HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-07-17 Info Packet-Iwo
••�4i CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET
CITY OF 10VWA CITY
www.icgov.org July 17, 2014
IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule
MISCELLANEOUS
IP2 Memo from Neighborhood Outreach Coordinator: Gilbert Court / Highland Court
Neighborhood Update — Spring / Summer 2014
IP3 Memo from Streets Superintendent and Sr. Civil Engr.: Iowa City Pavement Management
System
IP4 String of emails from City staff to Rockne Cole: Source of Housing Authority funds for
proposed Chauncey purchase of five affordable housing units
IP5 Memo from City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show
IP6 Civil Services Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker II - Refuse
IP7 Civil Services Entrance Examination: Treatment Plant Operator — Wastewater Treatment
DRAFT MINUTES
IP8 Charter Review Commission: June 24
IP9 Planning and Zoning Commission: June 19
I1310 Public Art Commission: June 5
#AM11%
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Date
City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP1
Subject to change July 17, 2014
Time
Monday, July 28, 2014 4:00 PM
Tuesday, August 5, 2014
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, November 4, 2014 5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, December 2, 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Tuesday, December 16 2014
5:00 PM
7:00 PM
Meeting
Joint Meeting /Work Session
CANCELLED Work Session Meeting
CANCELLED Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Work Session Meeting
Formal Meeting
Location
Tiffin TBA
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
Emma J. Harvat Hall
•�� CITY OF IOWA CITY IPZ
�..� MEMORANDUM
Date: July 15, 2014
To: Tom Markus, City Manager
From: Marcia Bollinger, Neighborhood Outreach Coordinator
Re: Gilbert Court/Highland Court Neighborhood Update — Spring /Summer 2014
Introduction:
As you may recall, an update was provided to the City Council in March of this year regarding
efforts my office, the police department and Inspection Services had made to address concerns
expressed by area business owners in the Gilbert Ct. /Highland Ct. (GCHC) area about the
addition of agencies being housed at the 1105 Gilbert Ct. building which includes the Free
Lunch Program (FLP), Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP) and the National
Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI). The Crisis Center and Salvation Army have provided
services and resources to low income persons in the area for several years and it was felt that
making additional services available would increase an existing issue with loitering, trespassing,
crime and general deterioration of the area. At the time of that update, there had been few
opportunities to evaluate if additional issues would arise due to the severe winter weather that
area had been experiencing since the building opened in January. This update provides
general observations and activity since the March report as well as upcoming efforts that are
planned.
History /Background:
In March of this year, it was reported to City Council that a "Neighborhood Policy" had been
developed and adopted by all human service agencies operating in the area that established a
no- tolerance approach to loitering /trespassing on their properties. All area businesses were
notified of this policy and encouraged to assist in these efforts by consistently enforcing the
policy on their own properties so as to establish a unified approach for all future operations.
Since March, the weather has warmed up to allow for extended outdoor activity and potential
loitering issues would become more apparent. In the past month, I have contacted the agency
directors /board members to first seek feedback on any experiences they have had with loitering
and how enforcement of the neighborhood policy was progressing. Many of the agencies had
developed written information that was posted and /or distributed to their clients. Some visited
personally with their clients to share the information if that opportunity existed.
Initial reactions are that there have been instances where they have had to enforce the policy —
particularly as it relates to clients arriving early for services and continuing to stay in the area
after receiving those services. The Crisis Center has initiated a 10- minute wait time both before
and after services. The 1105 building is enforcing a 30- minute before and after policy which is
currently under review and may have to be adjusted because of the numerous agencies housed
in the building and the variety of services they provide. All have had to work with their clients to
require that they comply but little police involvement has been necessary.
As was expected, there is an issue with clients who wish to remain in the area between the Free
Lunch Program meal and the evening meal provided by the Salvation Army. There does not
appear to be an issue with establishment of permanent "camps" in secluded areas of the
neighborhood as there had been in previous years.
July 15, 2014
Page 2
I have also worked with the City's Neighborhood Response Office, Rob Cash on pulling up
"calls for service" requests coming from the area. There does not appear to be much change
between 2013 and 2014 for the period March — June except for "suspicious subject" calls
increase in 2014. Because all agencies and businesses in the area have been encouraged to
implement a zero tolerance policy for loitering and trespassing, this increase could be a result of
that proactive approach.
Type of Call
2014
2013
Vagrant
4
3
Welfare Checks
2
0
Suspicious Subject
7
3
Burglary
1
0
Fight in Progress
4
3
Theft
2
3
Public Intox
2
2
Discussion of Solutions:
The upcoming activities that are scheduled for the area include a walk- through with interested
stakeholders from the area with Officer Cash to point out and discuss "problem areas" as well
as meet with Inspection Services to get an update on past property maintenance enforcement
efforts and possibly initiate new if necessary.
A newsletter is being developed that will include information about the appointment of Officer
Cash who will serve as the point person for the police department in these efforts and review of
agency efforts to address potential issues. Additional feedback from all GCHC stakeholders will
be requested. If needed, a meeting will be scheduled to discuss concerns.
The Waterfront Hy -Vee management has changed since the March report but an invitation was
extended to other management staff that my office was willing to assist in any efforts they
wished to make in addressing loitering /trespassing issues. They have made no such request
since that time. Officer Cash will be connecting with them to see if there are additional services
that they might find useful.
Financial Impact:
At this time there are minimal financial impacts aside from additional police and inspection
patrol.
Recommendation:
Continue to have my office work with the GCHC area to monitor the situation, direct City
resources as necessary and continue efforts to maintain communications between all area
stake holders. We will further evaluate expanding efforts in the Waterfront Business Area as
necessary.
Cc: Doug Boothroy, Neighborhood Services and Development Director
Steve Long, Neighborhood Services Coordinator
Rob Cash, Neighborhood Response Officer
Stan Laverman, Senior Housing Inspector
Becci Reedus, Executive Director, Crisis Center
gm
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 15, 2014
TO: Tom Markus, City Manager
FROM: Jon Resler, Streets Superintendent
Dave Panos, Sr. Civil Engineer
RE: Iowa City Pavement Management System
CC: Rick Fosse, Public Works Director
Ron Knoche, City Engineer
Background
The City of Iowa City is moving towards a more scientific and objective approach to managing the City's
pavement with a goal of maximizing the overall pavement condition with the revenue allocated for
roadway improvements. This approach is referred to as pavement management and the City is taking
steps to develop a pavement management system.
