic Development Committee for discussion. She asked if this was
going to happen early on, noting that she doesn't believe this is the right spot in the
process for EDC's review. Davidson added that one change here is the increased
involvement by the City Manager's office in this step. This would then change the
process somewhat, with information coming to the EDC at a later time.
Davidson then began a discussion of those items needing the EDC's guidance, as staff
finalizes policy recommendations. The first issue covered is the idea of a 'TIF
generator.' Davidson noted that the City of Madison, Wisconsin recommends a policy
granting no more than 50% of the TIF increment created by a project to the developer,
and reiterated this would be desired, but not necessarily a requirement.
Requiring a minimum `developer equity' was discussed next. Davidson noted that
typically the City has funded TIF projects in the range of 20 to 25% of project cost, and
that staff recommends that the developer have at least a 50% equity investment in the
project. Equity may be in the form of financing. The fourth item for which staff is
requesting EDC's direction is in determining what type of projects may be eligible to
receive TIF assistance. Discussion ensued. Davidson noted that staff will finalize this
document and bring it to a full Council work session for further review. He then
Council Economic Development Committee
September 20, 2011
Page 3 of 4
responded to questions about the Plaza Towers' project and the successful TIF
assistance there.
STAFF TIME:
Davidson noted that he hopes to be able to make some announcements soon about
upcoming projects. He added that the design for the north wastewater treatment plant is
coming along nicely. He stated that staff has been meeting with developers weekly over
the Riverfront Crossings area. The interest in the Towncrest redevelopment is also
going well. Davidson continued, noting that the Hieronymus Square project is showing
some movement again. Ford spoke briefly the much publicized survey done recently,
adding that they should have a final report in the coming weeks.
COMMITTEE TIME:
None.
ADJOURNMENT:
Hayek moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:45A.M.
Bailey seconded the motion.
Motion carried 2 -0; Mims absent.
Council Economic Development Committee
September 20, 2011
Page 4 of 4
Council Economic Development Committee
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2011
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
TERM
NAME
EXP.
3
VI
(D
►�
�'
o
°
co
Regenia
01/02/11
X
X
X
X
X
Bailey
Matt
01/02/11
O/E
X
X
X
X
Hayek
Susan
01/02/11
X
X
X
X
O/E
Mims
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
IP5
Iowa City Police Department
Bar Check Report - October, 2011
F, L sDe sion of Alcohol Under the Legal Age (PAULA) Under 21 Charges
Numbers are reflective of only Iowa City Police activity
201110V -8 iti [i: 11
Business Na e, �; ,; Occupancy
1 tr (I ti
(occupancy !off �s� URiae�,ti f aobsh,
t
Monthlv Totals
Bar Under2l PAULA
Checks
Prev 12 Month Totals
Bar Under2l PAULA
Checks
Under 21 PAULA
Ratio Ratio
(Prev 12 Mo) (Prev 12 Mo)
2 Dogs Pub 120
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Airliner— 223
5
0
8
80
0
36
0
0.45
American Legion 140
1
0
0
8
0
1
0
0.125
Aoeshe Restaurant 156
0
0
0
0
0
Atlas World Grill 165
0
0
0
0
0
Blackstone— 297
0
0
0
0
0
Blue Moose 436
8
0
1
74
6
4
0.0810811
0.0540541
Bluebird Diner 82
0
0
0
0
0
Bob's Your Uncle 260
0
0
0
0
0
Bo-James— 200
5
0
0
40
0
0
0
0
Bread Garden Market & Bakery
0
0
0
0
0
Brothers Bar & Grill, [It's] 556
15
4
11
168
21
44
0.125
0.2619048
Brown Bottle, [The]— 289
0
0
0
0
0
Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar— 189
4
0
0
0
0
Caliente Night Club 498
3
0
1
37
3
1
0.0810811
0.0270270
Carl & Ernie's Pub & Grill 92
1
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
Carlos O'Kelly's— 299
0
0
0
0
0
Chef's Table 162
0
0
0
0
0
Chili Yummy Yummy Chili
4
0
1
0
0.25
Chipotle Mexican Grill— 119
0
0
0
0
0
Club Car, [The] 56
2
0
0
0
0
Coaches Corner 160
4
0
0
0
0
Colonial Lanes— 502
4
0
0
0
0
Dave's Foxhead Tavern 87
1
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
DC's 120
4
0
0
77
7
4
0.0909091
0.0519481
Deadwood, [The] 218
1
0
0
20
0
0
0
0
Devotay— 45
0
0
0
0
0
Tuesday, November 08, 2011 Page 1 of 4
Donnelly's Pub 49
1
0
0 17
1
0 0.0588235
0
Dublin Underground, [The] 57
1
0
0 17
0
0 0
0
Eagle's, [Fraternal Order of] 315
0
0
0 0
0
El Banditos 25
0
0
0 0
0
El Dorado Mexican Restaurant 104
0
0
0 0
0
El Ranchero Mexican Restaurant 161
0
0
0 0
0
Elks #590, [BPO] 205
0
0
0 0
0
Englert Theatre— 838
0
0
0 0
0
Fieldhouse 178
7
1
1 79
6
1 0.0759494
0.0126582
First Avenue Club— 280
0
0
0 0
0
Formosa Asian Cuisine— 149
0
0
0 0
0
Gabes 261
3
0
1 31
5
1 0.1612903
0.0322581
George's Buffet 75
1
0
0 6
0
0 0
0
Gilbert St Piano Lounge 114
6
0
0 0
0
Givanni's— 158
0
0
0 0
0
Godfather's Pizza— 170
0
0
0 0
0
Graze— 49
0
0
0 0
0
Grizzly's South Side Pub 265
2
0
0 10
3
3 0.3
0.3
Hawkeye Hideaway 94
3
0
0 0
0
Hilltop Lounge, [The] 90
1
0
0 5
0
0 0
0
IC Ugly's 72
1
0
0 7
0
0 0
0
India Cafe 100
0
0
0 0
0
Jimmy Jack's Rib Shack 71
0
0
0 0
0
Jobsite 120
1
0
0 17
0
0 0
0
Joe's Place 281
1
0
0 39
0
0 0
0
Joseph's Steak House— 226
0
0
0 0
0
La Reyna 49
0
0
0 0
0
Library. [The]— 420
17
0
3 31
0
4 0
0.1290323
Linn Street Cafe 80
0
0
0 0
0
Los Portales 161
0
0
0 0
0
Martinj�&-;.: -= (_.,` 7-3 200
12
0
0 70
18
3 0.2571429
0.0428571
Masala 46
0
0
0 0
0
00
Mekong taurant — = ''°"�' 89
0
0
0 0
0
„
Tuesday, November�68, 2011
Page
2 of 4
Micky's- 98
3
0
0
23
0
3
0
0.1304348
Mill Restaurant, [The] 325
8
1
0
0.125
0
Moose, [Loyal Order of] 476
0
0
0
0
0
Motley Cow Cafe 82
0
0
0
0
0
Okoboji Grill- 222
0
0
0
0
0
One- Twenty -Six 105
0
0
0
0
0
Orchard Green Restaurant— 200
0
0
0
0
0
Oyama Sushi Japanese Restaurant 87
0
0
0
0
0
Pagliai's Pizza— 113
1
0
0
0
0
Panchero's (Clinton St)— 62
0
0
0
0
0
Panchero's Grill (Riverside Dr)— 95
0
0
0
0
0
Pints 180
6
2
1
74
6
4
0.0810811
0.0540541
Pit Smokehouse 40
0
0
0
0
0
Pizza Hut— 116
0
0
0
0
0
Pizza Ranch- 226
0
0
0
0
0
Quality Inn /Highlander 971
