Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-12-18 Bd Comm minutes+ r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok 10WA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Commission: October 18 Item Number: 4.a. October 18, 2018 Page 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 2018 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Minnetta Gardinier, Derek LaBrie, Christopher Lawrence Members Absent: Warren Bishop, Robert Libby Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp Others Present: Todd Allyn, Toby Myers, Melissa Underwood, Bob Cohrs FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 6:01 P.M. by Acting Chair/Secretary Lawrence. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Members first reviewed the minutes of the September 26, 2018, meeting. LaBrie moved to accept the minutes of the September 26, 2018, meeting, as presented. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. City Attorney Goers noted at this time that with the absence of the Chair, Bob Libby, they should approve temporary Chair and Secretary. Lawrence, as Secretary, became the Acting Chair and Gardinier volunteered to be Acting Secretary. Lawrence moved that he serve as Acting Chair and that Gardinier then serve as Acting Secretary. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONIACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM I David Hughes I. Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp noted that Hughes is not present this evening but that Todd Allyn with AECOM is here instead. Continuing, Tharp noted that he was part of a conference call with the FAA earlier in the week, in regards to this project. He stated that the FAA is doing some research in regards to the City's zoning ordinances, before moving forward with this. Allyn stated that the FAA was requesting permanent October 18, 2018 Page 2 easements for all of the properties affected in this project. Goers further explained what the `permanent easement issue entails and why this is being further investigated. He then responded to Member questions and concerns regarding the City's policies and how the Airport might handle such matters in the future. iii. North T -Hangar Restroom — Tharp stated that this project is now complete and staff is recommending that the Commission accept it as such. 1. Consider a resolution accepting project as complete — Lawrence moved to accept the project as complete, with Resolution #A18-08. Gardlnler seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. iii. Terminal Apron Rehab — Tharp stated that they are currently waiting for the State to get back with them on the grant. The plan would be to do design over the winter, with construction in the spring. Allyn stated that they will definitely work with Jet Air on the phasing of this project. iv. FAA Supplemental AIP Program — Tharp stated that this program is due to Congress giving the FAA an extra $1 billion. He briefly noted the rules that apply to the use of these funds. He stated that staff is proposing to apply for three projects — the larger apron expansion, the parallel taxiway, and the runway rehab program. If awarded, the grants under this program are 100%. Allyn further clarified what the program calls out for in projects. He asked Members what their thoughts were on the three proposed ones. The Commission talked about these projects at some length, especially from a safety perspective. Increased traffic was another area of discussion, as the Airport continues to see its numbers increase. b. FBO I Flight Training Reports L Jet Air — Toby Myers with Jet Air shared the monthly maintenance reports with Members. He stated that they did a lot of mowing in September and October. As for flight training, he noted that business continues to increase. As of last night, they were at 98.5 hours of instruction just in October, and with several more today, they are up to 102-103. Myers noted that the Great Plains Air Expo that was held last week had a good turnout for a daytime event. Continuing, Myers stated that they added four new charter pilots in the last several weeks. C. Airport Operations I. Management 1. Airport Viewing Area -- Tharp reported that this project is about 95% done. He added that the kiosks have been installed now. 2. 2019-2023 Consultant Selection RFQ — Tharp stated that every five years they go through a process to select an engineering firm to provide consulting services for the Airport. The FAA has to then give their blessing to whomever is selected. Tharp gave Members some insight into the process and what they can expect as they move forward. He noted that the way he has the dates set up currently, everything would culminate at the December Commission meeting. Discussion continued on this process, with October 18, 2018 Page 3 Tharp stating that his goal would be to push the RFQ out to the public by November 13t, giving them about a month to respond. LaBrie stated that he will be out of the country for the December meeting but that he is okay with moving ahead as discussed. Members then briefly talked about the review subcommittee, which would be involved in reviewing the applications received, and the timeline to complete this process. Tharp will let Members know of any special meeting needs. 3. Consider a resolution setting a public hearing for a ground lease with Westside Automotive LLC — Goers spoke to Members about the proposed lease, which was previously talked about in Executive Session. He reminded Members of this session and what was discussed there, noting that what he has come back with is $600 per month for leasing the entire parcel, for a five-year term, with a second five-year term tenant option with a CPI escalator. The need for a public hearing is due to the fact that the lease is more than three -years in length. LaBrie moved to consider Resolution #A18-09 as discussed. Lawrence moved to second the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. U. Zoning Code —Tharp noted that while updating the Airport master plan they had discussed the need to also update the zoning code to reflect any changes. He stated that he has obtained quotes from several firms that would assist them in doing this zoning code review and update, and Short Elliot Hendrickson Inc. is the recommended bid to go with. Melissa Underwood then spoke with the Commission, giving clarity to what is being proposed under this change. 1. Consider a resolution approving a contract with Short Elliot Hendrickson Inc. - Lawrence moved to approve Resolution #A18-10 approving contract with Short Elliot Hendrickson Inc. per discussion. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. Ill. Budget — Tharp noted that the subcommittee has met to review the FY20 budget. He stated that he worked with several City departments, as well. He spoke to some of the budget items being included for FY20 and stated that what is being proposed is an operating budget with revenues of just over $363,000 and expenses of $387,000. Therefore a request is being made of the City for $24,000 worth of operational support. Tharp stated that they have roughly $120,000 of cash that is usable, with $100,000 in emergency reserve. Gardinier then asked for some clarification from Tharp on certain budget items. Lawrence moved to submit the FY20 budget as presented. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. iv. Events — Tharp stated that he had nothing at this time. Members briefly talked about annual events, such as Young Eagles, and also about getting new events to come to the Airport. Gardinier spoke to the balloon events and if they would want to contact any of those groups. d. Commission Members' Reports — Gardinier shared that she flew to Canada this past weekend. The Air Race Classic goes into Canada this next year and she is checking out the various stops. October 18, 2018 Page 4 e. Staff Report — Tharp stated that he will be out of the office next Friday. He then shared that the frfth Member of the Airport Commission has been appointed — Warren Bishop. He is expected at the next meeting, according to Tharp. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday. November 15, 2018, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. ADJOURN: Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at LaBrie 7:20 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0, Bishop and Libby absent. CHAIRPERSON DATE October 18, 2018 Page 5 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 20'17-2018 Key— X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o 0 0 0 W 0 0 N 0 Wy, 0 V 0 Oo Co m -h Q NAME EXP. e Warren 06130/22 N N N N N N 0I Bishop NM NM NM M M NM M M M M E Minnetta 07/01/19 0 Gardinier X X X X X X IE X X X X Robert Libby 07/01/20 01 01 Ol X X X X E X X X X E E Christopher 07/01/21 Lawrence X X X X X X X X X X X Derek LaBrie 07/01122 N N N NM NM NM M M NM M X X X X Key— X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time Item Number: 4.b. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Community Police Review Board: November 13 FINAL/APPROVED COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - November 13, 2018 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Orville Townsend called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Monique Galpin, Donald King, David Selmer MEMBERS ABSENT: Latisha McDaniel STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Pat Ford, Staff Chris Olney OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Chief Matherly RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None REPORT FROM NOMINATION COMMITTEE Galpin and Selmer were appointed to the nominating committee at the September 11th meeting. Galpin reported that the committee met and recommends King as Chair and Galpin as Vice -Chair. MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING Motion by King, seconded by Galpin to fix the method of voting to be by voice vote. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON Motion by Galpin and seconded by Selmer to nominate King for Chair. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON Motion by Galpin and seconded by Selmer to close nominations. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. BALLOT OR VOTE Motion by Galpin and seconded by Selmer to select King for Chair. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE -CHAIRPERSON Motion by Townsend, seconded by King to nominate and select Galpin for Vice -Chair - Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE -CHAIRPERSON Motion by Townsend and seconded by King to close nominations. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. BALLOT OR VOTE Motion by Townsend and seconded by King to select Galpin for Vice -Chair. Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent CPRB Nov 13, 2018 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Galpin, seconded by King, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the Meeting on 10/09/18 Motion carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. NEW BUSINESS Legal Counsel Review of ICPD General Orders - Legal Counsel Ford noted that he does not as a practice review the ICPD General Orders and asked if the Board would like him to. Selmer stated that the memo regarding the ICPD General Orders history/background shows that the review process is extensive and follows the CALEA's (Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement) Accreditation process. The Board agreed to not have Legal Counsel review orders unless specifically asked to by the Board. King had questions regarding the ICPD General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence) as to what the ODARA Form was and how it is used by a Police Officer. The Chief explained that the (ODARA) Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment Form is a reporting tool used to provide the Courts with a scored risk assessment which helps give the Judge the ability to determine bond, no -contact and chance of re -offending. The Chief will have the Domestic Violence Investigator attend the next meeting to provide more information. OLD BUSINESS None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION Olney advised that the City Attorney and Police Chief are working on a response to the Proposed Ordinance Change and they are hoping to have a memo to the City Council in the next two weeks. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • December 11, 2018, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • January 8, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • February 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • March 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by King, seconded by Selmer. Motion Carried, 4/0, McDaniel absent. Meeting adjourned at 5:53 P.M. COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2017-2018 (Meeting Date) KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member TERM 11/14 12/7 1/9/18 2/13/18 3/19/18 4/17/18 4/23/18 5/8/18 6/12/18 7/23/18 8/21/18 9/11/18 10/9/18 11/13/18 NAME EXP. Donald 7/1/19 X X O X X X X X X X X X O X King Monique 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Galpin Orville 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Townsend Latisha 7/1/21 ----- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ McDaniel Royceann 7/1/21 ----- ----- ----- X O/E X O/E X O/E ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ Porter David 7/1/21 O/E X X X X X X X X X O X O X Selmer KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member Item Number: 4.c. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok 10WA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: October 11 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA HARVAT HALL OCTOBER 11, 2018 APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Zach Builta, Kevin Boyd, Sharon DeGraw, G. T. Karr, Cecile Kuenzli, Quentin Pitzen, Lee Shope MEMBERS ABSENT: Thomas Agran, Helen Burford, Gosia Clore STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow, Anne Russett, Judy Jones OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Miller RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: Bristow introduced new minute taker, Judy. Jones, and the City's new Senior Planner, Anne Russett. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS — CONSENT AGENDA: 802 South Summit Street. Bristow explained the property is on the corner of Sheridan and Summit. She displayed the Sheridan side elevation. She said it is a Queen Anne cottage that was originally a hipped roof with projecting gables on at least three sides and another one added to the south. She displayed an historic photo that was used to recreate the porch for a past project. Bristow said the current project is to remove the exiting single -car garage, which was added sometime before 1933, and replace it with a two -car garage. She displayed a picture inside the garage showing the door to the kitchen. This door and the stairs need to remain so there is access to grade level in the garage from the house. There is a trap door in the floor that is the only access to the basement. Part of the garage addition is maintaining space to have the stairs into the main kitchen of the house and retain access to the garage. Bristow showed a back view of the house showing the back of the garage with windows that do not look original and then the south facing gable, with a little deck, and some changes to the east facing gable. Bristow explained the existing garage footprint, the dotted outline, would be converted into a breezeway so the east wall of the breezeway will be on the foundation of the existing garage. The front wall will step back a little bit, which allows this space to become that hyphen that we look for between an existing historic building and a new addition. She said this location allows the property owner to retain a useable backyard. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 2 of 16 Bristow said staff has been working with this property owner and their architect since sometime last fall. They looked at the idea of just extending the existing garage to incorporate space for a second car. Since that garage has a shed roof, as it extended it was just getting to a point where the roof was too low to really have any clearance for a car or anything else. Bristow said they also looked at the idea of extending the existing garage but changing the roof line to a gable that would be similar to this gable, but there is a window in the gable that should be retained. Bristow said it also was not possible to move the garage to the backyard, because the backyard would not be usable, and the Building Official confirmed it was not possible. Bristow said the homeowner need to get minor modification approved because they are short on the required driveway length Bristow said the plan shows the stairs coming out of the kitchen area and down like they currently do, and the area for the trap door for the basement. It also includes some storage space because this would become kind of like a mud room for them, and then the two -car garage. The garage itself is very simple and follows the guidelines. Because this does include both demolition and attaching to the house it could not be a staff -reviewed garage. Bristow displayed an elevation drawing. She noted there are certain trim details on the house that we would also have them replicate, such as making sure that the window and door trim matches what would be on the house. She said the shingles will match the shingles on the house. Bristow said the windows will be metal -clad double hung, the siding will be cement board, and the trim would be wood. The garage will have two single -car, carriage house style garage doors. Bristow showed the breezeway portion and a three-quarter light door and two double -hung windows. She explained that on the south side that faces Deluxe there will be three smaller windows. She showed the back side that won't be visible from the street which includes a passage door for the garage, and one for the breezeway. She showed how the connecting roof for the breezeway is lower than the garage roof and the garage roof is below the windows in the gable so they are not blocked by the building. Bristow displayed some 3D renderings submitted. She explained that some of the details mentioned in the trim are not there, but it shows the massing and size of the addition. She explained that the garage and breezeway are clearly subordinate to the house, yet the front -facing gable roof echoes what's going on at the house on the Summit Street elevation. Bristow said staff does recommend approval of this. She said that to approve an attached garage, an exception must be allowed and staff feels that the site constraints are what allows for an exception to be made to allow an attached garage in this instance, and also finds the breezeway and the garage appropriate. Boyd asked if all plan details needed to be included in the future approval. Bristow explained these details are covered in the guidelines and would be included in any approval. She noted if the Commission did not want an item included, they should point it out. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 3 of 16 Boyd opened the public hearing. There were no comments offered by the public. Bristow noted the architect was present and available to answer any questions. Kuenzli stated she had a very strong negative reaction to the project for the following reasons: Summit Street was the first historic district in town, it is the most visible and the most traveled of the City's historic districts. She believed the attached garage was inappropriate for the historic district. Additionally, she thought the new garage was way too big in proportion to the house and there was no other house on Summit Street with a double -car or single -car garage attached and facing Summit Street. Kuenzli inquired about an alternative solution of leaving the existing single - car garage and then to add a single -car garage in the side yard. Kuenzli noted that across the street from this house on Sheridan is an 1890s house that has a breezeway and a garage, which existed before it was an historic district, but the driveway and double -car garage open onto Sheridan and it's a lot easier to drive onto Sheridan than it is to back out onto Summit Street. Kuenzli added that she found the project inappropriate for the streetscape. Kuenzli asked if it would be possible to put a single -car garage on the east side of the house where there is a pretty large side yard. Bristow said they probably would not be allowed to have an additional curb cut if a garage was added on the east side of the house. She wasn't certain how far away from the corner it had to be before an additional curb cut would be allowed per regulations. Kuenzli said she was just offering a suggestion to try to meet the homeowner's wishes Boyd and Builta noted the breezeway was not there for convenience, but for the kitchen stairs and access to the basement. Builta also noted there was a window that constrained the height of the breezeway. Shope said he understood the concern about the massing, but the issue of a garage facing onto Summit Street was already pre -established. Kuenzli agreed, but noted it was a single -car garage, not a double -car garage. Shope understood but thought the issue of a garage facing onto Summit Street was not relevant because there is one there. Kuenzli believed a double -car garage would set a different precedent. Karr asked if they would be allowed to put up a two -car garage that was not attached if there wasn't the issue of the access to the basement and all those things. Bristow said if they were to remove the existing garage and finish that end of the house, the restrictions would require a distance between the house and the new garage to avoid fire -rated construction. She said from the Commission's standpoint, the greatest concern would probably be exposing the trap door and basement access, something that's been enclosed for at least a very long time, if not always. Architect Steve Miller brought updated plan copies for the Commission based on Jessica's feedback. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 4 of 16 Miller noted the rendering shown might have been very early on in the process and a little more simplified and contemporary looking because of the lack of detail. He said they've worked with Jessica to narrow up the proportions and add the windows. Kuenzli asked if the garage, as drawn on the new drawing, had the same pitch of the roof as the pitch on the gable of the house. Miller said no. That would make it much taller, so it would have a lot more presence on Summit Street side. Shope asked if the pitch of the garage was the same as the front gable on the house, the one that faces Sheridan. Miller said it's actually the same as the little pitch over the porch in that rendering. Karr said he understood the significant issues and restraints with the size of the lot and the corner lot. He said we have an existing garage that we've already deemed historic and he didn't see a reason in the guidelines telling him he could not approve this, or a reason to not vote yes for this. If someone had a reason, he encouraged them to cite it so he could see that view. Kuenzli asked if he saw a problem with the mass of this garage compared with the mass of the house. Karr said no. Bristow noted the guidelines do include things about massing and rooflines, and it is true that for an addition the guidelines would want you to mimic rooflines on an existing structure. We have an issue here with the gables on the house covering a narrower part of the building than the garage is, so it is true that once you have this bigger footprint and you put a gable on it the same pitch as the house, you're going to just come up with a roof that is enormously tall. A traditional method to avoid that problem is to make the roof on a garage have a slightly lower pitch. Sometimes dormers on houses would also have slightly lower pitches, or higher pitches, because of this issue. Otherwise, the guidelines talk about having the addition be subordinate to the house and, in this case, it is set lower. It's separated by the hyphen area, and it is just generally smaller than the house. Shope noted in the new drawing the architect added a window in the gable. All the other gables appear to have double windows. He asked the architect if he considered a double window in that gable that might blend it better with the house. Miller said he would be willing to do that. Bristow said the guidelines for new outbuildings talk about having a small window or a vent in the gable. She said the idea of adding double windows might initially seem to be appropriate, at the same time, a garage is not going to be as ornamented as a house. Kuenzli said the windows should be proportional to the mass that surrounds it. She thought this looked kind of narrow. She suggested maybe just a single window. Boyd asked about the Commission about the motion in the staff report. He said he was inclined to support the motion as written. He felt given the constraints of the property and given there was already a garage there a new larger garage smaller in scale than the house could be approved. He asked if there was additional discussion. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 5 of 16 DeGraw said she was inclined to vote yes. She thought it looked a little contemporary but, it was within the guidelines, so she would vote yes. Builta said he was inclined to vote yes and added that this is an exception because there are constraints on what can be done. Boyd noted there were property limitations. This is a corner property. The garage is going to face a street. It does not have alley access. Bristow noted that the guidelines do include the possibility for exceptions. There is the possibility for an exception for unique site conditions and that is the specific exception that staff was considering for this particular project. Boyd asked if the Commission was ready for a vote. MOTION: Karr moved to approve the certificate of appropriateness for the project at 802 South Summit Street as presented in the application through an exception to the guidelines allowing an attached garage due to the unique conditions present at the site and existing setback. DeGraw seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 5-2. Nays: Kuenzli and Pitzen. (Aaran. Burford. and Clore absent). REVIEW OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ZONING AMENDMENT Anne Russett with Neighborhood and Development Services presented a proposed ordinance for a city-wide Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. She said she would provide a background on how we got here and explain what Transfer of Development Rights are. She said she would explain the existing Transfer of Development Rights policy in our Riverfront Crossings District and then go over what we are proposing in the ordinance. She said since this ordinance was related to historic properties, they wanted to bring it to the Commission for input. Russett said this began on May 29th when the City Council discussed considering a local landmark designation at 410-412 North Clinton Street.That motion was deferred to January 2019 based on a recommendation from the property owner's attorney to put the vote on hold for that local landmark designation until the City had an opportunity to explore a city-wide Transfer of Development Rights program. Since then, Council has discussed a city-wide transfer program. Staff presented to them at a work session on September 4th and received some direction from the Council on how they would like to move forward. Russett explained Transfer of Development Rights. She said they are an incentive to protect historic resources which allows property owners to sell or transfer development rights from historic resources, which are called the sending sites, to receiving sites, which are areas where the City wants to encourage higher density development. The development rights would be applied to another site. Russett said there are some key components to a Transfer of Development Rights program. There are the sending sites, which in this case would be historic resources. The receiving sites are areas HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 6 of 16 where there could be additional development or additional density. There is the transfer calculation, that's used to figure how much density, or how much height, could be transferred from one site to another. There is also a review process and an administration procedure. Russett explained that the City does have an existing TDR program that applies to the Riverfront Crossings District. In Riverfront Crossings the City requires Iowa City landmark designation prior to requesting a Transfer of Development Rights. The receiving sites in this area are any site in Riverfront Crossings. The formula that's used to calculate the transfer potential is the lot area of the sending site x the maximum number of stories allowed on the sending site, the result is the square footage that a property owner could transfer to another site. Russett said for the Riverfront Crossings District, any request for a transfer must be reviewed and approved by City Council. She explained that while receiving sites can go above the base height in that zone, there is a max depending on which area of the district they are located in. Russett said one project has used this incentive since it was adopted into the Riverfront Crossings Ordinance, the Tate Arms Building at 914 South Dubuque. On this site the maximum number of stories is four and the area of the site is 8700 square feet, so the total development rights available for this site that could be transferred, were 34,800 square feet. The developer transferred at least 7400 square feet to the property to the north. The property to the north received an additional story, a height bonus, through this transfer. Tate Arms still has 27,400 square feet of transfer potential that could go to another site in Riverfront Crossings. Boyd asked if the owner of the Tate Arms Building had these rights, but didn't really want to develop something somewhere else, could sell those rights to another developer or must the owner of the landmark property use them. Russett said they could be sold on the private market. Shope asked if there was any restriction or requirement that those funds be used in any way to improve the historic property. If they transferred the development rights for money, would there be any requirement that the money be invested in the historic property from which the rights were sold. Russett said no. Shope asked if the Tate Arms allowance of four stories was based on current zoning for that property. Russett said it was based on the current zoning designation. Karr asked if the zoning was changed, would there then be additional rights that would be sold. Russett said staff is proposing no. Russett discussed direction received from Council regarding the proposed ordinance. She said Council asked that sending sites only include future local historic landmarks, so existing historic landmarks would not be eligible for transfer rights. They requested that staff develop a new transfer formula and not use the one that's currently used in Riverfront Crossings. City Council wants to continue to review and approve any transfer requests. For receiving sites, they wanted it to include areas in Riverfront Crossings and sites throughout the City that allow multiunit development. As a summary of the proposed ordinance, Anne said staff is proposing that properties eligible for Iowa City landmark designation would be eligible, but it only applies to future landmarks. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 7 of 16 Properties that are already landmarked, if they are already in an historic district, or if they are already in a conservation district, would not be eligible for a transfer. City Council felt that it was important to only apply this to future landmarks since these other properties are already protected, and this incentive would only apply to future designations. Russet said that receiving sites could be areas that are zoned either Riverfront Crossings, multifamily residential, or commercial zones that allow multifamily. She displayed a map of the eligible receiving sites. Russett said staff is proposing that there are two options for what could be transferred. An owner could either transfer height or transfer density, not both. The transfer could exceed the maximum height on the receiving site, as well as the maximum density on the receiving site, For the height bonus, it could not exceed 40 feet above the maximum height that is allowed in that zone. There would not be restrictions on increases in density. Boyd asked how many stories 40 feet would be. Russett said four, maybe a little less. Russett said the calculation for the bonus potential for height would be the difference between the maximum allowable height on the sending site and the existing height of the historic structure, so the maximum allowable height minus the existing height would equal the amount that could transfer. Russet said the minimum transfer would be 12 feet. She explained that a 30 -foot existing historic structure with a maximum in the zoned district of 35 feet, would only have five feet to transfer. She said that since that is not much to transfer, the minimum would be 12 feet, or a story, that could transfer. Russett presented an example of density transfer the maximum allowable dwelling units of the sending site minus the existing number of dwelling units that are currently there provide the number of dwelling units that could potentially be transferred. This would be determined at the time the landmark designation occurs based on the base zone for the district at that time. Russett provided a density example using 412 North Clinton. The maximum allowable number of dwelling units on the site is 24. There are currently 18, so the potential transfer is six dwelling units. Russett explained how review of transfers would work. Staff is proposing that transfers would be reviewed by the staff design review committee based on the guidelines in the zoning code for any design review project. The design review committee would make a recommendation to City Council, who would be the ultimate decision maker on the transfer. A proposal that was very out of scale or that didn't fit within the existing context of the neighborhood, might not move successfully through the approval process. Russett discussed how TDRs are consistent with the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan has policies that talk about protecting historical resources. With the historic preservation plan there are goals related to providing economic incentives to property owners to encourage them to preserve historic buildings. TDRs are a potential incentive for property owners to landmark their buildings. Boyd noted this is for future sites and confirmed that this is local landmarks only, not National Register listed sites, but local landmarks. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 8of16 Boyd stated that most of the properties where development rights being discussed here are either in commercial districts or high-density residential areas. He asked if a potential local landmark is zoned at the lowest density possible it wouldn't have much to transfer, correct? Russett said that if it's a large site, such as a farmstead that might be historic on a large parcel but with only one remaining building, the site could potentially be subdivided and there could be more dwelling units built. This could result in more potential to transfer. Kuenzli noticed among the receiving sites proposed were the South Johnson/South Van Buren Streets between Court and the railroad tracks. She said the stated goal of this is to preserve an historic structure somewhere, but to be able to increase either height or density within the receiving area. Johnson and Van Buren currently are mostly two or three-story structures. Kuenzli asked if this were to pass, could a developer could come in and build eight stories or 12 stories on those streets. Russett said theoretically yes, but with the process in place it would go through design review and City Council, who would look at consistency and compatibility with the existing neighborhood. Russett added that in the proposed ordinance there would not be limitations on density, but there would be limitations on height, 40 feet above the maximum in the zoned district. 12 stories in that area would not be allowed based on the proposed TDR amendment. The maximum height in that area is 35 feet, so with TDRs a new development could still be much larger than what's there but there would be a process in place for review and approval to make sure the development was not out of scale for the area. Boyd clarified the receiving sites would be Riverfront Crossings and where there are existing multifamily units. Kuenzli said she was in favor of saving historic properties, but not if the cost is going to be the destruction of other neighborhoods. Builta pointed out if a house is preserved and they sell a floor or two somewhere, that's not going to destroy a neighborhood. Kuenzli said she is concerned that it is not going to be a floor or two judging from the discussion so far. Shope noted there are homes in residential areas that have large lots and questioned if this was based on lot size, not the existing structure size. Russett said the height was based on what's allowed in the zone compared to what the existing structure is. Shope provided an example. A house is one story tall and it's on a lot that is a little over half an acre. If you figured her allowance based on that half acre for four stories, the existing house hasn't used much of that. Russett clarified that if it's in a residential district the maximum height is probably 35 feet where the most she could transfer would probably be two stories, Shope asked again about the half -acre lot size. Russett said the transfer would just be two stories. For the height, it doesn't matter what the lot size is. Shope asked if it was based on the size of the current structure. Russett said the height of the current structure. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 9 of 16 Karr said he understood it was limited and was concerned that existing homes that are already landmarked wouldn't be eligible, especially for the six or seven that were recently landmarked. Karr said he loved the fact that this is incentivizing preservation of individual landmarks, but he would be upset if he was one of the recent landmarks left out of this incentive. Karr wondered what happens when we look at the Downtown District. He said he felt this would have ramifications there. He noted if there were some building owners downtown who probably weren't excited about getting in the district, this would be a fantastic way to entice them. Boyd said those may not be individual landmarks. That may be a district. Karr and Boyd asked if it had to be individual properties. Russett said it must be local historic landmarks. Karr said he was asking about an entire district, such as the proposed Railroad Depot District on Clinton Street. Boyd said he thought the railroad qualified because it is currently in Riverfront Crossings. Russett clarified it is only for individual landmarks in Riverfront Crossings, as well. They need the landmark designation. Boyd asked if people could be incentivized individually to be a landmark if a Downtown District didn't happen. Karr thought that would give a landowner downtown a reason to fight the district and go on an individual landmark basis, because it'd be worth more money to them. Russett believed that may be true. Bristow asked if the downtown becomes a district, would it then be removed from the receiving sites. Russett said yes, Historic districts, conservation districts, and landmarks are not eligible as receiving sites. Bristow followed up on Karr's comments about the recent landmarks. She said that because this deferral and TDR development process came up when the five that achieved landmark status happened, she wondered if there would be any condition that included just those five because they were done at the same time when this process started. Russett said if the Commission wanted to recommend that, if they wanted to recommend changes to the proposed receiving areas, she could pass that along to the Council and the Planning Commission. Boyd said he was glad they were talking about this. He said he thought it was helpful because the Commission gets a lot of questions about the economic incentives that can be provided for landmarks. He said TDRs are being discussed because one particular property owner asked for it. Boyd asked if there were other incentives that could be considered. He said that there is an example in North Carolina where new local landmarks receive automatic property tax deduction. Boyd said there may be other incentives that help achieve some of the goals in the comprehensive plan. He said he felt we were doing this because one property owner asked and the focus had been narrowed very rapidly based on a very rapid timeline and a deadline that was set by the property owner and the City Council. Boyd said he wondered if the City could consider other potential incentives, regardless of what happens with the TDRs. He wondered if the Commission was supposed to bring those ideas or if Planning and Zoning Commission came with them. Russett said if the Commission had ideas for Planning and Zoning to investigate, staff could definitely do that. She wasn't sure if the property tax idea was something we could do here, but she HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 10 of 16 knew other communities do it, so staff could look into that Bristow clarified that the property owner for 410-412 didn't necessarily come up with the Transfer of Development Rights out of the blue. The Tate Arms project had been successful and the idea of protecting historic properties this way had been considered by the planning staff in the past. Staff had always thought about the possibility of adopting something like this to protect historic properties, partly because through research, we have learned that this is something that other communities, and there are some examples in the packet, have taken on to promote the preservation of their historic properties. The first few communities that came up with the process found there were some lessons to be quickly learned, and they had to tweak the way the process happened. She said there was a document put out by the National Park Service that she may have given the Commission earlier in the year. She said it goes talks about those lessons learned and how a community can make sure TDRs work as they are supposed to. Russett asked if they could have wording for the downtown stating that if there is a proposed district, those properties cannot individually landmark for the TDR bonus instead, to avoid a non - incentive for a potential historic district. Bristow wanted clarification on whether this incentive could be possible for a future Downtown District. Russett said that once an area has been selected for a district, if the group of property owners say no to the district, then they cannot individually landmark to get the TDR. An owner can agree to the district, but you cannot strategize to reject the district in order to go for the individual landmark and the incentive of the TDR. Russett said the reason they were not allowing future districts to be eligible is that there are certain properties in an historic district that might not be contributing or might not be as historically significant and wouldn't meet local landmark requirements, so it isn't fair to provide the incentive for the entire district. She said another option is that future districts could potentially be eligible to utilize the incentive. Boyd noted that all our current historic districts are largely non-commercial districts. He said he wondered if there could be a consideration about how we think about commercial districts, which was something that needed to be considered anyway. Expectations for a residential district are different than expectations for a commercial district. The buildings are used differently now than they were historically. In the residential districts those structures are largely being used as they were when they were built, for the most part. Boyd said if there is an effort to limit the scale of this proposal, commercial is one thing to think about. He said he thought high-density residential by itself, was the highest zoning piece. He thought that's largely where these properties probably are anyway, just given where our historic properties are. Boyd thought one item of consensus would be including anything that's been landmarked in 2018. Kuenzli asked about the receiving areas that allow multiunit development. Kuenzli thought that was a little vague. Boyd questioned if that was the red area on the map. Russett said yes it includes all multifamily residential zones and commercial zones that allow multifamily. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 11 of 16 Boyd said since those are the receiving sites, could those also be the categories that we use for landmarks or districts. Russett said that was a possibility and she liked the suggestion of commercial districts because residential districts, even though you could maybe get more units, have lower height limit. Commercial districts generally allow a lot more development potential, so it could be more of an incentive in a commercial district and a landmark designation could restrict the ability to develop that property to its maximum allowable density or height under the zone. She said to her, the commercial districts make sense because the base zoning designation probably allows a lot more height than is currently there. Boyd said he thought one other item for consensus was the idea of individual properties and potentially future commercial districts. Russett said we could bring this back to the Commission at the next meeting if they want to think about it more, but she needed to move it forward to Planning and Zoning next week. She asked for the Commission's feelings on if this was something they wanted the City Council to consider or if there was no interest in providing this type of incentive for historic properties. Boyd said he thought we should find incentives for landmark and district designations. He thought the City should consider it, and the Commission was one step in that consideration. He said Planning and Zoning will consider it, and ultimately City Council will consider it. He believed the Commission's job was to look at the impact on historic preservation. He said TDRs are a potential tool that helps incentivize historic preservation. He noted there were some things that needed to be worked out as a City, but he didn't believe the Commission was the one to work out all of those details. Russett restated what she'd heard from the Commission. She heard this should apply to landmarks that were designated in 2018, and maybe consider future commercial historic districts being eligible. She heard some concern about the receiving sites. She said if they wanted those changed, even if it was not a consensus, she would pass that information along. Boyd agreed there was some concern about the receiving sites, particularly those in residential areas. He didn't think there was a lot of concern when there was already a lot of density and a lot of other taller buildings. He said the Commission was open and interested in exploring what other incentives might be available outside of this particular program. DeGraw said there was a concern with the calculation with regard to lot size that used with Tate Arms, because at times that would create an overly generous handing out of TDR that couldn't be honored. Shope was concerned that this is currently restricted to future landmarks. He said he understood the rationale, which is that those existing landmarks are already protected, but historic landmarks also have higher costs of maintenance. He had a bit of an issue with precluding the benefits of this from those who already own those historic landmarks. Boyd wondered if there was a way for us to think about other incentives for existing landmarks. Shope noted this is the incentive that's before us right now. He asked for a clarification on the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 12 of 16 following: On page 3 of the October 11th memo it says eligible sending sites include properties designated as an Iowa City landmark, eligible for landmark designation, registered on the National Register of Historic Places, or listed as an historically significant building per a survey. He said he thought what was presented as eligible is an Iowa City landmark, and that's not the way he read this sentence. Russett said that portion of the October 11 memo was a summary of the current ordinance in Riverfront Crossings. She clarified that if the property is in Riverfront Crossings and is registered on the National Register, it is eligible, but is still required to get local landmark designation before receiving the incentive. Russett said she would pass these suggestions forward and incorporate some of them into the draft ordinance if there was consensus. Russett said if the Commission wants to, it could move this forward to Planning and Zoning with amendments. The Commission could move that it be deferred until the next meeting and we it could be brought back. Boyd asked if the Commission could move that they are generally in favor of this, but have a few concerns that have been identified. Russett said that was an option. Boyd asked if the Commission could still revisit the amendment at some point. Russett said it could be revisited at the next meeting on November 8th, which would be before the amendment goes to City Council for public hearing. Boyd said he'd like to move that the Commission is generally in favor of the TDR amendment to the zoning code and has made some suggestions. The Commission's role is to decide if this is a tool that historic preservation should use. Russett suggested moving the amendment forward and then, for a property owner that wasn't thinking about development but still wondered what was going on with the TDR, add the offer of a simple tax reduction. That would be appealing and save that person the burden of having to research how to capture this potential. Russet said she thought some property owners would do that. MOTION: Boyd moved that the Commission is generally in favor of incentives, including this amendment. The Commission has shared some specific concerns but are broadly in favor of moving forward. Karr seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Agran, Burford, and Clore absent). REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review. 