The City participates in the Iowa Pavement Management Program. The mission of the Iowa Pavement
Management Program (IPMP) is twofold:
Support the management, planning, and programming needs of transportation agencies
Provide pavement management information, tools, and training for project and network level
activities
IPMP promotes optimal, cost - effective decisions on street maintenance, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction using accurate past and projected pavement conditions. IPMP integrates data collection
and a database to track the condition of pavements. It focuses on local transportation agencies and
provides these agencies with:
• An objective and consistent planning tool to support development of transportation
improvement plans
• Information on pavement condition for individual pavement sections
• Raw pavement distress data from the automated distress collection equipment
• Inventory and history information on roadways
• Training on pavement management software and principles
• Videologging of roadways
A pavement management system has many advantages over past approaches used to determine
pavement maintenance and rehabilitation strategies. It allows us to more efficiently utilize our limited
resources to maximize the condition of the roadway network. Previous approaches to managing
pavements often rested with one individual who took that knowledge with them upon leaving the
IP3
Z
organization. A pavement management system helps keep the knowledge and information within the
organization. It also results in more consistent decisions because it creates a structured and objective
process for evaluating pavements and selecting maintenance and rehabilitation strategies. Lastly, a
pavement management system results in improved roadway network condition.
There are four components to a pavement management system and they are as follows:
• Pavement condition data
• Database (pavement condition data integration with GIS /GPS)
• Pavement performance forecasting
• Decision support tools
Historically, pavement condition data collection was very subjective. Is the roadway in Figure 1 in good
condition? Most would agree it is as they would agree that the roadway in Figure 2 is in poor condition.
However, what about the condition of the roadway in Figure 3? The condition is not so obvious. One
person may say the pavement condition is good while another might call it poor.
Figure 1: Asphalt Roadway —Good Condition
Getting rid of the subjectivity in the pavement condition evaluation process and providing consistant
condition evaluations for pavement like that shown in Figure 3 is done through the use of automated
data collection tools that are a component of the IPMP. The automated pavement data collection tools
are shown in Figure 4.
The pavement condition data is collected as a van outfitted with all the equipment listed in Figure 4
drives the roadways. GPS assigns the pavement condition data to the correct roadway section as it is
located on the earth. The information is then summarized in a database that is linked to a GIS for use in
evaluating the roadway network. The various pavement condition data are then used to calculate a
combined condition index referred to as the pavement condition index (PCI). Road roughness, rutting,
cracking, patching, and faulting are incorporated into the combined index. PCI is calculated separately
for asphalt and concrete pavements on a scale of 0 -100 with 100 being a new street.
b
� $
_`
Figure 2: Asphalt Roadway —Poor Condition
F�
P-9-
e4'...
Figure 3: Asphalt Roadway — What is the Condition?
W vs tioo ys is a fully automated crack
detection system For pavem enl mnditiun
raring_ WiseCrae Telps to remove the rut}
jectivity from pavement evaluation.
Longitudinal Profile -The Lax T SDF-
pmdums a longitudinal pmliie of the mad snr.
face and determines the toughness of the road.
inlernaiioial Roughness Ind. (11Uy aiu3 other
indices are calculated in real-time.
Smart Rutbar is used to calculate the
transverse mad profile to determine the
amount and severity of rutting. Specil
noftwarr caleulahs the will and shim :an-
Mies of asphalt to restore proper crossfall.
Figure 4: Automated Pavement Data Collection Tools
® Right-of-Way Video produces
videoiogs of the roaoad d Hg hla4Way. Up to six
cameras can mcord different peespeelives
(side view• rear view, etc.l simultaneously
and synchroeauAy
Inventory - Keyboard allows technicians
B to recurd pavement condition and roadside
features gush as %!gag, bridges, culverts,
guardrails, grade crossings, etc. LCD key-
caps are programmable to display symbols.
GPS iUobat I'ositioning 5ystem) is used to
♦ • determine the three dimensional coordinates
• in geographic space. GI'5 alno porvides Mi-
L rude /longitude mardinatee of madway Ipa-
r lures to create maps using CAD and GIs
The PCI scale can be compared to a description as follows:
• Very Poor Condition 0 -20
• Poor Condition
20 -40
• Fair Condition
40 -60
• Good Condition
60 -80
• Excellent Condition
80 -100
See Figures 5 -9 for a visual correlation.
Figure 5: Very Poor (PCI 0 -20)
Figure 6: Poor (PCI 20 -40)
Figure 7: Fair (PCI 40 -60)
With the data collected and summarized, the database can be linked to a GIS to assist in the street
network evaluation and project prioritization process. As an example, the network can be queried in GIS
to showthe ranges of PCI as shown in Figure 10.
Figure 10: Pavement Condition Shown in GIS
The City elected to purchase Deighton Total Infrastructure Management System (dTIMS) software
through the IPMP to assist with multi -year project prioritization using pavement performance
forecasting and incremental benefit cost analysis. In other words, dTIMS performs life cycle cost analysis
on the City's pavement sections, looking at projected costs and pavement deterioration to determine
the best maintenance and rehabilitation strategies for each pavement section with regard to budget
constraints. The software generates recommended projects by year, recommended treatments by
project and year, and overall summaries of condition, backlog, treatment cost, and treatment length. It
also provides various graphs that show impacts to the condition of the network over time based on the
amount of money invested in the assets. Figure 11 shows an example of the average network condition
overtime based on the level of investment. Figure 12 shows an example of the length in project backlog
overtime based on the level of investment.
Average Network Condition
70
66
60
66
x
d
v
c
co 60
a
c
0
U
46
40
36
30
Analysis Year
Figure 11: Average Roadway Network Condition Over Time Based on Investment Level
144
124
100
E. 80
'a
60
J
40
20
0
Length in Backlog
--W-
Aralysis Year
Figure 12: Length in Project Backlog Over Time Based on Investment Level
— Do Nothing
$3 M
— $2.6 M
$2 M
— $1 M
— $1 M
$2 M
— $2.5 M
$3 M
— Do Nothing
Current Practice
A pavement management system consists of many parts, tools, and variables. The system attempts to
minimize subjectivity where possible and provide consistent results. Subjectivity is minimized and the
pavement evaluation process is made consistent through the collection and use of automated pavement
condition data and the use of that data to define the condition of the roadway. This is all designed to
help us make the best of our limited resources.