0
0
0
0
0
Quinton's Bar & Deli 149
1
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
Red Avocado, [The] 47
0
0
0
0
0
Riverside Theatre- 118
0
0
0
0
0
Saloon- 120
1
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
Sam's Pizza- 174
25
0
23
0
0.92
Sanctuary Restaurant, [The] 132
4
0
0
0
0
Shakespeare's 90
1
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
Short's Burger & Shine— 56
1
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
Sports Column 400
10
1
1
108
13
29
0.1203704
0.2685185
Studio 13 206
2
0
0
22
0
0
0
0
Summit. [The]— 736
21
0
13
197
16
78
0.0812183
0.3959391
SushiPopo 84
0
0
0
0
0
Takanami Restau`?Ant— 148
0
0
0
0
0
TCB _ -= s: 250
5
2
0
73
4
0
0.0547945
0
Thai Fl 60
0
0
0
0
0
'� =
co
Thai Spj4 t -y-` 91
0
0
0
0
0
Times (pup @ Pra kf ;�6 Lights:,= 60
0
0
0
0
0
c�
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Page
3 of 4
Union Bar
VFW Post #3949
Vine Tavern, [The]
Wig & Pen Pizza Pub
Yacht Club, [Iowa City]
Zio Johno's Spaghetti House
Z'Mariks Noodle House
Off Premise
854
197
170
154
206
94
47
Totals
Grand Totals
* includes outdoor seating area
exception to 21 ordinance
C., t
�� rn
oD
R.
cv
16 5
1 0
2 0
7 0
170 15
0 0
6
168
38
46
0.2261905
0
8
0
0
0
1
41
4
1
0.097561
0
0
0
0
1
75
3
3
0.04
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49
1749
155
290
0.0886221
34
1
0
0
158
0
83
1 448
0.2738095
0
0.0243902
0
0.04
0
0
0.1658090
0
Tuesday, November 08, 2011 Page 4 of 4
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 13, 2011
EMMA HARVAT HALL
T1 =10 -11
IP6
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, William Downing, Pam Michaud,
Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner
MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrew Litton, David McMahon, Ginalie Swaim, Dana Thomann,
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Chery Peterson
OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Royce Chestnut, Erica Damman, Rebecca Routh, Mark Russo
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
None.
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Trimble called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA;
There was none.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
518 Ronalds Street.
Peterson said this could have been a consent agenda item, but staff wanted to bring it to the Commission for
discussion, because staff would like to know if removal of non - significant chimneys could be one of the pre -
approved minor review items. Michaud agreed that a chimney that is falling apart should not have to be considered
by the Commission.
Wagner stated that the criteria for minor review of the demolition of a chimney should probably be for a chimney
that is at the back of the house and is not architecturally significant. Miklo said staff would add that to the list of
minor or intermediate review approval items.
Regarding this particular chimney, Miklo said it is not really highly visible from the street, it is deteriorated, and it
does not have any decorative brickwork, so staff would recommend approval of the demolition.
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 518 Ronalds
Street as presented in the application. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0,
(Litton McMahon, Swaim, and Thomann absent).
713 N. Lucas Street.
Peterson said this is a project for which the owner would like to replace the front door and to do something to even
out the appearance of the foundation. She showed a photograph of the foundation and said the west elevation has
the same condition. Peterson said the house has a mix of original, textured block and new block. She said the
owner's thought is to somehow stucco over. Peterson said she thinks that may be a bad idea and believes perhaps
the owner should repair the masonry and just paint it, as opposed to covering over cracks that will just come through
the stucco.
Peterson said the guidelines say that an unpainted foundation is recommended to stay unpainted; however, she did
not think that is applicable here. Peterson said that would be more appropriate when there is only a little bit of
foundation showing. She stated that this is a walkout and spans the whole side of the house.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 2
Peterson said the foundation was not properly toothed together, and she does not think it will perform well with the
stucco. Ackerson said he thinks the stucco will work better than what you have there, at least you have done
something about cracks.
Downing asked about the potential of adding exterior insulation and then a siding material to match. Baldridge said
he has seen new houses built with an obviously fake stonework fagade that he thinks would look better in this
position.. Miklo said he guessed the owner would not want to make that kind of investment.
Michaud asked if the owner could have something different on the short, front wall and then maybe put siding on the
taller back walls. Peterson said that on the west side there is a full story that is foundation material. She pointed out
where there is half and then as one comes around to the front, less than two feet, and the carport has maybe four to
six inches of exposed foundation.
Baldridge asked if the owner has consulted a mason. Peterson said she suggested that to the owner.
Miklo said the question before the Commission is whether to approve stucco over a two different block foundation
materials. Michaud suggested the Commission give the owner some options, since there are not strong opinions
about it. Peterson said she thought the paint would be affordable but wouldn't cover up the masonry problems so
that they could still be fixed.
Peterson said that the front door is also part of the proposal. Peterson said the owner was wavering between
replacing the door with a new door and getting rid of the storm or just leaving the current door in place and getting a
new storm door. She said this is something that can usually be approved by staff and chair. Michaud said that a half
light door would be appropriate, and Peterson agreed.