Iowa City's Pavement Management System is in the early stages of development. The clTIMS software is
very sophisticated allowing for a customized approach. The user defines all of the variables in the
software including variables that are not always easy to define. Those variables include items such as:
• Pavement maintenance strategies and associated costs
• Pavement rehabilitation strategies and associated costs
• Triggers for the maintenance and rehabilitation strategies
• Pavement deterioration models / equations
Refining the variables in the software and the overall pavement management system for the City will
take time. With more historical data, the City may determine that pavements are lasting longer or
shorter than what is being modeled. The City may choose to add new or different maintenance and
rehabilitation strategies requiring updates to the system. The variables that trigger strategies like crack
sealing or an asphalt overlay may need to be modified to better reflect field observations. Costs of the
maintenance and rehabilitation strategies continually increase which require consistent updates to
material and maintenance costs within the program. Often there is additional work tied to pavement
rehabilitation that creates difficulties developing accurate cost estimates. Ultimately, this is a trial and
error process that requires matching the theory with reality. Past experience and historical data give us
a good starting point but a pavement management system needs attention so we hit the target and
continue to get closer to the bull's -eye.
The results from the clTIMS software provide guidance for project selection and budgeting; however,
other factors are considered that are not part of the software analysis such as complaint frequency,
existing ongoing priority lists, street function (local vs. collector vs. arterial), underground maintenance
activities scheduled by other City utilities, and construction projects scheduled by other agencies and
developers.
The factors listed above also impact our internal prioritization of projects in the Street's Division. A list of
concrete pavement repairs and pothole patching locations is developed with input from many sources
like the Street's Division, Police, Transit, Refuse, Engineering, citizens, and others. There are times staff
is purposely looking for pavement problems and other times the problems are found by accident when
completing other work. In many cases, complete pavement reconstruction is necessary, however,
budget constraints often negate this option and the Street's Division is tasked with making reasonable
repairs. The Street's Division also attempts to spread the repairs throughout the community in an effort
to be equitable. The project list is long and unfinished projects continue to rollover into the next
construction season, in part because of other priorities like leaf collection orflood mitigation. Lastly,
winters with frequent snow events hurt productivity during the construction season due to the amount
of comp time built up and vacation that must be used prior to the end of the fiscal year. I believe the
City is on the right track but we must continually strive to improve the pavement management system
by allocating adequate staff time and resources if we truly want to realize the benefits of the system.
From: Tom Markus
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 9:38 AM
To: Marian Karr
Cc: Geoff Fruin; Simon Andrew; Eleanor M. Dilkes; Sue Dulek; Doug Boothroy
Subject: FW: Re:
Place this string of emails in the info packet.
From: Doug Boothroy
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 9:17 AM
To: Wendy Ford
Cc: Tom Markus
Subject: FW: Re:
From: Doug Boothroy
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 8:09 AM
To: 'Rockne Cole'
Cc: Steve Long; Steven Rackis; Jeff Davidson
Subject: RE: Re:
Rockne,
The source of funds the Housing Authority would use are from the HUD approved Housing Authority's past sale of Public
Housing units and are to be used only for acquisition /construction for replacement of affordable housing and not for
Housing Authority administrative expenses. The funding cut backs from HUD were in the Section 8 program
administrative fees which resulted in layoffs in the Section 8 program.
From: Rockne Cole [ma i Ito: rocknecole @gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 5:40 PM
To: Jeff Davidson
Cc: Doug Boothroy; Steve Long
Subject: Re:
Thanks Jeff. Doug and Steve, I am trying to determine if comes out of the ordinary budget, or any alternative
source such as a federal grant.
Steve, or Doug,
Could you provide me a copy of the purchase agreement authorizing the sale?
thanks in advance.
lye]
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Jeff Davidson <Jeff- Davidson@iowa- city.org> wrote:
Rockne,
I can't tell you the specific source of the housing authorities funds, but Doug Boothroy or Steve Long should be
able to. I will cc this to them and ask them to respond directly to you with CC to me.
Thanks. JD
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 16, 2014, at 1:18 PM, " Rockne Cole" <rocknecole@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeff,
> I have a follow up question about the source of the housing authority funds for Iowa City's proposed
Chauncey purchase of five affordable housing units for one million dollars. Did the housing authority's
purchase come of the regular housing budget, other special funding, source?
> Thanks in advance.
> Rockne
> Rockne Cole
> Attorney at Law
> Cole & Vondra, PC
> 209 E. Washington St., Suite 305
> Iowa City, IA 52240
> (319) 358 -1900
> E -mail is not a secure mode of communication and may be accessed by unauthorized persons. This
communication originates from the law firm of Rockne Cole, Attorney at Law, and is protected under the
Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510 -2521. Such communication may be confidential
and /or privileged and is intended only for the party to whom addressed. It is prohibited for anyone else to
disclose, copy, distribute or use the contents of this communication. Personal messages express views solely of
the sender and shall not be attributed to the law firm. If you received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by e -mail or by telephone at (319)358 -1900.
Rockne Cole
Attorney at Law
Cole & Vondra, PC
209 E. Washington St., Suite 305
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 358 -1900
E -mail is not a secure mode of communication and may be accessed by unauthorized persons. This
communication originates from the law firm of Rockne Cole, Attorney at Law, and is protected under the
Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510 -2521. Such communication may be confidential
and/or privileged and is intended only for the party to whom addressed. It is prohibited for anyone else to
disclose, copy, distribute or use the contents of this communication. Personal messages express views solely of
the sender and shall not be attributed to the law firm. If you received this communication in error, please notify
the sender immediately by e -mail or by telephone at (319)358 -1900.
�! CITY OF IOWA CITY IP5
..,,� MEMORANDUM
Date: July 16, 2014
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
Re: KXIC Radio Show /n#—
At your July 15 work session meeting Council Members agreed to the following schedule:
July 16 — Dickens
July 23 — Hayek
July 30 — Mims
August 6 — Dobyns
August 13 — Botchway
August 20 — Throgmorton
Future commitments:
September 17 — Dobyns
November 12 — Dobyns
U: radioshowappts.doc
L07-17-1 '4
IP6
log
�r
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240 -1826
(319) 356.5000
(3 19) 356 -5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
July 11, 2014
TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council
RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker II - Refuse
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 Maintenance Worker
II — Refuse.
Andrew Stockman
IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Lyr W. Dickerson, Chair
� A 1 IP7
L _ -Mir _
CITY OF IOWA CITY
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
(3 19) 356 -5000
(319) 356 -5009 FAX
www.icgov.org
July 11, 2014
TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council
RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Treatment Plant Operator — Wastewater
Treatment
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 Treatment Plant
Operator — Wastewater Treatment.
Dustin Stewart
Jeffrey Tonn
IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Lyra W. Dickerson, Chair
Charter Review Commission �P8
June 24, 2014
Page 1
MINUTES DRAFT
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
JUNE 24, 2014 — 7:30 A. M.
HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
Members Present: Steve Atkins, Andy Chappell, Karrie Craig, Karen Kubby, Mark Schantz
(7:35), Melvin Shaw, Anna Moyers Stone, Adam Sullivan, Dee
Vanderhoef
Staff Present: Eleanor Dilkes, Marian Karr
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
None
CONSIDER MOTION ADOPTING CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED:
a. Minutes of the Meeting on 06/10114 — Chairperson Chappell noted that there was
no correspondence to adopt and then asked if there were any amendments or
corrections to the minutes.
Sullivan moved to accept the minutes of the 6/10/14 meeting as presented, seconded by
Vanderhoef. Motion carried 8 -0, Schantz absent.
REPORTS FROM MEMBERS AND STAFF:
None.
REVIEW CHARTER:
a. Specific Sections to be Addressed:
Preamble —
Definitions —
Article II — Chappell noted that they left off with Section 2.12 of the
Charter, and he read aloud this section. The discussion began with
Kubby asking for clarification on the wording in this section. Dilkes noted
that basically the city manager serves at the pleasure of the city council.
Decisions to hire, fire, discipline, etc., are at the discretion of the city
manager. Dilkes gave several examples of how the functions of the city
manager are carried out and the role that the council does or does not
play in them. The issue of the hiring of the fire chief and police chief was
also discussed by Members. Dilkes responded to questions, noting that
these are also civil service positions. The discussion turned briefly to the
use of "may" and "shall" throughout the document. Members continued to
discuss this section, agreeing that the prohibitions in place appear
adequate and that they would tentatively approve Section 2.12.
Article III — Stone was asked to read Section 3.01 - Nominations to the
group. Dilkes noted that the matters addressed in this section are
completely controlled by State Code. The times have changes under the
State Code to 'not more than 85 days or less than 68.' The State Code
Charter Review Commission
June 24, 2014
Page 2
was also changed last year, according to Dilkes, taking the city clerk out
of the election process for city elections and moving these duties to the
commissioner of elections instead. She suggested adding wording to this
section that lets citizens know that what is set forth here is dictated by
State law. Dilkes will work on the updates that need to be made to this
section, due to the State Code changes, and will bring that back for
Members to review.
Chappell then asked if Members would like to have Sections 3.02 and
3.03 read. Dilkes asked if it would be Members' preference to simply say
that those items are controlled by State law, or 'as provided by State law.'
She asked if it was preferred to have the actual numbers and
percentages present in these sections. After a brief discussion, it was
decided to show as much information as possible in these sections, along
with the reference to State law. Kubby asked about the primary section,
stating that she would like to have a discussion at some point about
eliminating primaries by having some instant run -off voting. She has a
memo she can update that talks about the advantages of run -off voting
for the system and to the people who are engaged in the election.
However, if they were to keep the districts as they are now, this type of
voting would not work. Chappell asked Dilkes if she is aware of what
other options there are other than the current primary system they have.
Dilkes stated that she had this discussion at the last review, but
essentially the State Code gives cities two options. The city may chose to
have a run -off election, and a primary will be held unless a run -off is
chosen by city council ordinance. She added that `instant run -off' is
different from 'run -off' in this instance, and State law pretty much dictates
how this will be done. Dilkes will gather more information on primary
versus runoff for the next meeting's agenda.
Chappell suggested they go ahead and read Section 3.03 as it does play
into something they've already talked about. The Commission will come
back to this section as they revisit the topics of districts and candidates.
b. Commission Discussion of Other Sections (if time allows):
Article IV — Sullivan began by reading Section 4.01 to the Commission.
This is another area that is dictated by State Code, and Members agreed
to tentatively approve it.
Section 4.02 Accountability was read by Vanderhoef. This area again
covered the city manager position. Chappell asked what the current city
manager's contract provides for as far as severance. Dilkes stated that it
has been pretty standard for a number of years, three to six months is
typical. However, she will obtain this information for the Commission. A
discussion ensued about this timeframe and whether there should be a
'no more than' clause added to the existing policy. Sullivan spoke to this,
stating that he would not feel comfortable putting restrictions on this.
Members continued to discuss this section, more specifically the length of
time a city manager could receive severance pay. Shaw asked why this
Charter Review Commission
June 24, 2014
Page 3
section contains any reference to salary at all, questioning if this wouldn't
be a contract issue between the city manager and the City.
Atkins spoke to this issue, noting that most professional positions such as
a city manager are using contracts to protect themselves. He further
explained what protections have been put in place, both for the City and
for the position. Shaw continued to express his concerns with this
section, noting again that it is a contract issue and should be part of that
instead. Karr noted that this section has not been updated for a number
of years. Dilkes noted that staff will obtain the current manager's contract
for review, and also see what trends are out there in other communities.
Chappell noted that they will start with Section 4.03 at the next meeting.
DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT:
None.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
None.
TENTATIVE THREE -MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE (Second & fourth Tuesday of each
month):
July 8 — Three people will be absent for this meeting. Chappell suggested they skip this
meeting as they have gotten pretty far in their review. Others agreed that this
would work at this time and this meeting will be cancelled.
July 22 — Karr noted that she will not be present at this meeting but will have a
representative from her office there. Atkins suggested they plan on having two -
hour meetings, with others agreeing to start this practice at the July meeting.
August 12
August 26
September 9
September 23 — tentative evening public forum.
ADJOURNMENT:
Shaw moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 A.M., seconded by Sullivan. Motion carried
9 -0.
Charter Review Commission
June 24, 2014
Page 4
Charter Review Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2014
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
TERM
o
0
0
0
0
0
NAME
EXP.