Trimble said it is difficult to frame a motion without knowing what the owner's price point is. Miklo said the owner
is proposing stucco, unless the Commission is offering another alternative. He said the question is therefore if the
Commission would object to having stucco put over the two block materials.
Michaud asked if there is any kind of stucco board to go over insulation. Downing said that one can buy stucco that
goes over insulation; it's called exterior insulating finish system. He said that one can by four by eight sheets of
foam and screw those into the block, and then use a fiberglass mesh and plaster it with two to three layers of EFIS.
He said that it needs to be done properly to avoid moisture problems.
Peterson said if EFIS is used the owner would have to come up with a detail where the siding meets the EFIS on the
foundation, because the foundation is going to be thicker than the clapboard wall. She said she does not know how
it meets at grade. Downing said one can do insulation below grade, but it would change the type of insulation.
Miklo suggested stuccoing the new concrete block and leaving the older block as it is, as an alternative. Trimble
said she is not opposed to stuccoing the old block, because it would not look any worse, but she did not think it
would necessarily look any better either. Peterson said there would still be a patchwork of different surfaces.
Michaud said that at least now, the surfaces are the same shape. She stated that if one adds stucco, it is going to be
solid and a lot pointier than the faux stone.
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 713 N. Lucas
Street as presented in the application, with the following conditions: the owner provide product information
for the new front door(s) for approval by Chair and staff, and, if the owner does not paint the foundation,
that the owner provide product information for stucco product and application methods for approval by
Chair and staff. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0, (Litton, McMahon, Swaim,
and Thomann absent).
427 Clark Street.
Peterson said this property is in the Clark Street Conservation District, and the applicant was available to answer
questions. Peterson showed the street facing the side of the house and the back side of the house.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 3
Peterson said this is an addition project. She said the roof of the one -story component would be removed so that a
second story can be added up from the existing addition on the back, and the new addition, the one -story shed roof,
would also be added. Peterson showed a sketch of the project and views of the house the way it is now.
Peterson said her main concern is that she has not seen the trim work details that would match the existing house,
especially the molding at the corner and over the window head. Miklo said staff's recommendation would be for
approval, as long as those details match. Peterson said that what has been designed is appropriate, and the
proportions seem correct. She said the proposal is for cedar siding and metal clad wood windows and a wood door.
Damman, one of the owners of the house, said that this house was known as the murder house on the street, and she
is doing her best to have it not be known as that. She said that in the spring, they will try to put back on the porch
that was originally on the house. Damman said the drawings really don't show the wood trim described by Peterson,
but they agree with matching the trim.
Baldridge asked about the porch. Damman said that in the spring, she would like to come in with a proposal to put a
full porch on.
Michaud asked if the Commission should give a fiber cement board option if cedar is unavailable. Wagner asked if
the siding has a four -inch reveal. Chestnut said that it is anywhere from three and one -half to five. Michaud asked
if each side is different. Damman responded that it varies, because some of the boards might be spread out and
some might be a little bit skinny, but on average it is four.
Wagner said that across the last row, it is four inches. He said that over 16 boards, one can change it perhaps an
inch to get four across the top. Wagner said that the siding is correct on the main building, so on the addition, one
will want to watch that. Peterson replied that the owners will have to watch it, because this is meeting up; it's in the
same wall plane, so they'll have to get it to match.
MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 427 Clark
Street as presented in the application, with the following condition: trim at new walls, windows and door, and
materials at new eaves will match those of the existing historic house. Baldridge seconded the motion. The
motion carried on a vote of 7 -0 (Litton McMahon Swaim, and Thomann absent).
822 Rundell Street.
Peterson said this property is in the Dearborn Street Conservation District. She showed a view of the front of the
house and said the proposed addition would be on the rear.
Peterson said the owners plan to match the siding and the windows on the addition. She said they will be unable to
match the roof pitch and the roofing materials. Peterson said the new roof will have a very flat pitch with a
membrane -type roofing. She said it might be the best solution to tie into the steep roof without ruining the dormer
that is already there.
Peterson said the one concern she has is that the porch is projecting out farther than the laundry/bath, and yet the
roof is projecting out the same amount. She said that where the edge of the porch is, that much roof overhead seems
appropriate, but the roof overhang at the laundry room is at least four feet or more. Miklo said that might be a
mistake in the drawing.
Routh, the owner of the house, said she did not think this is a four -foot projection. Peterson said it is actually scaled
quite deep so that she wondered if the beam and column could be repeated or else the roof pulled back so that there
would not be the same fascia line at the laundry room as at the screened portion. She said there would be a couple
of ways to deal with that.
Routh said she had suggested going out further, Russo, her contractor, thought that would be less likely to be
approved and that the symmetry would be better. Routh said Russo had thought that could be part of the enclosed
porch.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 4
Russo said the whole structure is twelve feet deep, and the laundry room is eight feet deep. Peterson said the same
roof is over the whole space. Russo confirmed this but said it can be changed. He said his idea was to have a sort of
portico area for storage or sitting. Peterson asked if there would be another corner post and beam then.
Russo said he thinks he may have intended to cut that roof back to allow light in there. He said that it would
actually step back. Baker asked if it would be matched out then, and Russo confirmed this. Peterson asked if the
roof edge would then match the building edge, with as much overhang, and Russo agreed.
Michaud said she was encouraging the functionality of the addition. Peterson said that one could either pull the
addition out to the same wall plane as the porch or push the roof back on the laundry room. Routh asked if both
conditions could be approved, and then she and her contractor could discuss them.
Russo said that he did not know about increasing the addition. He said that becomes the enclosed part, so that would
become a pretty significant structure then that might look a little odd. Russo said he understands the concern about
the roof line and thinks it would make sense to either continue the roofline over and create kind of a portico or to
step it back. He said that to increase the depth of the bump out on this solid addition would look odd. Russo said
that if he did that, he would prefer to enlarge it, but he did not really want to do that, because the entire purpose of
this was to create a screened -in addition that evolved into a joint laundry/bathroom.
Peterson said she feels that the proportions are right and that they are holding it back from the corners of the existing
house. She said that except for the roof overhang, everything seems to be compliant.
MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 822 Rundell
Street as presented in the application, with the following condition: provide final drawing of new roof for
review, and possibly if the owner wants to think about the other option, considering the budget or other
capabilities and time schedule, for approval by Chair and staff. Wagner seconded the motion. The motion
carried on a vote of 7 -0 (Litton McMahon Swaim, and Thomann absent).
Miklo asked to clarify the intent of the motion — if it is for approval as shown, with the roof notched back, or a larger
addition. Michaud said it was to enclose a possible larger area for a bath, if the owner finds that more functional
after all.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY STAFF AND CHAIR:
Peterson stated that this information is available in the packet and asked if anyone had additional comments.
DISCUSS FEMA MOA:
Miklo said that is item is on the Commission's agenda because the Commission was asked by FEMA to have a
public meeting to seek comment on the potential demolition of Sabin School and the fraternity building at 109 River
Street. This was part of the Section 106 review, which requires when federal funds are used to damage or destroy a
National Register eligible property attempts to mitigate the damage should be made. That meeting was held on
August I I(the Commission had further discussions at the September 8 meeting). He said the Commission sent back
a list of suggested, projects that could mitigate the loss of those historic buildings.
For the school, Miklo said the Commission's priority was activity that would further promote the preservation of
Longfellow and Horace Mann, the other two historic school buildings designed by the same architect and built in the
same year. He said Commission had requested funding elevators for those schools and the Commission also was
interested in the possibility of listing Horace Mann School on the National Register. The Commission also suggested
a facilities study focusing on the issues of maintaining the two schools in the long run.
Miklo said FEMA took the Commission's and other public comments into account and came back with the proposal
that is on the agenda. He said FEMA felt the elevator would be too expensive for them to fund. He said they did
propose providing the School District with funding to study heating and air conditioning energy efficiency
improvements to Longfellow School, as well as providing funding for the listing of Horace Mann School on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 5
Miklo said that someone from the Northside Neighborhood asked if the same study regarding energy efficiency
should also apply to Horace Mann School. He said that was passed on to FEMA, which said it would study the
design so that both schools would be addressed for energy efficiency.
He said he received a call from FEMA's representative today asking that the Commission table discussion or
suggest alternative mitigating projects that FEMA might fund. Baldridge asked why the change? Miklo stated that
FEMA indicated that the School District has not agreed to those provisions and had asked that it not be part of the
Memorandum of Agreement. He said that FEMA therefore has asked that the issue be tabled for the Commission to
discuss at its November meeting, finding alternative mitigating measures for the loss of Sabin School or that some
other suggestions be offered at this evening's meeting.
Miklo said that FEMA is looking for broad ideas for what would mitigate the loss of Sabin School. Baldridge
asked why the School District did not wish to participate in the agreement. Miklo did not know.
Burford said that the draft MOA was written to say, "...if the school is demolished." She asked if there was any
information regarding that. Miklo said it is his understanding that the current plans are to demolish the Sabin School
but that may change.
Miklo said the Commission's decision is to either table this discussion to its next meeting or come up with some
alternatives mitigating measures. Trimble suggested tabling the issue to give the Commission some time to think
about the matter.
Baker said it would be interesting to know what the School Districts objection to the proposal is. She asked if the
School District did not want to be part of this at all or if it wanted the Commission to come up with a better way to
preserve the other two schools. Baker said it is difficult to come up with alternatives, not knowing what the School
District issues are.
Miklo responded that apparently the School District did not want to be part of the agreement at all. Baldridge
suggested it would be an advantage to the School District. Ackerson said not being part of the agreement would
make it easier for the schools to be torn down. Trimble asked if there was no objection from the School District to
putting Horace Mann on the National Register. Miklo said the message he received from FEMA is that the School
District is not comfortable entering into the agreement at all. He did not know what the District's concerns are.
MOTION: Baker moved to table discussion of the FEMA Memorandum of Agreement to the Commission's
next meeting in November. Ackerson seconded the motion.
Wagner asked if there should be a subcommittee to come up with alternative ideas. Miklo said the question is what
other historic preservation activities in the community not involving the School District could mitigate the loss of
the Sabin School building. Baker said she recalled from the original discussion that most of the ideas related to the
school buildings.
Baldridge said that, from a preservation standpoint, he is not willing to give into the School Board that easily.
Ackerson agreed. Baldridge said it is for the benefit of the community to get something out of the demolition of
Sabin School. This was an opportunity for the School District to receive federal funding to help making its buildings
more useful. Miklo said that would be an issue to bring up before the School Board, not FEMA, because FEMA
cannot force the School District to be part of this MOA.
The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0 (Litton McMahon, Swaim, and Thomann absent).
DISCUSS CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY:
Trimble said there was correspondence regarding Roosevelt Elementary School. Miklo said the issue is how the
Commission would like to respond to the correspondence. He asked if the Commission wanted to put energy into
studying Roosevelt School further, given the Commission's other activities and resources.
Miklo said it is his understanding that the School District is offering the property for sale. He added that any use of
the property that is not for a public institution will require a change to the Comprehensive Plan and a rezoning so
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 6
that there will be a public process regarding the use of the building. Miklo said that whether the building will be
preserved or not has yet to be determined.
Trimble said it is a difficult issue in that this would be a big loss to that neighborhood. She added that the School
Board has already decided that there will not continue to be a school there. Trimble said she was told that
foundation repair would cost $800,000 or more, so it is unlikely that anyone else would use the building for
anything.
Baldridge said the building has not been maintained. He said that it was inadequate, they planned to enlarge it, but
they didn't.
Miklo said this probably does deserve some sort of response. He suggested a letter to the effect that the Commission
recognizes that this may be an historic building but does not have the resources to nominate it or study it further.
Miklo said as an alternative, the letter could give a list of sources to apply to for funding to study.
Wagner suggested this could be one of the mitigation efforts by FEMA, since the School District is selling the
property. Miklo said the School District is the current owner, so mitigation efforts would require its approval.
Trimble said that being on the National Register would not stop the property from being sold or the building
demolished. She stated that only a local designation would do that.
Baldridge said that the real estate where Roosevelt School is located is an extremely valuable property. He said he
is a little reluctant to deny the School Board, because it does need funds. Baldridge said the building has sort of
been botched up already.
Miklo suggested that the Commission chair send a letter acknowledging the concerns regarding Roosevelt but
stating that, given the limited resources, there is not much the Commission can do about it at this point. That was
also the consensus of the Commission.
Michaud said the letter should thank those who corresponded for the work done on this. Trimble said the letter
could also relate that National Register listing would not necessarily save the building from demolition.
DISCUSS NOMINATIONS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARDS:
Trimble said the awards ceremony would be held on Friday, November 18`h' at 5:30 p.m.
Peterson presented slides of properties to be considered for awards and discussed the categories. Miklo said the
subcommittee met and selected the properties from a larger list. He said they are being presented to the Commission
to confirm that the Commission wants to bestow awards on all of them.