O
W
j
W
N
—L
CD
N
N
N
4/1/16
X
X
O/
X
X
Steve
E
Atkins
Andy
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Chappell
Karrie
411/15
X
X
X
X
X
Craig
Karen
4/1/15
O
X
X
X
X
Kubby
Mark
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Schantz
Melvin
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Shaw
Anna
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Moyer
Stone
Adam
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Sullivan
Dee
4/1/15
X
X
X
X
X
Vanderhoef
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
- -- = Not a Member at this time
�J
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY
JUNE 19 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard,
Jodie Theobald, John Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ann Freerks
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, John Yapp, Sara Greenwood Hektoen
OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Synan, Bruce McDonald, Ann Synan, Dave Zahradnick
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
The Commission voted 4 -2 (Thomas and Swyard opposed) to recommend approval of
REZ14- 00005, an application submitted by Allen Homes for a rezoning from Low Density
Single Family (RS -5) zone to Planned Development Overlay (OPD -5) zone and a
preliminary sensitive areas development plan subject to general conformance with the
plans submitted and subject to the final building design complying with the multi - family
site design standards in the City Code Section 14 -213.
The Commission voted 5 -1 (Martin opposed) to recommend approval of REZ14- 00007, an
application for a rezoning from Central Business Service (CB -2) zone to Central Business
Support (CB -5) and for the building's designation as a Historic Landmark subject to a
Conditional Zoning Agreement on the CB -2 height regulations at 203 N. Linn Street.
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
There was none.
Rezoning / Development Items:
REZ14- 00005: Discussion of an application submitted by Allen Homes for a rezoning of
approximately 3.6 -acres of property from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone to
Planned Development Overlay (OPD -5) zone to allow construction of an 11 -unit multi-
family building located at the NE corner of First Avenue and Hickory Trail.
Yapp showed a map and aerial photo of the subject property and the surrounding
neighborhoods. He directed the Commission's attention to a graphic submitted by the applicant
showing the extent of the proposed development area and open space on the subject property,
consisting of the creek along the east property line, the wetlands along the creek and a one -
hundred foot wetland buffer.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 2 of 8
Yapp said that in response to the Commission's request at the last meeting, staff computed the
average of single family and multi - family buildings in the Bluffwood neighborhood, which
currently consists of approximately thirty -five percent multi - family dwellings and sixty -five
percent single family dwellings. He said including the multi - family dwellings on the west side of
First Avenue the numbers change to approximately forty -three percent multi - family and fifty -
seven percent single family. He said the Bluffwood neighborhood's average is slightly less than
the city -wide average and that of two comparable neighborhoods including the neighborhood
along Court Street east of Scott Boulevard and the neighborhood along Mormon Trek
Boulevard.
Yapp said the Northeast District Plan states that townhouses and small apartment buildings are
proposed at the edges of the neighborhood. He said that while this application is for is a multi-
family dwelling it is not an increase in density in that eleven single family lots could be permitted
on the subject property.
Yapp said the applicant has clarified that the proposal is for nine three - bedroom units and two
two - bedroom units. He said staff recommends approval subject to general conformance with the
plans submitted and that the final building design complying with multi - family design standards.
Eastham asked if the Comprehensive Plan is neutral about rental versus owner. Yapp said it is
supportive of both types of housing.
Eastham opened public discussion.
Jesse Allen, the applicant, said the Planned Development Overlay Zone (OPD) that he chose to
zone this property is based on the Comprehensive Plan of the Northeast District. He said they
are not impacting one tree on the site with the proposed design and they are also protecting all
of the green space and the wetland and the stream corridor on the subject site. He said the Plan
encourages energy efficient development, and he said this project will offer LEED lighting and
high efficiency equipment. He said as an infill development, they will be able to connect bicycle
and pedestrian traffic. He cited all the ways this development complies with the Neighborhood
Planning Principals from the Northeast District Plan of 1998.
Dyer asked what percentage of the property will be developed. Allen replied that out of the 3.59
acres they are impacting ten percent. Dyer asked about his choice of evergreen trees along the
east side of the property instead of using a mix of varieties. Allen said they will use three
different types of evergreens and that they chose them because they don't drop their leaves, but
they will use whatever the City Forester approves.
Eastham asked where the retaining walls will be located on the proposed design. Allen pointed
out the two planned on the property and said the maximum height will be seven feet. Eastham
asked if it's possible to terrace the retaining walls. Allen said that would be possible. Eastham
asked if they will be excavating to provide parking under the building. Allen said they are using
the natural slope of the land so there will be very little digging. Eastham asked if it would be
possible to lower the height of the building. Allen said they could lower the building by changing
the floor elevations, the wall heights or the roof design. He said that would compromise the
design of the building and the spaciousness of the apartments.
Bill Synan of 833 Cypress Court said vehicle traffic on the subject property will impact the
privacy of single family homes in the Bluffwood Neighborhood. He showed several examples of
other multi - family structures in the neighborhood that, unlike the proposed building, do not have
vehicle traffic crossing behind single family homes. He said the two neighborhoods chosen for
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 3 of 8
comparison in the staff report have factors coming into play that the Bluffwood Neighborhood
does not. He said according to the Comprehensive Plan the predominant land use in the
Bluffwood Neighborhood will be detached, single family residential. He said there are actually
176 single family units in this neighborhood and 178 multi - family units.
Bruce McDonald of 855 Cypress Court said he was in favor of building duplexes on this site.
Ann Synan of 833 Cypress Court read excerpts from new correspondence from residents Doug
and Judy LeBreck urging the Commission to abide by the current City Master Zoning Plan and
decline this request for another zoning variance which would allow construction of another multi-
unit dwelling. She said she thinks duplexes would be better for the subject property.
Dave Zahradnick of Neumann Monson Architects said from the beginning the developer wanted
to preserve the green space on the subject property. He said they had a neighborhood meeting
and that is what the majority of neighbors asked for. He said the way this development is being
proposed is the right way to go in order to fit into the neighborhood and lessen its impact.
Eastham closed public discussion.
Thomas moved to recommend approval of REZ14- 00005, an application submitted by
Allen Homes for a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) zone to Planned
Development Overlay (OPD -5) zone and a preliminary sensitive areas development plan
subject to general conformance with the plans submitted and subject to the final building
design complying with the multi - family site design standards in the City Code Section 14-
26.
Martin seconded.
Martin said she likes the orientation of this development in that the least amount of land is being
disturbed. She said she's a fan of more condensed building and maintaining that wetland area.
Theobald said she agrees with Martin, but she does take issue with the landscape choices. She
said conifers are not necessarily good in wet areas. She said she agrees with Dyer's idea about
using a mix and being very careful about tree selection and thinks the applicant could really
impress the neighborhood with landscaping. She said she thinks the design is a good use of the
space.