Regarding the awards, Trimble suggested acknowledging Christina Kuecker, who is the former planner for the
Commission, or giving her an award for the work she did for historic preservation. Miklo said there is a Margaret
Nowysz Award that is not given every year, but the Commission may want to consider it this year. The consensus
of the Commission was to present the award to Kuecker.
Peterson showed the properties nominated for awards for exterior paint, residential stewardship, rehabilitation,
commercial rehabilitation, new work, and special recognition categories.
Trimble pointed out that awards are also given out for interior work, which is not something that would come before
the Commission. She added that last year, if owners used salvaged or recycled materials, their certificates had a
green star to recognize that.
Miklo said that letters will be sent to the property owners asking if they want to accept their awards and asking if
they want to have their contractors acknowledged as well.
Burford asked about the Van Patton House that was heavily damaged in the recent fire. Miklo said Kevin Monson is
aware that it is a landmark building and will require review by the Commission. Miklo said the guidelines state that
if the owner can demonstrate that the building is structurally unsound and irretrievable, then the Commission may
Historic Preservation Commission
October 13, 2011
Page 7
issue a demolition permit. Miklo said that would involve review of the replacement building before the demolition
permit is issued.
Michaud asked how tall that building and the Bruegger's building could be if replaced and if they could be as tall as
the Moen Building. Miklo confirmed that they could be six stories or possibly taller, but the sites may not be
conducive to taller buildings, because they are so narrow and small. He said that in terms of height, the airport
overlay limits downtown heights to about twelve stories. Miklo added that the Bruegger's building is not a
designated building so that the Commission cannot do more than make suggestions for that location.
Regarding the house at 332 -336 South Governor Street, Wagner said that he found out earlier in the day that the
Commission did not discuss the back window at 336. Miklo asked if that had been in the plans. Wagner responded
that he thought all of that had come up, but the Commission was focusing on the removal of the chimney at 332
South Governor. He said he thinks it was an oversight and should be corrected.
Peterson stated that the Commission just reviewed new steps at the front porch and some railing and support of the
foundation at the back porch, but nothing about windows. Wagner said the builder is under time constraints to finish
the kitchen and asked if the Commission could convene a special meeting. Miklo said that the Commission cannot
approve something that is not on the agenda, because it would violate the open meetings law.
Commission members agreed to meet on Monday the 17`h at 5:15 in the Planning Conference Room for a second
meeting.
Burford asked if FEMA did not anticipate that the Commission would have any comments regarding the proposal
about the old Art School Building. Miklo said he thought the reason FEMA brought the other projects to the
Commission's attention is that they are within the Commission's jurisdiction. He said that because the old Art
School is on the University campus, it was not put before the Commission.
Michaud said that for the Monday meeting, the Commission might want to discuss a rezoning proposal near College
Green Park. Miklo replied that that particular item will come before the Commission as an agenda item, so the
Commission should probably not talk about it in any detail. He added that the proposed zoning change for
Washington and Johnson Streets is for property in a conservation district so that anything built on the property will
need to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Miklo said the appropriate time to talk
about that will therefore be when a proposal is submitted. He said that anything built on that property will require
the Commission's review, whether under the current zoning or any future zoning.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 8,2011:
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's September 8,
2011 meeting with the correction that the male voice should be amended to Wagner. Ackerson seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7 -0 (Litton McMahon Swaim, and Thomann absent).
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
s/pcd/mins /hpc /2011 /hpc10 -13 -11
z
O
N
O�
UO
ZU
Ow
Qw�
U
W Q N
W °
(1) z
LU W
w�-
a�
UQ
O
I--
U)
2
E
0
0
0
0 0
z
X C.0
0 0
_ c (D
c o E 0
0 a�
2 -0QZ o
Q 11 II z
uwgn
xo'oz
M
o
x
x
x
x
LLJ
0
ui
0
x
LLJ
—
O
LU
—
O
x
x
r
co
o
x
x
o LU
x
x
x
x
x
LU
o
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
LLI
0
x
x
w
0
c
x
x
LLJ
0
x
x
o
x
x
LLJ
0
x
x
M
w
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
X
LU
O
x
x
x
x
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
M
X
X
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
X
CD
X
X
X
-
X
X
O
O
O
X
X
N
X
X
O
X
X
X
X
x
a
x
LJJ
C
LV
M
0')
N
\
M
't
0')
N
\
M
N
CY)
N
\
M
M
0)
N
\
M
[t
CY)
N
\
M
d'
M
N
\
M
N
M
N
\
('7
N
m
N
\
M
d
o)
N
\
cY)
M
0)
N
\
M
N
N
\
M
H
�
z
Y
D
Y
Q
cQ
G
=
LL
o
�
m
=
f-
w
Y
m
J
z
Z
�
°
w
°
a
z=
0
J
°
Q
°
o
Q
a
c
a
J
z
N
Q
Q
°
Z
Q
H
U
Q
ui
m
F-
Y
Q
LL
z
E
0
0
0
0 0
z
X C.0
0 0
_ c (D
c o E 0
0 a�
2 -0QZ o
Q 11 II z
uwgn
xo'oz
IP7
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 17, 2011
PCD CONFERENCE ROOM
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Thomas Baldridge, Andrew Litton, David McMahon, Pam Michaud,
Ginalie Swaim, Dana Thomann, Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner
MEMBERS ABSENT: Esther Baker, William Downing
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo
OTHERS PRESENT:
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action)
None.
CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Trimble called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA;
There was none.
CONSENT AGENDA:
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS:
332 S. Governor Street.
Wagner, the contractor for the project, said (tape starts in mid sentence — something about the remaining one —
something — of the two other rooms that go out the back. He said it is not original to anything, except maybe the
third 1970s addition.
Miklo said the report sent out by Peterson found that this meets the guidelines.
MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 332 South
Governor Street to approve the closing of two windows on the north side of the addition with the siding
information for the shingles and siding to be reviewed and approved. McMahon seconded the motion.
Wagner said that with that siding, which is aluminum, he did find some aluminum siding up underneath the second
addition, which was done in the 30s, which (something like he could take off and match the aluminum siding).
Regarding the shed porch on the south side of the 332 building, Wagner said he had talked previously about
removing some of the siding that is on there about one third of the way up. He said it is rotted and deteriorated.
Wagner said the certificate of appropriateness states that the owner could replace some of the siding that is on the
house shed.