Eastham asked staff for clarification about how the City, in approving the final plat, will decide
what trees to require.
Miklo said the plan that they see is what they get, but if the Commission is concerned they can
amend their motion to indicate the need for a mixture of trees.
Theobald said she would like to do that.
Theobald said she would encourage the applicant to take advantage of counsel from the City
Forester.
Yapp said staff would be happy to talk to the applicant about the landscaping plan.
Dyer said a mixture of trees would be more in keeping with the trees already on the subject
property and would be more natural.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 4of8
Thomas said the Northeast District Plan does reference the Comprehensive Plan's design
guidelines for neighborhood development, and he said in the section "New Neighborhoods
Diverse Housing Types" it states that "small multi - family lots of approximately 12,000- 16,000
square feet of low density multi - family zoning are appropriate at the intersection of collector and
arterial streets ", which would be similar to Hickory Trail and First Avenue. He continued, "lots of
this size will assure that the resulting apartments buildings will be no more than 4 -6 units per
building. Buildings of this size can be designed to be of a similar height and appearance as
single family housing ". He said this reveals an issue about the multi - family development on First
Avenue, which is that even at low densities if the site is three or 3.5 acres the result can be a
very large building. He said he thinks there is a disconnect on First Avenue between the multi-
family buildings and the single family character of the Bluffwood Neighborhood that affects the
overall integrity of Bluffwood. He said whatever the building type, it should contribute to a sense
of wholeness within the neighborhood, and right now First Avenue feels separate and distinct
from the neighborhood areas. He said the proposed project has a lot of positives but he can't
accept the size of the building in that location as it's proposed. He said he thinks there is a
compelling reason to argue for a smaller building or buildings.
Thomas named a number of housing types allowed under RS -5 — duplexes, attached single
family, attached zero lot line, and single family. Miklo clarified that the attached single family and
attached zero lot line in the RS -5 zone is only on the corner lots. Thomas said there are good
examples of multi - family along First Avenue. He said the subject site is a beautiful one and if the
density is kept at five units per acre it's possible to develop it with only minor encroachment into
the stream corridor. He said early development along First Avenue was done thoughtfully and
then over time the desire to preserve open space and sensitive features has begun to override
the compatibility of the building type with the neighborhood. He said right now the size of the
proposed building is too big.
Thomas explained that the Comprehensive Plan was saying that with multi - family development,
if you want to limit the building size you limit the lot size. Miklo clarified that that referred to
zoning something multi - family. He said this case is a little different in that you aren't zoning
something multi - family but rather clustering something that's in the RS -5 zone.
Thomas argued that you are ending up with a building that is a multi - family zone type building
that he would place in a more highly developed area because of its size and the bulk. He said
the key issue for him is if that if they don't regulate along the lines of building height and width
on large lots, even if the density is low you can end up with a very large building that may no
longer be compatible with the low density residential development around it.
Eastham asked if eleven 1500 square foot buildings would be more desirable to Thomas for this
space than a building of the proposed square footage.
Thomas said to him it is a building scale and type issue. He said the types allowed under RS -5
all typically emphasize the individual household, with individual entries and more of a sense of
individual identity to the housing unit. He said the key issue here is the transitional quality, an
infill development fairly late in the development of the neighborhood on the edge of an existing
residential neighborhood where you want to moderately increase the intensity of use. He said
that suggests to him the types of building types you find provisionally allowed in an RS -5
neighborhood. He said multi - family might even work, depending on how you do it and based on
the existence of successful multi - family in that neighborhood. He said there has been an
emphasis on the overall density of the parcel without consideration of how that density is
distributed over the property. He said when you concentrate that density in a small portion of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 5 of 8
site, especially at a high elevation relative to the surrounding neighborhood, it's no longer going
to feel like a transition but rather a distinctly different element within the area.
Theobald said she understands Thomas's concern about the design and transition, and if you
go along First Avenue, there are buildings that have been done much better than others. She
said thirty -five feet isn't all that high though. She said she thinks this proposed project has the
potential to use the site very well, and she is in favor of keeping more of the green space and
loves that the trees will be preserved.
Thomas said the building height could actually go as high as forty -two feet, but it's not all about
the height. He said he does believe it's possible to develop the subject project in an interesting
way and preserve all the qualities they want to.
Martin said she likes the design before the Commission. She said for her this works as transition
because of all the large buildings on the other side of First Avenue.
Dyer said this is a good solution to infill development. She said First Avenue is an arterial and
the Comprehensive Plan talks about multi - family dwellings on arterials. She said she likes the
fact that there's only one driveway compared to the ten or twelve if there were single family
dwellings planned. She said this proposed building is comparable in many respects to the
building across Hickory Trail, which also preserves a lot of green space. She said it's not as if
this proposed building is on the smallest dimension of the property or closer to the neighboring
houses. She said it's a good solution in contrast to the building across the street.
Swygard said she's gone out to the subject property, as have the other Commissioners, and she
keeps going back to the Comprehensive Plan for this particular neighborhood. She said the
Plan does say that it's largely single family with opportunities for duplexes or zero lot line
integrated throughout and small -scale apartments located along arterial streets. She said the
project does abut an existing single family neighborhood unlike some of the other developments
along First Avenue. She said she thinks this proposed project affects that neighborhood more
than some of the other projects along First Avenue. She said she can't support this particular
plan because there has to be a little more balance in this area. She said it's very concentrated
along First Avenue and she doesn't know how much more can be developed, and it reminds her
of the top of Benton Street where it is lined with apartments to the point where it's uninteresting
and not diverse and doesn't provide different housing types.
Eastham said he thinks the Comprehensive Plan is an attempt by the community to decide how
they are going to "share their space, and the sharing is the key thing. He said he was already
familiar with the area before he went out there and was invited into the backyard of a resident
on Cypress Court for a view of the proposed site. He said he personally would like to see
diverse housing types throughout a neighborhood. He said the Comprehensive Plan doesn't
have a preference about housing type or ownership versus rental. He said the proposed project
fits into the OPD zoning scheme for RS -5. He said that preserving the existing natural habitat on
this side of First Avenue is of value. He said he is trying to determine how the design would
balance out the preservation of green space. He said he doesn't think this is an unacceptable
use of this space.
Thomas said he didn't want to convey that he thinks this is a bad proposal, but he just can't
accept it in its current form. He said how it might be more acceptable to the neighborhood is an
extremely important part of this conversation as the residents are a measure of what's working
and what isn't.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 4 -2 with Thomas and Swygard opposed.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 6 of 8
REZ14- 00007: Discussion of an application submitted by Michael Hodge for a rezoning of
approximately 4000 square feet of property from Central Business Service (CB -2) zone to
Central Business support (CB -5) zone and Local Landmark Designation at 203 N. Linn
Street.
Miklo showed the subject property on the zoning map and from an aerial view. He said what is
motivating this application is that the property is nonconforming in both zones in terms of
parking requirements. He said the property has grandfathered rights for thirteen off - street
parking spaces which would allow retail or office type uses but would not allow restaurant type
uses. He said the applicant has requested the new zoning because the CB -5 zone does not
require parking for commercial spaces, but does require parking for residential spaces on the
upper floors. Miklo said the applicant has also requested Local Landmark Designation, meaning
that the building would be protected unless the Historic Preservation Commission approved its
removal.
Miklo said because of concerns raised by the community about a larger building being
developed on this site should the current building be destroyed by natural disaster, the applicant
has agreed to a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) that would limit the scale of the building to
the current zoning in terms of C13-2. He said if the subject property is zoned C13-5 with the
Landmark status and the CZA the building could only be rebuilt to the C13-2 standards. Miklo
said the applicant has also agreed to place a condition on the rezoning that would go with the
property should it be sold that would limit redevelopment to the C13-2 standards in terms of
height.
Miklo said the Comprehensive Plan clearly calls for preservation of historic buildings in this
area.
Dyer said preserving this building is a wonderful idea.
Eastham opened public discussion.
Mike Hodge, the owner of the building, gave a history of its uses and said he shares the
sentiment of the neighborhood to be a historic neighborhood with a vibrant commercial area.
Sarah Clark from the Northside Neighborhood Association said due to complications in
communications, the neighborhood became aware of this application only at the last minute.
She asked if the CZA will go with this property in perpetuity.
Miklo said it will unless the City Council removes it.
Eastham closed public discussion.
Dyer moved to recommend approval of REZ14- 00007, an application for a rezoning from
Central Business Service (CB -2) zone to Central Business Support (CB -5) and for the
building's designation as a Historic Landmark subject to a Conditional Zoning
Agreement on the CB -2 height regulations at 203 N. Linn Street.
Swygard seconded.
Planning and Zoning Commission
June 19, 2014
Page 7 of 8
Martin said she would like to see this application deferred in order to hear what the
neighborhood has to say about it. She cited a previous application for the Billon Auto site where
the property had a CZA that wasn't upheld until the new owners wanted to improve something.
Miklo explained that the application Martin referred to was sensitive areas issue not a
Conditional Zoning Agreement. He said approval of this application may provide more flexibility
in how the upper floors are remodeled because there are different parking requirements for
residential densities in the CB -5 zone than there are for CB -2.
Eastham observed that there is a City parking lot within a block of the subject building and
questioned if there is adequate parking infrastructure to support this application.
Yapp explained that there is on- street metered parking and there is also metered and permit
parking in the City lot near this property.
Swygard said she is fully in favor of the historic designation but is wondering about the
residential parking requirements for CB -5 versus CB -2.
A vote was taken the motion carried 5 -1 with Martin opposed.
Consideration of Meeting Minutes: June 5, 2014
Dyer moved to approve with minor corrections.
Swygard seconded.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
Planning & Zoning Information
There was none.
Adiournment
Martin moved to adjourn.
A vote was taken and the motion carried 6 -0.
z
O
U)
O
V
z
Z
N
z
Z
z
J
a
0
O
Q
W
m
W
0
z
O
z
W
Q
0
N
M
r
0
N
z
H
W
W
J
O
LL
�xXOxxxx
�xxxxxxx
�- Xxxxxxx
;XXXXXXX
le
xxxxxxo
NxXxxoXx
M
O
NXxxxxxx
N
N X x x x x x x
;oXx><
04 xxxxxxx
NX x x x x x x
r
c�XXx�XXX
r
V-xXXXxxx
�XxoXXXX
ooXXOXXX
2w (OCOM I-- Lo wto
wmU -)Lo n0 000
F.X0000000
w
w
z w W J a
.J=Z W aO2
00< CL 0
ao
=�?ama
w0E -wp00�
Q
z0wuw,.2w
0
z
W
W
Q
O
LL
z
NXxxxxxx
N
NXxxxxxx
rXXX�XXx
r
C4
XXxxxxx
°'XXXXXXX
N
E w
C
'o
C")
�
I [)
co
In
�-X0000000
W
z
w
w
W
J
a
JXZwa02
QxCL
a2
via°maC6
wCE
U
0
m
�w
0
zowW12cn�-F
r
,o
w (D
+. �2cn
em-0 3:
aaz�
n u u n n
XOw
O
w
Y
MINUTES PRELIMINARY
PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE
THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 2014
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL
Members present: John Engelbrecht, Mike Moran, Tam Bryk, Rick Fosse, and
Elizabeth Pusack
Not present: Brent Westphal, and Bill Nusser
Staff Present: Marcia Bollinger
Public Present: None
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL
Recommend approval to the City Council that for the 2014 Mural Project 1) Brock
Muench's proposal be selected for the College Street Bridge location; 2) the committee
asks Taylor Ross to provide a colored rendering of his proposal for the Fairmeadows
location so the committee may review and approve, otherwise the committee
recommends Cheryl Graham and Julie Fenton's proposal; 3) One of Tony Brown's
proposals selected for the Mercer Park location.
CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order at 3:34pm.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
No new business.
CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 1ST, 2014 MEETING
MOTION: Moran moved to approve the May 1 st, 2014 meeting. Pusack seconded. Motion
passed 5:0.
MURAL PROJECT 2014- REVIEW OF PROPOSALS
Engelbrecht asked the committee to discuss the Mural Project applications. Bollinger then
explained that artists were asked if they would consider their proposals for the different locations
since there was significant interest in one location: the College Street Bridge. The committee
then carefully considered each application, which was shown via PowerPoint, for each location
and discussed their thoughts. The committee started with the College Street Bridge location and
reviewed the eight different proposals for this location. Engelbrecht stated that he pitched the
mural project to many of the BenchMarks artists and many of them submitted. Engelbrecht
stated which artists he was familiar with and explained his experience with the artists.