Wagner said that, when the siding is removed to be repaired or replaced, the shed is not part of the original house.
He said that the siding and the window that are inside that little shed porch is the exterior wall. Wagner said that if
one were to take off the aluminum siding above the one part and all the way around, it would probably uncover the
original stucco on the building.
Wagner said he is asking that if the siding is removed and it looks as if the porch would look better without siding
on it, if it could maybe just have three posts. He said that is the southern exposure, and that shed doesn't allow the
southern light to come into the dining room and the kitchen. Wagner said he would put siding on if he has to, but if
he takes it off and decides there could be three columns that would support the porch roof, it might be nicer to just
leave it open and it might look more like a porch.
Historic Preservation Commission
October 17, 2011
Page 2
Wagner said he thinks it would look more appropriate to the age of the house to put three turned columns on that
and perhaps a railing to match. He said then there would not have to be a storm door on a room where the outside
temperature and inside temperature are the same.
Wagner said he is requesting that if the siding is removed, which the certificate of appropriateness allows, if it is
feasible, to not put the siding back on and leave it as an open porch. He said there would be turned columns to
match the house, rather than just leaving studs there. Wagner said the storm window and door would be removed,
and it would be an open porch. He said the other aspect would be to close the two windows on the north side.
AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION: Baldridge moved to amend the motion to allow the option of
opening up the porch with the design of the exterior components of the porch to be approved by staff and
chair. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0 -1 (Baker and Downing absent
and Wagner abstaining).
336 S. Governor Street.
Wagner showed the rear of 336 South Governor, where the kitchen is being renovated as part of the
University /neighborhood project. He showed the east side /rear door of the house, which is going to receive a new
door that will be a half light, like the one that is on the side door of the foursquare.
Wagner showed the window that the design has proposed for removal to provide for a wall of cabinets. Miklo said
it would not have been unusual for a rear porch to just have a door. Wagner said that he would match the siding
material with cedar siding with the same four -inch reveal.
Wagner said he already has approval to replace the three pillars below. He said it is probably the type of columns he
would match next door at 332 S. Governor Street.
MOTION: McMahon moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an application for 336 S.
Governor Street to approve closing the window on the east side under the porch. Baldridge seconded the
motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8 -0 -1 (Baker and Downing absent and Wagner abstaining).
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte
s /pcd/mins /hpc /hpc10- 17- 11.doc
Z
O
N
N
O
U
Z
O
H
Q
w
N
w
w
a
U
O
N
2
O
U
W
w
W
U r'
Z°
Q N
Z
w
H
Q
E
0
0
'0d
0 0
3 Z
U 00)
X
� N N
Em
Z
<t 0
Q 11 Z
n n w
XOOZ t
i
w
Y
Q
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
M
c
X
X
X
X
O
X
O
O
X
X
r
Co
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
0
co
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ti
0
X
0
X
X
0
X
X
0
X
0
V-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
X
O
LA
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
d
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
X
X
X
0
X
X
O
O
O
X
X
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r
a
X
w
w
M
N
\
M
N
\
M
N
N
\
M
M
N
\
M
d'
N
\
C7
ct
N
\
M
N
N
\
M
N
N
\
M
et
N
\
C�
M
-
N
\
CO
N
N
\
m
H
Q
w
Q
Y
z
O
U
H
ui
Q
w
~
W
Q
J
z
Z
Z
O
w
Z
Q
Z
O
Q
Q
a
p
Q
U
J
z
C9
�_
Q
Q
Q
Z
O
U
Q
LLf
m
Y
Q
LL
OE
Z
Q
E
0
0
'0d
0 0
3 Z
U 00)
X
� N N
Em
Z
<t 0
Q 11 Z
n n w
XOOZ t
i
w
Y
MINUTES
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011 — 6:30 PM
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL
AWM
PRELIMINARY
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Chappell, Cheryll Clamon, Jarrod Gatlin, Holly Jane Hart,
Charles Drum, Michael McKay
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bacon Curry, Scott Dragoo, Rachel Zimmermann Smith
STAFF PRESENT: Tracy Hightshoe, Jeff Vanatter, David Purdy
OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Dostal, Emily Schettler, Jessica Hook, Mark Patton, Christine
Scheetz, Beth Ritter Ruback, Maryann Dennis
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL:
Recommendation to increase the priority level for transportation services in the 2011 -2015 CITY
STEPS Plan from a medium to a high priority. Motion approved 6 -0.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Michael McKay at 6:30 p.m.
APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 MINUTES:
Chappell noted two corrections for the minutes.
Chappell moved to approve the minutes.
Gatlin seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 5 -0 (Chappell, Clamon, Drum, Gatlin, McKay,
Hart absent).
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
Hart arrives.
STAFF /COMMISSION COMMENT:
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011
PAGE 2 of 6
Hightshoe updated the commission about the Broadway Condos project. The pre - construction
meeting was held and the project will begin shortly. Hightshoe stated she had sent the invite to
all commission members, but as a reminder all commission members are invited to the
retirement reception for the City's Assistant City Manager, Dale Helling. He has been with the
City for over 30 years.
PUBLIC MEETING:
Annual Review of the 2011— 2015 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a CITY STEPS)
• Discussion of the 2011— 2015 Consolidated Plan
McKay stated that staff summarized the comments received and this summary was in the packet.
A few of the HCDC members attended one or more of the input sessions. This year, public input
was sought at a Grant Wood PTO meeting, the senior center and at a Restorative Justice meeting
at the Broadway Police Substation. There were also three comments emailed to staff. These
were also included in your packets.
Chappell moved to accept correspondence from Mr. Mark Patton.
Clamon seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
Hightshoe stated that every year staff and HCDC solicit input from the community and
completes an annual review of the City's Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. 2011 -2015 CITY
STEPS).The Plan is reviewed to ensure that the City's goals and priorities have not changed
during the Plan's 5 year period. Hightshoe reminded commission members that just because a
need is identified as a low or medium priority, it does not mean it is not needed in the
community. It may be considered a low or medium priority as there may be other funds better
suited to meet this need or the city /community has already invested heavily in a facility.
Identifying priority needs are important as when commission members decide what will be
funded during the allocation process, high priorities are reviewed first and if funding remains,
medium priorities are reviewed and then low priorities if sufficient funding remains.
The Commission should compare the input received to the priorities identified in CITY STEPS
and determine if any changes are needed. If no changes are recommended, then we conclude the
annual review of CITY STEPS. If changes are recommended, HCDC makes a recommendation
to the City Council.
McKay asked for any public comments.
Mark Patton, Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity, highlighted housing concerns. Patton stated
the need to help people stay in their homes is huge. The elderly and disabled need assistance to
stay in their homes with rehab, weatherization and accessibility improvements. The cost of
utilities is too much for many low income homeowners in poorly insulated homes. Habitat
received a $74,000 grant to do weatherization, but there needs to be more funds. Another
concern is the loss of mobile homes as an affordable option to many. There was a report done
two years ago that showed 3,000 mobile homes in the county and about 500 of them do not meet
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011
PAGE 3 of 6
building code. The secondary market that normally financed the purchase of mobile homes
doesn't exist anymore. Any time a mobile home burns down or deteriorates that home will not
be replaced. Patton asked that as the mobile home courts slowly wind down, the city should
encourage more affordable housing options to replace them and possible reuse of mobile home
courts.
Patton stated that there was a hand out regarding the high energy cost. He stated that the serious
issue should be contemplated locally and there could be tax incentives to improve the green
quality of the commercial buildings in the area. The net savings of energy would be greater than
the increased costs in taxes. Patton stated there is cheap money out there due to low interest
rates. Patton stated he could get two and half percent money for seven years and there are a lot
of creative uses for affordable housing. The final point is support for the UniverCity Program
that will rehabilitate 25 homes in downtown neighborhoods to be sold to income eligible
households. He wonders if there are more homes that could be rehabilitated and sold with
cooperation for there are many older homes near employment centers could be regained and not
lost.
McKay asked for discussion or questions. There was none.
Jessica Hook stated that she came to learn more and to give her local perspective. She just
learned about the CDBG rehab program by reading about the meetings in the local paper. Hook
stated that her family lives under the 80% medium income limit. She stated she lived on the
eastside in the Mark Twain neighborhood and has purchased her home. The homes in the area
are mostly over 50 years old. She thinks that it is great that people are buying the homes and
rehabilitating them. Owner - occupied rehabilitation is an important need in our older
neighborhoods. Hightshoe stated that staff has considered targeted areas for the owner occupied
rehab. program. This has been done in the past and could be considered again in certain
neighborhoods.
Chappell asked Mark Patton if he had any suggested changes or did he just want to bring
attention to the issues he identified. Patton stated that he wanted to raise awareness.
There was discussion about the current high priorities in CITY STEPS. Chappell stated that staff
will identify the main priority the application addresses. Hart suggested changing transportation
to a high priority, currently a medium priority. Chappell asked how many transportation related
applications were received. Hightshoe stated it is not common to get transportation applications
due to the expense and how much we have available under the public service cap. Eligible
activities would include cab vouchers or vehicle purchases. We typically have less than $15,000
to allocate, thus it is not funded often. This past year, due to the amount of program income we
had, we did get two applications for the purchase of vans for non - profit agencies. Hart stated
she realized that the commission couldn't fund much regarding transportation, but that
transportation is often identified as a huge need and the commission should recognize that the
need is great.
Chappell asked if Hart wanted to change the priority from medium to high. Hart confirmed that
was correct. Chappell stated that the CITY STEPS is primarily for CDBG /HOME. He stated he
was unsure what changing it would do because it was primarily for the Commission's use. Hart
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011
PAGE 4 of 6
stated that the document identifies needs in the community and is a planning document used by
more than just the commission. She didn't feel it would hurt to have the need identified as a high
priority as it is often documented as a large obstacle for low income residents. Hightshoe stated
that city staff and organizations outside the city review CITY STEPS and will include narrative
and identified priorities in their grant applications to other funding sources such as IDOT and
other federal agencies. The Johnson County Metropolitan Planning Organization was interested
in the feedback concerning suggested transportation routes to employment centers and level of
interest by potential riders. They will investigate if grant funding could be used for a route from
the Broadway /Lakeside areas to the industrial park. Chappell asked what it would take to change
a priority level. Hightshoe stated that the Commission would need to make a recommendation to
Council to change a priority from medium to high and then it would have to go through an
annual action plan amendment. There would be a 30 day public comment period and then it
would go to Council for a public hearing. The Council could approve the amendment at that
time. Chappell stated he did not have an issue with changing it from medium to high.
Drum moved to change the priority from medium to high priority for transportation
services.
Clamon seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
McKay asked if there were any other changes that the Commission would like to recommend.
Gatlin stated that he was fine with changing the level of transportation but there was a lot of
work put into the writing of it. He stated that he felt that if they were to look at others than other
needs could be changed and it may turn in to what it once was - where everything was a high
priority.
DISCUSSION OF THE FY13 CDBG /HOME APPLICATION MATERIALS:
McKay stated there was a small committee of Commissioners that worked to review the
applications and evaluation criteria. Chappell stated that the evaluation criteria was modified to
allow commission members to rate based on a range and that a few application questions were
changed to complement the evaluation criteria. If an important component in the evaluation
criteria there should be a question that directly rates to that criteria and the applicant should make
the case for their project.
Drum stated that the changes have made a big improvement. McKay asked the Commission to
take the time to look it over and make any suggestions if needed. Hightshoe stated that formal
approval happens at the November meeting. Chappell asked if there were concerns to email the
subcommittee as soon as possible.
UPDATE ON FY12 PROJECTS — CDBG PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT ENTERED A
FORMAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF IOWA CITY:
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011
PAGE 5 of 6
Hightshoe stated there was an error in the agenda as it is the FY12 projects that must be
reviewed. City Council policy requires CDBG recipients to enter an agreement with the City
within 90 days of July 1, thus by Sept. 30 There are three agencies that have not entered a formal
agreement with the City. Hightshoe reviewed the three agencies. Neighborhood Centers of
Johnson County does not own the Pheasant Ridge Center and thus the property owner, Mark IV,
must grant approval first. The agreement is ready and waiting the property owner's consent.
Staff anticipates approval as it has been done in the past, but it is a time consuming process as
must go through their legal department and it takes time. Old Brick has not entered an
agreement yet. The agreement is ready, just waiting their Board President to come in and sign.
Systems Unlimited has not entered an agreement and has not responded to staff s emails /call if
they will proceed. The Commission can vote to make a recommendation to Council to
reallocate the money or there can be conditions set. Chappell stated that he did not have a
problem waiting another month but suggested that in another message or letter sent to Systems
and Old Brick the applicant should be notified if there is no communication or they are unable to
enter an agreement by the November HCDC meeting, the commission will recommend the
reallocation of those funds.