The committee then looked at and discussed the submitted proposals for the Fairmeadows
Splash Pad location. The committee carefully discussed each of the six proposals submitted.
The committee then looked at the Mercer park location in which there were also six proposals.
The committee looked at all proposals for all locations and discussed which ones they would
like to select. Committee members then voiced their favorite proposals for each location. They
also discussed each proposal in terms of what the proposed theme was for each location.
The committee discussed one artist's proposals and stated that they wished they could see
them in color. Engelbrecht stated that that particular artist ran out of time and had to submit
rougher sketches. The committee discussed the favorite proposal for the College Street Bridge.
Pusack stated that she would like to see something edgier. There were two clear favorite
proposals for the Fairmeadows location. Moran suggested the Wetherby Splash Pad as an
alternate location for one of the proposals. There wasn't a clear consensus for either location.
Through the discussion of the Mercer Park location, the committee expressed a desire for
consistency in the level of quality of the proposals. Bryk suggested clarifying the quality and
level of detail required for submission to be included in future calls to artists. The committee
would like to see approximately the same level of detail with each submitted proposal so that
they can judge proposals more equally.
MOTION: Bryk moved that: 1) Brock Muench's proposal be selected for the College Street
Bridge location; 2) the committee ask Taylor Ross to provide a colored rendering of his proposal
for the Fairmeadows location so the committee may review and approve, otherwise the
committee would select Cheryl Graham and Julie Fenton's proposal; 3) One of Tony Brown's
proposals selected for the Mercer Park location. Pusack seconded the motion. Motion passed
5:0.
PROJECT UPDATE — GEORGE'S MURAL
Engelbrecht stated that the George's Buffett mural project will not happen. He thought that the
owner decided that he did not want to cause concerns and lose long time customers as a result
of the mural.
DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE_ART PROJECT UPDATE
Bollinger explained the downtown streetscape and what has been decided as a result of the
subcommittee. There has been much discussion regarding the area that has been called the
Blackhawk Mini Park. Bollinger stated that the idea has been to work directly with the Museum
of Art and Sean O'Harrow, and solicit proposals from artists who are on an internationally
renowned level. They look at this project as a significant project that could cost up to $1 Million.
Bryk asked for clarification on the price. She wanted to know if it was the cost of the work or the
value of the work. Both Bollinger and Engelbrecht stated that it would be the cost of the work.
Engelbrecht stated that they were looking at this piece as a signature for the City. The artists
that are being looked include artists like Andrew Goldsworthy, Maya Lin, and Vito Acconci.
Bollinger stated that she thought there would be continued discussion regarding this topic and
that she is had already received input from local artists.
INSIDE OUT PROJECT UPDATE
Bollinger stated that the Inside Out project is not yet completed. 16 of the 24 posters were
installed. There were two days available for the installation of the posters and they were not
able to finish. The plan was to use volunteers to complete the installation. Engelbrecht
expressed concern since the existing 16 are starting to fade and the posters would be in
different stages of degradation. Moran stated that the project did get a lot of great press. Bryk
agreed with Engelbrecht, that the remaining posters should not be put up because the posters
would be in different stages.
POETRY IN PUBLIC PROJECT UPDATE
Bollinger stated that everything is done in regards to Poetry in Public but there was an issue
with the installation of posters in the downtown kiosks. Bollinger stated that she was given
permission to put the posters up in the windows of the Iowa City Public Library. Bryk stated that
she thought the Library was the perfect place. Bollinger agreed but stated that it is a policy of
the library to not put anything up in the windows, but they made an exception for the program
this time. Pusack expressed interest in being a part of the Poetry in Public program next year.
BENCHMARKS PROJECT UPDATE
Engelbrecht updated that group on the BenchMarks Project. Bryk and Bollinger stated that the
benches which were completed looked great. He was able to get 26 artists to complete 30
benches. He stated that many are done and done well, but that there have been issues with
some of the remaining benches. Engelbrecht stated that he is currently following up with a
remaining 5 -8 benches. He also stated that instead of contracting a company, himself and other
artists that have worked on this project in the past have been repeating and touching up
benches from past years. Engelbrecht also stated that the Credit Union agreed to sponsor this
project for three years and it has now been three years. There will no longer be a sponsor for
this program next year. Moran asked whose responsibility it is to find a new sponsor.
Engelbrecht stated that he was unsure. Engelbrecht thought that this project could minimally be
run for $12,500.
KIDZ TENT PROJECT UPDATE
Bollinger stated that this event will start on Saturday. The tent will be open from 10 AM to 4 PM
on Sunday and volunteers from this committee will pick up donations from artist on Saturday.
Bryk and Pusack volunteered to work the tent on Sunday. Engelbrecht stated that he could help
pick up on Saturday.
FY15 PUBLIC ART FUNDING — PROCESS ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
Bollinger stated that this topic will be discussed at the next meeting. She stated that we still
need some ideas, and asked the committee to think of ideas for the allocation of the $12,000.
OTHER
Zitzner then spoke about the application for the NEA Grant called Art Works which has two
application deadlines of July 24th and February 20th. She stated that the February 20th grant
would be more feasible and the committee agreed. She also spoke briefly about funding that is
available through the MPO. Bollinger clarified and stated that the money will be available and
that it just needs to be applied for. Zitzner gave examples of a project in which bike racks are
built and designed by artists. This type of program would be carried out similar to the Mural
Project in which an RFP would be issued.
ADJOURNMENT
Moran motioned and Bryk seconded a motion to adjourn at 5:04 PM.
Minutes created by Ashley Zitzner.
a�
.E
0
U
O
N
Q
Q
a
O
LL
O
V
C
'C
C
.d+
l'
T
N
M
T
O
N
m
ai
w (D
E
U)4) mco
Vl N
2-0-0 O
IL Q Q Z
a W
Y XOO I
U'xxo0xxx
�oxxxoox
LO
ooxxxxxx
�oxxoxxx
T
M
oxxo
x'o
N
M
Lo
x
N
oxxo
r
M
xxxx
xx
N
(0
LO
tir-
LO
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
W
O
O
O
�—
O
r
O
Et
L
O
111
V
Y_
r
.0
iY
Y
�
CL
+r
d
ei
0
ni
4)
f!!
C
Ri
'Q
O
M
N
fl1
O
z
M
w�Za.0
-�
m
ai
w (D
E
U)4) mco
Vl N
2-0-0 O
IL Q Q Z
a W
Y XOO I