Hightshoe stated that there are agreements that have not been entered for the FYI I special
allocation, but staff was the reason for the delay as some projects are not ready to proceed or had
mitigating circumstances such as Habitat. The land they wanted to purchase was found to have a
history of petroleum contamination. Staff required a Phase I environmental assessment before
proceeding with an agreement in case a different site was needed.
MONITORING REPORTS:
• FY12 Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program — Rental Housing
• Iowa City Free Medical Clinic —FYI I Far ade Improvements & FY12 Operations
• FYI I Johnson County Ag. Extension — BBBS New Construction
• FY11 Arc of Southeast Iowa - Equipment
Hart stated that Big Brothers Big Sisters' new building is done and they are in the new facility.
The Community Development Celebration was there this year. The contractor received final
payment. It's a very nice facility. The Free Medical Clinic fagade work will start in November.
The pharmacy case management product care is seeing more and more people. With over 200
clients seen in the first quarter and the numbers increasing and they are seeing old clients as well
as new.
Mayor's Youth Employment rental housing purchased their first lot and construction started in
September. It is expected to be done by December 1" and the second house will be started this
spring.
The Are of Southeast Iowa purchased and installed the play equipment.
ADJOURNMENT:
Drum made a motion to adjourn. Clamon seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0
z
O
U)
O
U
z
W
2
CL
O
J
W
W
z
Uo
0
Q0
N p
U W
U) O w
°oCL
z
O
U)
U)
O
U
F-
z
Wp
CL v
OW
wIx
W W �-
pUo
QN
zz
=C z
G F-
Oa
U
z
a
C7
z
N
U U
U �
x .� E
W
c
N Q) c�
o �Qzo
z
n n ii n
Y x O z I
0
c
Lij
0
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
0
r
x
x
o
x
x
x
x
o
x
o�
-
co
x
x
x
x
x
0
x
x
x
x
N
x
x
x
x
LLI
o
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
M
-
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
ti
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
N
`-e
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
CL
LU
ct
NN
N
CD
It
C) N
M
N
C7
N
O
M
O
It
O
O
N
O
H
J
W
J
(�
a
z
LLJ
V
V
z
s x
m
Lu
Q
J
w
a
U
J
O
a
U
N
O
O
w
a
O
p0
a
z
a
O
W
Q
J
s
=
w
2
W
w
a
ME
Q
2
a
w
m
N
U U
U �
x .� E
W
c
N Q) c�
o �Qzo
z
n n ii n
Y x O z I
Preliminary Minutes
October 2011
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
OCTOBER 20, 2011
ROOM 208, IOWA CITY /JOHNSON COUNTY SENIOR CENTER
Members Present: Sara Maiers, Chuck Felling, Michael Lensing,
Merce Bern -Klug, Daniel Benton
Members Absent: Jay Honohan, Michael Lensing
Staff Present: Linda Kopping, Kristin Kromray
Others Present: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 PM. Felling chaired the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM September 15.2011 MEETING:
Motion: To accept the minutes from the September 15, 2011 meeting.
Motion carried on a vote of W. Maiers/Bem -Klug.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
COMMISSION ASSIGNMENTS:
Honohan will attend the next Johnson County Board of Supervisors and the next
City Council meeting.
STEERING COUNCIL REPORT:
Felling reported that the Membership Committee has started a "group of the
month" bulletin board.
The Community Outreach group finalized the new Senior Center brochure. They
have been printed and are now available. The Center Ambassadors group, which
Preliminary Minutes
October 2011
goes out into the community to speak about the Senior Center, has had a
number of recent engagements.
30TH ANNIVERSARY PROGRESS REPORT:
Kopping reported that the film festival was a success. The Alloy Orchestra event
at the Englert was very successful with over 500 people attending.
The Senior Center hosted an open house the last week of September. Interested
people were able to try out the membership facilities for free during the week.
The Senior Center will be holding a Mac and Cheese Fundraising Dinner on
October 21't. This event is being sponsored by Hills Bank and supported by the
Blackstone. Tickets are $5 in advance, $7 at the door. People will receive a
serving of Blackstone mac and cheese, a drink and a homemade desert. The
Senior Center is promoting this event with a table at the I -Club breakfast, an
insert in the water bill, and a KCRG Mugshot promotion, in addition to selling
tickets at the same time as the Senior Center quilt raffle. The Center will also be
raffling tickets to win a Iowa Hawkeye football that is autographed by Kirk
Ferentz.
REVENUE COMMITTEE REPORT_
Maiers reported that the executive committee met a second time and discussed
raising fees and also having two large fundraisers each year.
Kopping would like to invite the Steering Council Membership Committee to the
next Commission meeting to discuss the raising of membership rates.
In December Kopping would like to invite the entire membership to be involved in
a conversation about raising fees.
PERATIONAL OVERVIEW:
Kopping reported that part of this year's budget planning process included
submitting a report that included performance measures, accomplishments,
challenges, goals and objectives. The performance measures for the Senior
Center were then compiled and compared with the Madison, Wisconsin Senior
Center. This information was put together by two assistants to the City Manager.
Examples of items compared include operational costs, per capita expenses and
income.
Preliminary Minutes
October 2011
Kopping shared a draft of the performance measure data. Bern -Klug noted one
measure that would be important to know is the per capita cost divided by the
number of Senior Center visits since you do not need to be a member of the
Senior Center to participate in many Senior Center activities.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Bern -Klug mentioned that her term is ending on December 31 at, 2011. She
suggested that someone from the Aging Studies Program at the University still
be involved on the commission.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: To Adjourn. Motion carried on a vote of 510. Klug/Felling.
I ZOOX
11 C j II 11
11 II
ZZDD'U
O O Q 17
(G
a
� �o
M
so
a.
3
m
O m'
o�
cr
N �
O
o
0)
=
0
�
O
m
Ni
t3
ii
t3
Ni
t3
�iV
�3
Div
t3
i
w
Divv
3
Ni
v3
rn
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
5c
N
i
W
W
x
X
m
x
X
l
x
m
o
X
x
m
X
X
l
m
X
y
c
c c
c°
c
c
c
v
a.
m
I
X
m
X
X
l
X
m
I
X
m
X
X
l
x
m
I
X
X
X
m
I
X
X
I
X
m
m
x
X
X
X
0
°
i
a
� �o
M
so
a.
3
m
O m'
o�
cr
N �
O