1037 East Washington Street. This project will repair about five of their original windows and replace storms, which we don't need to review, but they put it on the application anyway. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 13 of 16 722 East College Street. This project will replace the concrete steps that were an original part of the building. They have completely deteriorated. 900 North Johnson. This project is repairing siding that was deteriorated and repairing the rear deck. 430 Ronalds Street. Bristow said the owners of this property are repairing windows Minor Review —Staff Review. Bristow said the University Partnership property at the last minute had to replace the roof because it had failed suddenly. She said it was being replaced, but it would not be metal. It will be shingles. Boyd wondered if it was just staff review if they go from metal to shingles. Bristow said yes, that was something that changed at the beginning of the year. 927 South 711 Avenue. Bristow said this property was part of a series of bungalows that could have been their own historic district at the end of 711 Avenue, but they are a part of the Dearborn Street Conservation District. The siding on just the front and rear dormers was failing and so they are replacing the siding and trim. 412 S Summit Street. Bristow said this roof has been deteriorating for a long time and they are replacing it. The internal gutters will remain. 900 N Johnson. Bristow said they will be putting in a radon mitigation system in the area where all other utilities are located. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 DeGraw thought there was one area, page 9 of 14 paragraph 4, where it says DeGraw noted. She thought that was supposed to be Kuenzli, and then the Kuenzli after was supposed to be DeGraw. Bristow said she would go back and listen to the audio copy of the minutes. She said she would go back, review, and correct it. Boyd referenced page 11, the second paragraph, second sentence, where it says, "Boyd noted if a termite of moisture will not affect them" should be attributed to Pitzen. Pitzen agreed. MOTION: Builta moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 14 of 16 September 13, 2018 meeting with the changes noted. Kuenzli seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Agran Burford and Clore absent) COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Downtown District Survey: Bristow said the final survey and report from our consultant Alexa McDowell is uploaded on the City's website. It is separated on the website into parts so that readers can download smaller portions instead of the entire document. The report is the first part which includes the findings. Bristow said McDowell talks about her methodology and makes recommendations to the City based on her findings. Another section is the Multi -Property Document, which is historically what Iowa City has used to discuss the overall built history of Iowa City. This document discusses downtown history, the types of architecture, and the types of material. Bristow said McDowell also includes appendix items such as maps and the table, tax incentives, and information about the National Register Criteria. She said another appendix item is the Secretary of the Interior standards, which would be the basis for any review that would occur. Bristow said a public presentation by the consultant is scheduled in the Old Capitol Building in the Senate Chamber on October 22 at 5:30 pm. She said there will also be a presentation with a City Council work session the following morning, October 23, at 9:00 a.m. Old Settlers' Cabins: Boyd noted the Old Settlers' cabins in City Park are coming along quite nicely. He thought we should look at exploring what it would take to make those a local landmark. They are City -owned, He thought it really would highlight the work the City has invested in those properties and really help talk about their history, which is really kind of interesting. Boyd asked to put this on a future agenda unless there were strong concerns not to. Bristow said staff would investigate that. ICAAR: Karr received an email last week from Monica Hayes, who is in charge of ICAAR, the local realtor conglomeration, who would like to do a lunch and learn with HPC at the ICAAR building in Coralville. He didn't know if it mattered that it was not in Iowa City, but the intent would be to hopefully have some Commissioners do a short presentation to explain to them what historic preservation is, what we're trying to accomplish, and some of the guidelines, so hopefully more realtors would know what's going on when they are potentially listing or have a buyer for a house in an historic district. Boyd said that was great and that he'd love to be a part of it. Karr said they were going to try and push it into 2019, but if anybody would like to help, that would be great. He said he may also try to get the Home Builders Association involved, too, because there is a Remodelers' Council and there could be a nice group of people there. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 11, 2018 Page 15 of 16 DeGraw said she could design print materials, if needed. Award Nominations: Bristow said the award season process would be beginning again. She would be putting out a call for nominations. She said staff keeps a big list of potential things that people point out throughout the year and other projects, but of course any Commissioners who know of any projects that might be eligible for an award, should nominate them. The Awards will be Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:30 pm in the Iowa City Public Library with a reception at 5:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT: Kuenzli moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Shope. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017-2018 NAME TERM EXP. 11/9 12/14 1/11 2/8 318 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 819 8/23 9/13 10/11 AGRAN, THOMAS 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X O/E BAKER, ESTHER 6130/18 X X X X X X X X BOYD, KEVIN 6130/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X O/E X X X X X X X X X BURFORD, HELEN 6/30/21 X X O/E X O/E CLORE, GOSIA 6/30/20 X O/E O/E X O/E X X X X O/E 01E X 01E DEGRAW, SHARON 6/30/19 X O/E X X X X X X X O/E X X X KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X KUENZLI, CECILE 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X 01E X X X MICHAUD, PAM 6/30/18 X X X X X X X PITZEN, QUENTIN 6/30/21 X X X X X SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 X X X O/E X SWAIM, GINALIE 6/30/18 O/E X X X X X X X WAGNER, FRANK 6130/18 X O/E 01E X I X X X X KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused ... = Not a Member Item Number: 4.d. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Housing & Community Development Commission: September 20 r -.®oar, CITY OF IOWA CITY ,t M E M 0 RA N D U M Date: December 5, 2018 To: Mayor and City Council From: Kirk Lehmann, Community Development Planner Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission At their October 11th meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission approved the September 20, 2018 meeting with the following recommendation to the City Council: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _x_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action Done MINUTES FINAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION September 20, 2018 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Mitch Brouse, Charlie Eastham, Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Lamkins, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly, Steve Rackis OTHERS PRESENT: Sara Barron RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vaughn called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 20, 2018 MINUTES: Eastham moved to approve the minutes of July 20, 2018. Harms seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. SARA BARRON TO PRESENT ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COALITION: Sara Barron (Executive Director, Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) was asked to present about the Affordable Housing Coalition and what services it might be able to provide the Commission. She first thought she would talk about the racial equity question but saw on today's agenda that HCDC will discuss what an outstanding example of a racial equity assessment can look like for a proposed policy. Instead, Barron said she would discuss what the Coalition is, their mission, and services. She will answer why the Affordable Housing Coalition exists though there are so many housing groups in the area, and specifically how the Coalition benefits groups like HCDC and the City. The Affordable Housing Coalition is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit focused on advocacy, education, partnership and policy development. The mission of the Coalition is to provide or create affordable housing opportunities for people in Johnson County, particularly those who are at 80% of the median income or below. Barron noted it can be confusing because there are many housing organizations, but the Coalition does not provide housing and rather focuses on community education, community advocacy, and partnership development. For example, the Coalition produced a video that features residents and other members of the community about the value of affordable housing and the impact it has on individual households and the community Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 2 of 11 That video is an example of how any one housing provider might not have the time or resources to create it, but as a coalition they put their resources together to create larger scale community advocacy resources. Barron also noted she attends Planning & Zoning and HCDC meetings both in Iowa City and Coralville because few housing providers and residents can attend all these meetings, so she works as an advocate to gather and share information and to see the big picture of housing throughout Johnson County. They look for not only gaps in housing, but gaps in knowledge, and making sure that knowledge gets disseminated to the broader community. Barron shared the example of a recent League of Women Voters forum where City Council candidates were asked a question about affordable housing options and what the City could do to help stimulate more housing opportunities for people at or below 30% of the area median income; several candidates didn't know discriminating against people who have a Housing Choice Voucher is not allowed in Iowa City because they did not know that Council made it a protected class. That is why the Coalition wants to make sure that information is available to people in addition to changing attitudes about affordable housing. Attitudes have already changed, people talk about affordable housing and are generally supportive of it which wasn't the case 10 years ago. The next step is to take that support of affordable housing and translate that into support for people living in affordable housing throughout the community. There are always people who say they support affordable housing, but then don't want it down the street from them, so the Coalition is educating the community on why and how affordable housing can be safe and appropriate throughout the community and how it benefits everyone. Barron stated the Coalition has an advocacy and policy development piece, but it is looking with a broader view, noting there are many groups in the area that have a tremendous knowledge of housing issues (City Staff, City Councilors, Housing Trust Fund, Shelter House, The Housing Fellowship, etc.). The Coalition is not going to be impacted if a specific funding decision is being made, or if a specific policy is made that privileges one type of housing over another, so they can look at the general impact and not be too tied to the outcome. Their goal is to bring all the stakeholders of the community together and join forces to move forward together. Barron next discussed how the Coalition might be helpful to HCDC. First the Coalition pays attention to what is happening throughout Johnson County, and if one municipal makes a housing decision, it can look at impacts on neighboring communities. If Iowa City has lots of restrictions for example, the Coalition can explore if people will just go to another city. Therefore the Coalition is working in neighboring communities to make the same types of advancements Iowa City is doing in an effort to make all communities favorable for residents who need affordable housing. Currently Barron is putting together a survey for business owners to see what employer's needs and thoughts are regarding housing options, and the impact for them to attract and retain workers. Coralville for example has built a significant amount of their economy around the service industry which are low wage jobs, so are their housing options for those workers. Barron noted it is important to remember there are many ways affordable housing affects people as well as businesses and employers. The Coalition can also assist the Commission promote news about new housing policies and options the City is doing. The Coalition is a membership organization, everyone is welcome to join, either as an individual or as an organization, and they represent around 100 different organizations and individuals throughout the community ranging from banks to cities to faith organizations to service clubs, etc. Barron noted one of her goals is this year to work more on the connection to the residents themselves. Eastham stated a measure of success on providing affordable housing is the number of families who are not housing cost burdened (that is, who spend less than 30% of their income on housing expenses), and a way to reduce cost burden without creating new or replacing homes is providing other assistance. Eastham asked what the Coalition thinks. Barron stated two things impact whether someone can afford their housing: the cost of the housing and household income. Therefore, the Coalition is paying attention to discussions about minimum wage because one way to make sure people can afford their housing is to raise wages as well as creating more rental assistance. Barron noted the Coalition represents a diverse number of members, so it can be difficult to come to consensus about what the favorite strategies should be. But what they can do is provide information about lots of different strategies, noting things that have been successful in other places, talk about the implementation of ideas, share information and provide support to those doing the affordable housing work in the communities. The Coalition is open to proposals that would provide additional rental assistance, but it has not yet signed off on a specific proposal they would stand behind 100%. Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 3 of 11 Barron did want to say one thing about racial equity and how people's access to affordable housing looks very different depending on who they are in the community and the search for affordable housing for a single mom with three kids is very different than the search for a person with a disability, someone without documentation, someone that comes from a family who has never been a homeowner, all people who may need affordable housing but coming from different circumstances. This can create potential threats to one's ability to achieve affordable housing. Barron noted that homeownership for black families is now as low as it was when the Fair Housing Act was created 50 years ago, there has been no progress made in eliminating the gap of white homeownership and black homeownership in the United States. Barron thanks HCDC and shared brochures and membership applications with HCDC as well as a letter that describes some of the things the Coalition accomplished in the last year. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN: Rackis stated the City is proposing these changes because when the Local Homeless Coordinating Board first started strategic planning a couple years ago, one item that came out was how to address a Housing First project. The original name of the project was FUSE for Frequent Users, serving the chronically homeless. These are homeless people with diagnosed disabilities, the hardest of hardest to serve in the population. Rackis was on the FUSE steering committee and when the idea of providing vouchers was raised, he suggested implementing a secondary preference for targeted admission because it would administratively be the easiest way. However, National Housing Trust Fund regulations account for projects that have tenant based vouchers, like the City's Housing Choice Voucher, and project based vouchers, like Ecumenical Towers, Capital House and Pheasant Ridge. Once the legislation was finalized, a project with project based vouchers could charge rents up to the HUD published fair market rents, but if they were tenant based vouchers, they had to use rents established under the National Housing Trust Fund legislation. Cross Park Place will have 24 units one -bedroom units; the 2019 fair market rent for a one -bedroom unit is $684, but under the National Housing Frust Fund rules, if a project has tenant based vouchers the maximum rent they can charge is $380. The City already committed to tenant based vouchers with what they are calling a secondary preference as all these individuals would be disabled which is part of the primary preference category. The City tried to make that work with the Iowa Finance Authority but it did not. Therefore Rackis is before HCDC to modify the City's Administrative Plan to allow the Iowa City Housing Authority to project base a portion of the tenant based vouchers. This will not create additional vouchers (they have 1,215 Housing Choice Vouchers) but will rather allow project based vouchers at Cross Park Place which permits higher rents and therefore higher subsidy from the Housing Authority, ensuring better cash flow for that project. The project needs to maintain a healthy income flow as it will be used to pay for the services that will be available to residents housed in Cross Park Place. Rackis noted that services will not be mandatory for the residents, but will still be needed. This modification is the City reacting to the realities of the National Housing Trust Fund legislation and finding a solution that allows better cash flow for the project. This project meets many of HUD's priorities in how it funds Continuum of Care initiatives, which is now focused on homeless prevention, rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing rather than shelter and transitional housing. Rackis said this amendment allows the City to do the project based vouchers and to provide a vehicle that can quickly provide support to homeless and disabled persons found eligible by the Continuum of Care coordinated entry, the hardest to serve population. Rackis noted the second part of the amendment clarifies what they have been doing, formerly called special admissions, which is a secondary or targeted preference. All City preference categories are weighted, with the elderly, disabled, and families with children under the age of 18 who live or work in their jurisdiction weighted as the highest preference category. When the City takes people on the waiting list that is who they are typically taking. By clarifying and making minor changes to the secondary targeted preference, it opens it up to anyone coming out of the Continuum of Care coordinated entry for those who meet the definition of homeless and disabled. The determination will be up to Shelter House and other partners, but once decided it allows the City to provide vouchers more quickly. Harms asked for more clarification about benefits of the Iowa City Housing Authority's PBV program and how families secure units where it might be hard to use vouchers. Rackis said that benefit is from the Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 4 of 11 HUD handbook for project based vouchers and the Housing Authority stresses housing choice as a priority, believes in scattered site housing, and does not want to create programs that concentrate housing. Project based vouchers can concentrate housing, so they looked at the hard to serve homeless population; but if there is a low-income housing tax credit project, the Housing Authority may want to partner. The Housing Authority has two ways to partner with project based vouchers, they can issue an RFP and take bids, or they can select a project that has gone through a competitive bid process. Shelter House went through a competitive process with the Iowa Finance Authority, so the City was able to select them for project based vouchers. If the City wants to sponsor a project in a neighborhood that has higher rents and that otherwise our population of tenants and families cannot get into, the City can find a developer to work with and create a project based project in that neighborhood. That is the benefit to help families secure units in areas where it might otherwise be hard to use vouchers. Eastham asked if the Iowa Finance Authority, in their awarding process, take away points from awarding funds for project based voucher projects. Rackis said it changes, it can be based on the percentage of project based vouchers proposed or simply if there are project based vouchers, points are awarded or if none than no points awarded. Eastham asked if it was possible for the Housing Authority to change a project based voucher to a tenant based voucher. Rackis stated the Iowa Finance Authority was concerned about tenant based vouchers because after the 12 month lease expires, the tenant can just leave, so what happens to that voucher. Rackis explained that the City has a waiting list for vouchers and if someone leaves and gives up their voucher then the next person/family on the list gets the voucher. Rackis added with project based vouchers, if an individual or family in good standing with the landlord and Housing Authority requests to move with continued assistance after the completion of a year lease, they must be issued a tenant based voucher and allowed move. So in reality tenant based and project based vouchers work the same in these types of projects. Eastham asked if the City would stick with the 100 project based vouchers or would that number change. Rackis said the amount will be 5% of the total 1,215 vouchers, which is around 60, that at any given time could support two project based voucher projects. Eastham asked if this change would result in fewer vouchers being used because a project based voucher may be used for a unit that is not rented out 6 months out of the year or so. Rackis replied that with a project based voucher if someone moves out and the unit is vacant, no housing assistance payment is made until another tenant is in that unit. However they can continue to pay on a vacant unit for an additional month while they are looking for a new tenant to fill the space. That would not be done for a tenant based voucher, the voucher would leave with the tenant. Rackis added this year they received more funds from HUD than previous years and the communication coming from Congress states they intend to keep the funds at this level so he does not feel there is any need for concern for the tenant based vouchers. Brouse asked how they transition tenant based vouchers into project based and are there enough vouchers in each program. Rackis said in the case of Cross Park Place, there are 24 units so there will be 24 vouchers committed. If somebody gets to the point where they leave Cross Park Place for other supported or permanent housing, they will convert from a project based to a tenant based voucher and Cross Park Place will then refill that unit and the City will give Cross Park Place another project based voucher. The project based vouchers will also be on a one year cycle with renewal so they are treated administratively the same as tenant based vouchers. He noted there is always turnover in the voucher system. McKinstry moved to recommend to City Council amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrative Plan, Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. TENTATIVE SCHEDULE OF HCDC MONITORING UPDATES IN FY19: Lehmann stated that for projects that HCDC funds, the City likes to have organizations come to a meeting and update HCDC on their projects. Lehmann created this tentative schedule for monitoring updates: November 15 • Little Creations Academy, FY18 Daycare Rehab Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 5 of 11 Crisis Center, FY18 Food Bank Rehab Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County o FY19 Aid to Agencies o FY19 Siding Improvement Successful Living o FY18 Rental Acquisition o FY18 Rental Rehab o FY19 Rental Acquisition January 17 • Domestic Violence Intervention Program, FY19 Aid to Agencies • Shelter House o FY17 FUSE land acquisition and construction o FY19 Aid to Agencies o FY19 Rental Acquisition The Housing Fellowship o FY17, FY18, and FY19 Rental Rehab o FY19 Rental Acquisition o FY19 CHDO Operating Habitat for Humanity o FY17 Property acquisition and construction on N. Governor Street o FY18 Property acquisition and construction on Blazing Star Drive o FY19 Property acquisition and construction of 2 homes on Blazing Star Drive February 21 • Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program, FY19 Rental Acquisition • Prelude, FY19 Transitional Housing Improvements • Arthur Street Healthy Life Center, FY19 Clinic Rehab • 4Cs, FY19 Daycare Technical Assistance March 21 • City of Iowa City o FY17 Tenant Based Rental Assistance o FY18 and FY19 Park Improvements o FY18 and FY19 Homeowner Rehab o FY19 South District Investment Partnership Lehmann will invite the organizations to either submit a written update of the project or to come to the meeting and present. UPDATE ON ANNUAL INPUT FOR THE 2016-2020 CITY STEPS CONSOLIDATED PLAN: Kubly stated each year Staff solicits input regarding the five-year CITY STEPS Consolidated Plan, the goal is to get input from actual residents rather than service providers and work with local nonprofits to meet people and get that input. Next week Staff will go to a Housing Authority voucher briefing meeting which will have residents present who are trying to get on the voucher program. Then on October 6 Staff will attend the Center for Worker Justice meeting and will solicit input there as well. The goal is to see if the findings are consistent with the goals of the CITY STEPS Plan and if there is a significant change, the plan can be amended. Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 6 of 11 UPDATE ON RACIAL EQUITY ANALYSIS FOR THE SOUTH DISTRICT INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP: Kubly noted the City was allocated $100,000 in HOME Funds to rehab and sell four duplex units on Taylor and Davis Streets as owner -occupied, HCDC had some concerns about the racial impact that may have. Staff utilized the City's Equity Toolkit to look at that along with soliciting guidance from the Human Rights Equity office. The first question in the Toolkit is who is affected. Kubly said she focused on racial and ethnic equity for this report rather than looking at income. She began by looking at census blocks as close to Taylor and Davis Streets as possible. The census data is from 2010 because anything newer covers broader areas. This data shows blacks or African Americans comprise 35% of the population in the Taylor/Davis area whereas it is only around 6% in all of Iowa City. Additionally, the Hispanic population is higher in the Taylor/Davis area than in the rest of Iowa City. Kubly also looked at the housing stock and rental permits in that area and a large percentage of the Taylor/Davis area has duplexes with rental permits. There are 96 total parcels in that area with 188 units, and 168 of those are rentals (89%). Converting four units to homeownership through the HOME project would reduce the rentals to 86% of units. Next Kubly looked at housing tenure based on race, changes in assessed values in the neighborhood, and the use of housing choice vouchers in the area. Those results are noted in the report in HCDC's agenda packets. Kubly stated the next step was to conduct neighborhood outreach and they attended a South District Neighborhood Meeting in July, though it wasn't well -attended with only three residents present, none of whom live on Taylor or Davis Streets. Due to the low attendance, Tracy Hightshoe (NDS Director) and Henry Harper (Community Outreach Assistant) did a neighborhood walk-through to talk to residents. The question posed to the residents as they walked the neighborhood was: Which of the two housing activities would neighbors prefer? 1) Rental rehabilitation where the City would work with the landlord to remodel/make repairs to homes and the City would require that the landlord couldn't raise rents for a specific period of time, or 2) Homeownership where the City would buy two duplexes (4 homes), make repairs/remodel and sell the homes at approximately what it takes to rent the homes — goal would be about $850/month if possible. Six preferred homeownership, two preferred rental and two were okay with either, they were just happy the City was investing in their neighborhood. After data was collected, staff did the analysis in the Toolkit and identified African Americans, Hispanics, low income residents, and renters as potentially disproportionately affected populations. Per the Toolkit, staff identified affordable homeownership possibilities and neighborhood improvements (housing quality, fewer housing code violations, reduced police calls and nuisance complaints, increased property values) as potential positive impacts. Staff identified displacement of current residents or residents no longer being able to afford to live in the neighborhood as potential negative impacts. From that analysis, staff developed recommendations to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive impacts. These included limiting tenant displacement by acquiring vacant properties; providing relocation assistance to displaced tenants (per HOME requirements); giving current residents of the South District preference in purchasing the homes; fostering partnerships with Habitat, Horizons, or related agencies for homeowner education opportunities; continuing to work with Henry Harper for ongoing communication with neighborhood residents; looking for additional opportunities for future investment in the neighborhood; and reviewing the Equity Toolkit prior to undertaking any additional phase of the South District Partnership in the future. Harms noted if these four rentals are turned into four owner -occupied homes, the rental percentage would fall from 89% to 86% and wondered if the City has a goal of percentage of rentals. Kubly said there is no specific goal set and rather take an incremental approach and see how this goes or identify if there is more interest in homeownership opportunities. She noted they would not do more than 35% in the neighborhood to ensure/preserve affordable rental options. Alter asked if any preliminary data was collected on adjacent streets in that area and the percentage of homeowners or property values in those areas. Kubly said they did not review that data. Eastham stated when he reviewed the data earlier his opinion is Taylor and Davis have a much higher percentage of rental permits than any of the surrounding areas. Lehmann directed them to the map of rental permits for that area and it is significant in the Taylor/Davis area. Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 7 of 11 Eastham directed to section S.II.13.2 of the report to the table labeled Douglass Court Neighborhood Assessed Values and the discussion of a similar program that was done in the Douglass Court/Douglass Street neighborhood where assessed values increased. Eastham does not believe that table proves there was an increase in assessed values by this program, it is misleading, and the percentage of increase for the assessed values for the properties in the Douglass Court area between 2011 and 2018 is actually less than 2% per year which is close to the average increase throughout the City. Lehmann noted perhaps it should show it stabilized assessments more so than increased them. Eastham said the table should also so the comparison to the overall City's assessed values as the decline between 2006 and 2011 included the housing crisis time period. Kubly said they will revise the table. Eastham also noted that in the report section Stage IIIA Worksheet it shows potential positive impact and neighborhood improvements and that is a general statement and doesn't refer to specific properties so he doesn't understand how these four homes will aid in improving housing quality, fewer housing code violations and fewer police calls at those four homes. Kubly said the impact is intended to be on the neighborhood in general, not just those four properties. Eastham believes it is speculative. Brouse noted that the goals of these programs often go beyond just the properties directly affected. McKinstry asked if the City is collecting information on this neighborhood anyway, not just for this analysis. Kubly said yes, they can track all this data, and they can find specific data on those four properties with regards to housing code violations and police calls. She said they are working with the Police Department to identify the problem properties, however the City cannot just acquire a property that is not for sale, but having the information is helpful. Eastham noted this area is tricky, they are dealing with an area that is primarily African American so he asks that City Staff be very careful and deliberate about what they are saying about what the conditions are now and what the conditions would be if this project moves forward. Vaughn noted that four units may not make a difference regarding the number of police calls in a neighborhood and it may take more units than that before an actual change was seen. McKinstry agreed but noted at least there is a baseline for data. Lehmann noted this is part of a broader neighborhood stabilization project and the benefit is not only on the four units that are changing from rental to owner - occupied, there is a larger impact to gain. Kubly noted with project they are targeting units where the mortgage would be comparable to the fair market rents to make it affordable homeownership. Eastham noted the people in this area are predominately black and therefore the preference for the home ownership should state the buyers will be black residents. Lehmann said that may not be possible, the City attorney would have to be consulted. Alter noted that can be achieved by giving preference to the residents of the neighborhood without stating a race preference since many residents in the neighborhood are of one race. Vaughn asked how the City will find the buyers for these homes once converted from rentals. Kubly said that will come with communication with the neighborhood association and residents. And the priority would be for residents already in the South District, which encompasses more than just Taylor and Davis Streets. Padron noted that the City can prioritize residents in the neighborhood but what if none of them want to buy a house or qualify then it has to be available for others. Harms asked if there was a possibility of someone buying the units and turning them into rentals. Lehmann said it must be the buyer's primary residence and any sale within 10 years would have to be approved by the City for an income qualified buyer. Eastham asked about the Douglass Court/Douglass Street UniverCity project and how converting those rentals into owner -occupied affect the racial equity in that neighborhood. Kubly did not have that data readily available. McKinstry thanked the Staff for gathering this data and presenting it, he is supportive of the transition of rentals to owner -occupied and feels the impacts on racial equity will be seen after the project is complete. Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 8 of 11 Harms asked if there are any other rental units the might possibility be available to be bought by the City and transitioned to owner -occupied. Kubly said they are going to look at a unit next week, she is not sure of the address, but before they move forward on any other units they want to make sure there is a positive outcome on this particular project. INTRODUCTION TO THE ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING: Lehmann shared with the Commission a presentation on the Fair Housing Study, what the study is, what it entails and how the City plans to carry it out. The City strives to affirmatively further fair housing, which is also a legal requirement as the City is the recipient of federal funds. However, fair housing does not just apply to those items funded by federal funds but by any activity of the City. Affirmatively furthering fair housing means the City has to take meaningful actions over historical patterns of segregation, promote fair housing choice and strive to foster inclusive communities free from discrimination. Fair housing means one has the right to choose housing free from discrimination and for housing protections are stronger than for other categories such as credit or employment. In Iowa City, there are more housing protections than are federally required and what the State requires, for example public assistance as a source of income is a protected class in Iowa City in addition to age, disability, color, race, marital or family status in addition to other. These protections extend to owners, renters, and even includes those seeking financing or insurance for housing. This Fair Housing Study will update one completed in 2014, the City tries to update it every five years, and it will look at all barriers to fair housing, not just zoning laws, public regulations and policies the City uses but also the private market (landlords, banks, insurance companies). The Study also looks at the availability of affordable housing and range of unit sizes because that is an important component to fair housing choices. Staff intends to complete this study by May 2019 so it can inform the update to the Consolidated Plan the next year. Lehmann noted when this study was conducted last year, five major barriers were identified. The following are those barriers and what the City has done to address them, which is also reported to HUD: 1. Racial and ethnic concentrations in Iowa City. The City is trying to disperse affordable housing throughout the city to avoid concentrations and since FY15 they have created 397 new affordable units dispersed throughout the community; the Affordable Housing Location Model helps disperse certain kinds of housing throughout the City by preventing concentrations of units. 2. The Affordable Housing Location Model disperses affordable housing but can reduce where new affordable housing can be made. In 2017 HCDC and Council revised the Model and decreased the areas in which affordable housing was restricted and this will continue to be an ongoing conversation. 3. African American and Hispanic individuals may experience unfair treatment in home mortgage loan denials and high-cost loans. This came up initially based on denial rates so the Office of Equity and Human Rights reviewed the lending data with more detail and information than the City originally had; their analysis showed banks classify any kind of loan not moving forward as a denial, so there is an inflated percentage of denials for some of these groups and the Office of Equity and Human Rights didn't find the same discrepancies as at first identified. 4. Barriers to mobility and free housing choice for protected classes and persons of low income. This is the reason public assistance as a source of income (Housing Choice Voucher receipients) became a protected class. Since that change, the City has seen 92 new landlords accept Housing Choice Vouchers and there is less turnover of vouchers as people search for housing. The City has also started surveying voucher holders about their experience using the program. 5. Fair housing violations go unreported either because there is a lack of confidence something will change or someone doesn't know they are a protected class and there is some form of discrimination going on. The City tries to do public education and make sure landlords are aware of what are and are not violations, trying to ensure tenants know what their rights are and publishing those things in multiple languages, and auditing sites for discriminatory ads. Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 9 of 11 The City is starting the process and is collecting data, they have not begun analyzing data yet as they want to also get some public input to find information. They are meeting with stakeholder groups, so far the local Homeless Coordinating Board, and they are reaching out to landlords, realtors, home builders, apartment owners, they attended a Job Fair to talk with people trying to find jobs, and will host a public meeting on September 27. Lehmann noted there will also be a survey, so efforts are both broad and targeted to experts. Once data is collected and analyzed, they will begin drafting the report and receiving feedback. The timeline is to have an initial draft in February with a final draft in April and May. Eastham noted that if this Commission is going to be making a recommendation to Council regarding this study he hopes to see the document before May in order to have sufficient time to review. Lehmann agreed and noted the Commission will be reviewing the document through the multiple drafts. Lehmann asked the Commission their first blush feedback, any initial thoughts on what the City should first examine, and what are barriers to fair housing the Commission sees. Lehmann encourages the Commission to send him any comments. Vaughn suggested Lehmann email the Commission the documentation thus far so they can review and think about possible ideas and suggestions. Eastham noted that he feels zoning has been a barrier to affordable housing but does feel in the past couple years the Zoning Commission has not denied many multifamily zoning requests. Padron noted that many of people who are opposed to affordable housing in their neighborhoods have are very vocal with a good command of English and can prepare elaborate arguments whereas other constituents may not have a way to attend Council meetings or be able to speak in public, so perhaps the City can work for find a way to help those constituents be able to express their feelings and concerns. McKinstry noted a report that was in the paper a few months ago about Hills Bank having a higher rate of loan denials in Hispanic and Black applicants. McKinstry talked to Tim Feener at Hills Bank, and suggests Lehmann talk to him as well, and he explained how the process of reporting is discretionary and a lot of banks don't report denials on cases where people are have not even completed the application process, and Hills Bank does report that even through it is not that the bank denied the loan, it is the customer halting the procedures. Eastham added perhaps banks will deny people before any application process is started and therefore there is no paper trail and no reporting. Lehmann noted the public kickoff event for this study will be September 27 from 5:30 to 7:00 pm at the Assembly Room at the Senior Center and encourages the Commission to attend. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FY18 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE &EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER)* — ONLINE AT www.icgov.org/actionplan Lehmann shared with the Commission a revised PR26 report which is included as an appendix to the CAPER to show the HUD income match what the City says because they are different standards of accounting, accrual versus cash basis. The CAPER is a report that shows what the City has accomplished in the past year and what projects from FY18 or earlier progressed or were completed. Lehmann focused his report to the Commission on the summary tables in the report, first showed the goals established in the Consolidated Plan which all funding decisions must meet. The table shows many goals were modest, 90 homeowner units rehabilitated, 5 households having direct homeowner assistance, and so forth; it also shows progress towards the goals and given what they expect in FY19 the City should reach its goals. The only category where it is unlikely to reach the goal is to Remove Slum and Blight, initially the City was doing fapade programs for businesses downtown and there has been a step back from that. There is still talk of doing fapade programs downtown but will not be funded through CDBG funds. Not only are we reporting the number of organizations we fund each year, we report the number of individuals we are assisting. The second table looks at specific projects from FY18, where they stand, what is complete, what still needs to be completed. Many projects are done, especially those for public facility and public service projects, affordable housing projects take longer to progress. The Housing and Community Development Commission September 20, 2018 Page 10 of 11 next table reports projects completed during FY18 by HOME and CDBG funds, regardless of the fiscal year the project was awarded and the other table shows the projects that are still underway as of the end of FY18. Lehmann noted the Race and Ethnicity Composition table shows that about 36% of the households the City assists are black or African American, about 47% are white, about 9% are Hispanic. Eastham asked if the statistics in that table are for projects that are only assisted with HOME or CDBG funds. Lehmann confirmed it was and showed only the projects completed in that particular fiscal year. He added public facility projects like with the Crisis Center helps many people so it inflates the numbers somewhat. The next table shows the resources available, in FY18 there were less new resources available, there were some holdover funds which will be expended this upcoming fiscal year. Eastham inquired if it was possible just to get a simple table to show for affordable housing the number of beneficiaries that actually reduced cost burden. Lehmann stated cost burden is not reported in the CAPER but it could be if it fits within the HUD structure of the report. Cost burden could be examined. Alter moved to approve and submit to HUD the FY18 Consolidated Annual Performance & Evaluation Report (CAPER), Eastham seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed 7-0 STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann noted the next meeting is October 11 and will be looking at one LITHC application and CDBG projects that don't have agreements. There may be a Consolidated Plan Amendment if an update is needed, and the FY20 Aid to Agencies applications have been received so those will be sent out for review. There is an affordable housing memo being drafted to show the progress the City has made in all its affordable housing programs and that will be shared with the Commission. The Affordable Housing Location Model memo is being forwarded to Council along with the South District Partnership Equity Review. ADJOURNMENT: Eastham moved to adjourn. Brouse seconded. Passed 7-0. Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 9/21 10/30 11/16 12/18 1/23 2115 3/15 4/19 5/24 6/21 7/10 9/20 Alter, Megan 6130/21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X Brouse, Mitch 6130/21 -- -- - — - X X Conger, Syndy 6130/18 X X O/E X X X X X X X - -- Eastham, Charlie 6130/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30120 X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X O/E Harms, Christine 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X X X Lamkins, Bob 6/30/19 O/E X O/E X X O/E X O/E X O/E O/E O/E McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X O/E X X Olmstead, Harry 6/30/18 X O/E X X X X X X X X Padron, Maria 6/30/21 X X X X X O/E O/E X X X X X Vaughan, Paula 6130/19 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X Key. X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Item Number: 4.e. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Parks & Recreation Commission: November 14 IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED NOVEMBER 14, 2018 RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B Members Present: Suzanne Bentler, Steve Bird, Cara Hamann, Lucie Laurian, Ben Russell, Angie Smith, Joe Younker Members Absent: Jamie Venzon Staff Present: Brad Barker, Matthew Eckhardt, Zac Hall, RaQuishia Harrington, Juli Seydell Johnson, Jeff Sears Others Present: Nancy Carlson CALL TO ORDER Chairman Younker called the meeting to order at 5 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None OTHER FORMAL ACTION: Bird requested a revision to the October minutes on page 2, paragraph 10. Revise the section of the sentence that reads "sets up well for tube slides" to "sets up well for embankment slides." Moved by Hamann, seconded by Russell, to approve the October 10, 2018 minutes as amended. Passed 8-0 (Venzon absent). PUBLIC DISCUSSION None INTRODUCTION OF NEW STAFF MEMBER: Seydell Johnson introduced Brad Barker as the new Superintendent of Recreation replacing Chad Dyson. Barker shared that he is very excited to be a part of the Iowa City Parks & Recreation Department. He is originally from Ames. He has a Masters in Parks and Recreation Administration from the University of Illinois. He started as the Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation in Vinton, Iowa and eventually moved into the Director position. He feels that this position is a great opportunity to further his career while using what he learned in Vinton and expand on that. He is excited about moving back to a college community. RECREATION OUTREACH AND EQUITY: Seydell Johnson reported that at the request of the City Council, the department has been asked to report on ways in which they are currently reaching out to the Community and what attempts are being made to involve a more diverse population in recreation programs in the future. She noted that the department has been using a social equity tool kit that allows staff to see where participants are coming from. The department started with swimming lessons and garden plots. Jeff Sears and Matthew Eckhardt will report PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 14, 2018 Page 2 of 6 on this topic. The Mayor asked RaQuishia Harrington to look at Birmingham, Alabama's youth programs and compare them with Iowa City. Harrington will present her findings as well. EQUITY TOOL HIT MAPS & PROCESS — MATTHEW ECKHARDT & JEFF SEARS: Eckhardt and Sears explained that several months ago they discussed the idea of using the City's GIS mapping software to look at current program participants and to determine what future efforts can be made to reach underserved areas of the city. It was determined that swimming lessons was the best program to begin the analysis process, as it is easily identifiable. The GIS system allows staff to see which people are served in the various areas of town and neighborhoods. Eckhardt explained that staff could go back as far as 2014 to look at each session (three sessions per year) since then to determine what areas are best served and what areas need increased outreach. It has been expressed that there is a need for more outreach and programming for the south district of Iowa City. Eckhardt explained the equity tool kit maps and the processes for using them. Because there may be multiple people from one household who sign up for lessons, it was determined that it was best to use a heat map for this analysis. A heat map shows data represented in colors. Eckhardt explained that red to yellow on the heat map indicates a high density of users. He also noted that in summer months, the numbers increase. Eckhardt explained that the department partnered with the Sudanese community in 2016 and therefore, the map indicates a higher density of users in the Pheasant Ridge area. In 2015/2016, the department started the swim scholarship program. Eckhardt said they found that transportation, not necessarily fees, is the biggest obstacle when it comes to increasing the diverse population using the Recreation programs. Fett asked why it doesn't show that to be an issue in Pheasant Ridge. Eckhardt explained that this group tends to carpool. Sears also noted that staff will begin using this method when looking at the departments summer camp programs. Sears explained that when looking at the garden plot registrations, they added an overlay minority impact map and then retrieved addresses from the departments registration system which then populated onto the map showing where the garden renters are located. He noted that those that rented the Kiwanis garden plots all lived on the west side, Chadek Green gardens were rented by those that live on the east side, while Reno was further widespread. He explained that Wetherby garden plots had the most diverse group of renters noting that this could be because it offers 110 plots and has been established in Iowa City the longest. He stated that there are renters from outside of Iowa City as well that use Wetherby Park garden plots. Laurian expressed her concern that renters would not be shown on the minority impact map. Hall noted that the City has an overall minority impact map where information is gathered from census data collected. Seydell Johnson explained that these maps provide a tool for the department when planning future programming. For example, it will likely show that there isn't a need for garden plots in areas where there are fewer renters as home owners may have the available space to plant a garden in their own yard. Hall noted that the future Walden Hills gardens will serve the many renters on that side of town. PARTNER & OUTREACH EVENTS — RAQUISHIA HARRINGTON Harrington noted that staff is reaching out to various parts of the community to learn what their interests are, educate them about the programs that are offered that they may not be aware of, and to determine how to better serve them. She expressed the importance of collaboration and listening to them. She said that, although, there are some language barriers, she is working with family advocates at the schools as well as nonprofit organizations around the community to see how information can be better translated. She has worked with groups such as United Action for Youth to assist her in reaching the teen population and to determine what programs they are interested in. As mentioned, Mayor Throgmorton asked that Harrington look at programs offered in Birmingham, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 14, 2018 Page 3 of 6 Alabama for potential programming ideas for Iowa City. Harrington found that Iowa City offers many of the same or similar programs that Birmingham offers. Specifically, the Parks and Recreation Department offers programs in sports and fitness, music and movement, special events, social & cultural activities as well as programs centering around Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math (STEAM). The department has started hiring high school students in the aquatics and customer service areas. The Iowa City Library offers a program called the Teen Activity Group (TAG). This group meets monthly to discuss books, upcoming events, play video games and just to talk about what is going on. This program is to allow teens a greater voice at the library. The City's Summer of the Arts Festival features a variety of opportunities for musical performers and entertainers from both high school and college age students. Harrington expressed the importance of offering awards for their performance. An example is the Iowa City Human Rights Youth Recognition program. Area youth are nominated by members of the public for their promotion and contribution to human rights causes both locally and globally. Harrington stated that there is a long list of agencies who are doing great programming but need further collaboration. Harrington noted that it may be helpful to have a youth advocacy group where youth can come in and talk about what is needed and wanted. There is a need to learn how better to serve them and how we can be more involved in these initiatives. She also noted that transportation is an ongoing concern for both youth and adults. Younker asked if there is an area of Iowa City that we don't currently have contact with. Harrington said that the west side of Iowa City is the most underserved. She also noted that finding space to hold a program on the west side is a challenge. There may be programs that have a following but nowhere to meet. Laurian said that she is impressed with what is offered in the community. She does have a concern about there not being more programs for afterschool hours. Harrington said that Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County offers such programs. However, she also noted that once a child reaches the age of 5"/6' grade, the supervision drops as well as the afterschool program attendance. (Harrington's presentation is attached to these minutes.) SWIM LESSON OUTREACH — MATTHEW ECKHARDT Eckhardt shared that the department has been raising funds for a swim lesson scholarship program for the past few years. This program has raised a considerable amount of money; however, the department has resources for more. Eckhardt is working with other community members in developing a program called Swim Here in an effort to teach everyone in the community to swim. Eckhardt said that the fees do not seem to be a barrier for participation as the lessons are offered at a very economical price and the department offers low-income discount for residents of Iowa City who qualify. Eckhardt also reiterated that transportation is a big issue. He further stated that while many programs can be taken to the public, swimming is not one of them. Staff will be offering a physical education style course to Faith Academy, a faith based elementary school geared to reach low-income neighborhoods, set to begin in January. Staff is in the final phases of developing an after-school swim program with Alexander Elementary that will begin in January and run for 6 weeks. Looking to expand the program, staff is finding that most after-school programs have 90 participants, which is posing an obstacle. Staff is currently working with Lemme Elementary staff and City Transportation Services to see how we can overcome the transportation issue. When reaching out to targeted areas, Eckhardt has worked with Alexander Elementary to gather data from their free lunch stats and demographics. Eckhardt commended staff member Kate Connell for gathering much of the information needed for tonight's presentation. Seydell Johnson mentioned that staff is currently looking at partnering with the U of I Department of Public Health to offer another initiative to get kids involved in health and wellness activities. Staff would be able to do programming in our gyms teaching them healthy lifestyle choices as well as swimming. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 14, 2018 Page 4 of 6 CIP BUDGET UPDATE — JULI SEYDELL JOHNSON Seydell Johnson shared the most up-to-date budget information with Commission, explaining that this is still in draft form. This draft will go to Council in January. Seydell Johnson reviewed the various items listed in the Parks & Recreation section of the report (full report is attached to these minutes). She started with the Park Annual Improvement Fund explaining that this is for general miscellaneous small projects within the parks system. The next item on the list is Park Annual ADA Accessibility Improvements. She noted that the projects that have been completed with ADA updates include Pheasant Hill, Mercer, Highland and Tower Court Parks. Next year's projects will include Brookland, Oak Grove and Black Springs Circle Parks. Willow Creek Park will get new restrooms, a park shelter and a playground in the summer of 2019. She said that she will have more information for commission regarding the Annual Recreation Center Improvements at the December meeting. She noted that the budget for both the Lower City Park Playground and Willow Creek projects have been boosted. She explained that the East Side Sports Complex Tree Buffer includes only tree planting next year. These trees will serve as a buffer between the railroad and future development. There is no indication that the City will proceed with a master plan for an athletic complex. A new item on the list is the City Park Ball Field Improvements. These will include improvements to lighting as well as the addition of some fencing around the dugouts and backstops. She stated that the City will be looking for designers to develop a plan for 2020 projects to include a new shelter and small playground at Fairmeadows Park. This playground will focus on activities for younger children as there is a larger playground with amenities for older kids located at Grant Wood Elementary nearby. Wetherby Park will get a new restroom, shelter and playground. In 2020 the playground will be installed and the shelter replaced at Scott Park. Napoleon playground, located in the center of the softball complex, will be replaced. Other items will include repairing of drainage issues and providing accessible pathways to trails. HVAC and dehumidification upgrades to the Mercer Park Aquatic Center and Scanlon Gymnasium are included in the CIP. Laurian and Bentler both expressed concern about the Ped Mall project being listed under the Parks and Recreation budget. Seydell Johnson explained that is because the downtown area used to fall within the Parks Division and it hasn't been moved from there on this report. Laurian asked about the item titled Mercer Park Ball Diamond #1 Turf Conversion. This project would convert one field from natural materials to synthetic turf. Seydell Johnson said this would likely only occur if the school district agrees to be the primary financier. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF Parks & Recreation Director — Juli Seydell Johnson: • Staff Training: Seydell Johnson held an all -staff training that included a tour of several park projects. • Staffing: Seydell Johnson reported that staff have been busy with hiring and that it is great to have a full administrative staff again. Recreation Division Superintendent — Brad Barker: • Staff Meetings & Training: Barker noted that he has been busy meeting with all the staff of the Recreation Division learning what they do, how he can help to make their jobs more efficient, and learning about the community. He has also been busy training in the budget, finance, and purchasing procedures. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 14, 2018 Page 5 of 6 Parks Division Superintendent — Zac Hall • Snow & Leaf Removal: With the recent snowfall, staff has been cleaning snow from parks/trails as well as assisting the Streets Department in leaf pick-ups. • Villa Park: Parks staff have been working on this project with a portion of the playground installation. • Tree Advisory Committee: Hall reported that this committee held its first meeting on Friday, November 9. They will be working on the forestry management plan. • Sand Prairie: Staff has been doing natural areas work at Sand Prairie which includes pulling out much of the invasive species. • Facilities: Staff is in the process of winterizing athletic facilities, park shelters, restrooms etc. within the parks. • EAB Update: Staff will return to council to discuss the EAB plan. Hall is currently working with purchasing to create an RFP looking for a company to treat trees deemed healthy enough to do so. • Staffing: Seydell Johnson reported that there will be a staffing change within the Parks Division. With the recent retirement of a maintenance worker, staff asked council to approve the hiring of an assistant superintendent, rather than fill the maintenance position. They were agreeable. This staff member will work on tree inventory and other new projects within the city. This person will also work with the new mowing contract approved by the City. CHAIRS REPORT: Younker expressed his appreciation for the equity presentations given at tonight's meeting. He would like to make this a regular topic on future agendas. COMMISSION TIME/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE ATENDA ITEMS Smith said she appreciates the ADA paths that are going into various parks. She noted that it would be nice to have a playground for elopers. Seydell Johnson said this is being addressed during playground designs. Laurian also mentioned that the tree committee held their first meeting. While she believes that we should not be treating trees that are going to have to come down anyway, it is difficult to stick by that after speaking with a member of the public who expressed the value of that same tree in a whole different way. She further noted that that kind of value cannot be measured. She has concerns about how to balance both sides. Bentler suggested that there is likely a need for more education to the public, stating that it is important to let them know that the tree will be replaced. Younker expressed his concern that these trees may become a liability issue which also needs to be shared with the public. Bird agreed that education is very important. He noted that he learned a lot from the EAB presentation given by staff and that the public could learn from that as well. Laurian asked if staff should lobby for more money. Seydell Johnson said that this topic will be on the next council agenda. Younker stated that it may be helpful to educate the community through letters to the editor. Seydell Johnson noted that she has been approached by a realty group to discuss trees in general. Staff will proceed with a presentation to educate these realtors. Bentler asked if the treatment proposal has been taken to the northside neighborhood group. Hall said not since the Council Meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Bentler, seconded by Laurian, to adjourn the meeting at 6:16 p.m. Motion passed 8-0 (Venzon absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION November 14, 2018 Page 6 of 6 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NAME c 00 c o\o00 0000 0000 0000 0000 Opo Opo TERM N M 00 N EXPIRES N r. c 00 � Suzanne 1/1/17 X O/E X X O/E NM X X X X X X Bentler Steve Bird 1/1/22 X X O/E X NM X X X X X X Larry Brown 1/1/18 X Clay 1/1/18 X Claussen Wayne Fett 1/1/19 X X O/E X X NM X O/E X X O/E X Cara 1/1/20 X X X X X NM X X O/E X O/E X Hamann Lucie 1/1/10 X X X O/E X NM X O/E O/E X X X Laurian Ben Russell 1/1/22 X O/E X X NM X X X X X X Angie Smith 1/1/18 X X X O/E X NM X X O/E X X X Jamie 1/1/20 X O/E X O/E X NM X X X X X O/E Venzon Joe Younker 1/1/20 O/E X X X X NM X X X X X X NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member now Item Number: 4.f. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning & Zoning Commission: September 20 r CITY OF IOWA CITY AN DUMEMOR ..� Date: December 5, 2018 To: Mayor and City Council From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their October 18, 2018 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the September 20, 2018 minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council: By a vote of 5-0 (Hensch recused, Dyer absent) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00018, an application submitted by Johnson County, Iowa for a rezoning of CI -1 to P-1 on 5.82 acres of land located at 1914 S. Gilbert Street, 1804 Waterfront Drive, 260, 306, & 346 Southgate Avenue subject to City Council approval of the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the City's floodplain management standards, and 2. Prior to any site disturbance on the property receive approval from the State Archeologist to proceed. Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 20,2018-7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Carolyn Dyer STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Ann Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Ritter, Matt Miller, Kyle Hancock RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 5-0 (Hensch recused, Dyer absent) the Commission recommends approval of REZ18-00018, an application submitted by Johnson County, Iowa for a rezoning of CI -1 to P-1 on 5.82 acres of land located at 1914 S. Gilbert Street, 1804 Waterfront Drive, 260, 306, & 346 Southgate Avenue subject to City Council approval of the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the City's floodplain management standards, and 2. Prior to any site disturbance on the property receive approval from the State Archeologist to proceed. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: 1►.['TiT� REZONING ITEM (REZ18-00018): Discussion of an application submitted by Johnson County, Iowa for the rezoning of approximately 5.82 acres of property located at 1914 S. Gilbert Street, 1804 Waterfront Drive, 260, 306, & 346 Southgate Avenue from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Neighborhood Public (P-1). Hensch recused himself from this item per his conflict of employment with Johnson County. Russett stated this rezoning application is for a change from Intensive Commercial (CI -1) to Neighborhood Public (P-1), it is submitted by Johnson County, Iowa, for a proposed Behavioral Health Urgent Care Center or Access Center. The Access Center will provide services to Planning and Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 2 of 6 individuals experiencing behavioral health crises and connect them with necessary service such as mental health services or housing support and the center will provide crisis observation and stabilization, substance abuse treatment and act as a low -barrier winter shelter. The property is generally located at the northwest corner of Southgate Avenue and the Crandic Rail Line, the property is currently privately held however Johnson County has a purchase agreement for the property. Russett showed a map of the current zoning in the area, the project site is zoned Intensive Commercial, the areas to the east and west are also zoned Intensive Commercial, there are some areas to the north and the west that are zoned Community Commercial. The proposed zoning is to Neighborhood Public, which is a zone district that applied to properties owned by either County, the City or the Iowa City Community School District. The Comprehensive Plan, future plan use map, identifies this area a commercial and the South District Plan also identifies this area as an area for commercial development. Russett showed some photos of the project site. She noted the site is located within flood hazard areas, in both the 500 and 100 year floodplains. The City does have a floodplain management ordinance which does not allow facilities to locate within flood hazard areas if they are the base of operations for emergency services, are particularly difficult to evacuate during a flood event, or provide services essential to the life, health, and safety of the community. Per the floodplain management ordinance, these facilities are Class 1 Critical Facilities. Based on the description of the Behavioral Health Urgent Care Center, staff has determined it to be a Class 1 Critical Facility since the facility could be difficult to evacuate and would be unable to provide stabilization and treatment services during a flood event. In order to comply with the City's floodplain management ordinance, development of the proposed Behavioral Health Urgent Care Center requires raising the grade around the facility to the 500 -year flood level elevation. Furthermore, at least one access to and from the site needs to be passable during a 500 -year flood level event. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the development of the center must comply with the requirements for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the City's floodplain management standards. The site is accessed via Southgate Avenue and the applicant is exploring providing a connection to the site via Waterfront Drive that crosses the Crandic railroad and that access might be able to be used during a flood event. Russett noted there are also possible archeological resources in this area and therefore Staff recommends a condition of approval that the site must be approved by a State Archeologist prior to any site disturbance. In terms of stormwater management, the site was platted in 2007 and required at that time to install stormwater management facilities, and these stormwater management facilities will be further analyzed by the public works staff at the time of site plan review to ensure they have an adequate capacity for the proposed access center. Russett stated Staff has received one letter from the public regarding this possible rezoning, which was passed out to the Commission, and the concerns in the letter were focused on stormwater management. Staff recommends that REZ18-00018, an application submitted by Johnson County, Iowa for a rezoning of CI -1 to P-1 on 5.82 acres of land located at 1914 S. Gilbert Street, 1804 Waterfront Drive, 260, 306, & 346 Southgate Avenue subject to City Council approval of the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the City's floodplain management standards, and Planning and Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 3 of 6 2. Prior to any site disturbance on the property receive approval from the State Archeologist to proceed. Signs asked if the access on Waterfront Drive would solve the problem of ingress and egress during a flood event. Russett noted part of Waterfront Drive is above the floodplain and based on the elevations it would probably be the best location for that access. Baker asked why staff chose to use the 500 year floodplain as the condition placed on approval rather than the 100 year event. Russett replied that the 500 year is what is required for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the Zoning Code. Baker asked what the difference between the 500 and 100 year events. Russett explained the difference as the percentage of which the event could occur. A 500 year flood event would happen with a 0.2% chance in a year and a 100 year event is a 1 % change within a year. Baker asked what the difference would be on the development if the City required it to be at the 100 year event standard. Russett said the elevation grade the property would need to be raised would be lower than the 500 year elevation. The impact of a 500 year event is greater and therefore the elevations need to be higher. Baker asked if the difference in elevations from the 100 to 500 year events have impact on the neighboring properties. Russett stated regardless they need to provide stormwater management. Townsend asked if the whole area would be raised to the 500 year level. Russett said just the building on the property and an access driveway. Townsend noted that at any given time there may be anywhere from 16 to 60 beds in the facility, and is concerned how to get that many people evacuated if there is a flood. Russett said that is why the facility needs to be elevated to the floodplain, in 2008 the access across the railroad tracks and even the corner of Southgate Avenue on the southeast side were not under water. Parsons noted there is generally enough warning during a 500 year flood event to have time to evacuate. Parsons opened the public hearing. Scott Ritter (Hart -Frederick Consultants) answered Baker question of the difference in elevations from a 500 and 100 year events is 2.7 feet and the natural ground there is at the 500 elevation so they will raise the area a little to get above that, and they would add an access off of Waterfront Drive to be used for emergencies. Ritter also noted regarding the letter from the neighbor, that property is above the subject property, the subject property is downstream. The difference between the subject property and Highway 6 is one foot difference in elevation. Baker asked if any other sites or locations were considered. Ritter is not privy to those discussions, that discussion would have been with the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. Matt Miller (Project Manager, Johnson County) stated there were several other properties researched for this access center. He noted he was hired by the County on May 15 and at that point they already had this location picked out, but he does understand there were other locations previously looked at but for one reason or another just didn't pan out. Parsons asked about the Good Neighbor Meeting and if one has been held. Miller said one has not been held yet, but they are planning to conduct one. Kyle Hancock (Hansch, LLC, 1840 S. Gilbert Street) is concerned and wants to address the plan for runoff and stormwater management. The property that he owns is downstream and at lower Planning and Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 4 of 6 elevations than the subject property and feels raising the subject property up will put his property and others at more of a risk. Hancock also raised concern about the construction process and plans, and if the building will be in the southeast corner of the property, he questions what is the proposed use of the rest of the property. Ritter responded that the rest of the site will remain as is except for the area where the building and parking lot will be. There is currently a detention pond already there with outflow going east. Parsons closed the public hearing. Signs moved to recommend approval of REZ18-00018, an application submitted by Johnson County, Iowa for a rezoning of CI -1 to P-1 on 5.82 acres of land located at 1914 S. Gilbert Street, 1804 Waterfront Drive, 260, 306, & 346 Southgate Avenue subject to City Council approval of the following conditions: 3. Compliance with the requirements for Class 1 Critical Facilities per the City's floodplain management standards, and 4. Prior to any site disturbance on the property receive approval from the State Archeologist to proceed. Martin seconded the motion. Signs noted typically the Commission sees more of a site plan with such applications so they can see where the building will be located and where the detention basins will be, etc. Townsend is concerned with flooding in that area and the possibility of children being there during a flood. She noted that property will only have the building and parking lot and then a lot of open space that will be zoned P-1 and something could be put on that area like a school. Parsons asked if that were to happen, would Staff need to approve that site plan. Russett confirmed they would, and for a school to be there the property would need to be owned by the School District, as long as the County owns the property there could be a public use there but not likely a school. Hektoen noted that any structure that is put on this property would have to be elevated to the 500 year floodplain plus one foot. Martin stated she likes the proposal and feels good about the two caveats for the recommendation because this access center is something the area really needs. The plans for elevations make sense. Parsons agrees with Martin and feels this will serve the community and conforms with the area. Baker shared Signs concern that they did not receive site plans or elevations for this proposal. He added it helps with decision making and likes to have those items presented. Russett stated there are not different standards for rezoning public versus non-public zones, having a site plan and elevations is not something that is required of anyone for rezonings however is something that is encourage as it does help the Commission in the decision making process. Baker said if this were a private project he would likely want to defer and request more information, however he does agree with Martin that this access center is much needed in the community. Baker asked a general procedural question, at the last three meetings the Commission has been Planning and Zoning Commission September 20, 2018 Page 5 of 6 asked to alter a regulation or zone based upon a specific problem of a specific project, here is a problem so change the rules for us situations. Baker wonders if that is a recurring process the Commission deal with often. Hektoen said they are not asking the Commission to change the rules for them, they are asking for a rezoning and a rezoning is to satisfy the needs of whoever is doing the development. Russett noted rezoning applications can be initiate by the City, the property owner, the developer, the purchaser, in effort to create a new project. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0 (Hensch recused, Dyer absent). Hensch rejoined the meeting. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of September 6, 2018 Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett introduced the new associate planner, Jessie Lile. Baker will miss the October 18 meeting. Townsend will be absent October 4 and November 1 meetings. Adjournment: Martin moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018 KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused Not a Member 2/15 311 (W.S) 3112 3115 (W.S.) 4/2 4/5 (W.S) 4116 4/19 5/3 5/17 617 6121 7/5 8/16 9/6 9/20 BAKER, LARRY --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- — -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- X 01E X X DYER, CAROLYN X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X 01E X 0 O/E 0 FREERKS, ANN X X X X X X X X O/E X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X O/E O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X 01E X X X X X X X X X X X X X PARSONS, MAX O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X I O/E X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X. X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE O/E X X X X X X X X X X O/E '-- -- '-- -- '— -- '-- -- I TOWNSEND, BILLIE -- — -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused Not a Member Item Number: 4.g. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 18, 2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Public Art Advisory Committee: November 1 FINAL MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 1, 2018 — 3:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Tam Bodkin Bryk, Vero Rose Smith, Wendy Brown, Steve Miller, Joe Welter (for Ron Knoche), Juli Seydell Johnson NOT PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Bollinger, Morgan Musselman PUBLIC PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Kumi Morris PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Thomas Agran stated that he would like to discuss the BenchMarks program and the de- installation of the benches on the Ped Mall in response to the concerns raised by Vero Rose Smith on the behalf of the Blue Stockings art collective during the October 4 meeting. Agran works for the Iowa City Downtown District and has managed the BenchMarks program for the last few years and has also participated in it himself. Agran stated that the Downtown District was aware of the benches' de -installation for a while and that they had been talking with the City for a long time about how that de -installation would be handled. Agran stated that the Downtown District had solicited feedback from the BenchMarks artists which they submitted to the City along with their recommendations. Agran stated that the artists' feedback involved an understanding that the benches were impermanent and there was a desire for the money made through the sale of the benches to go back into the public art fund or to go back to the artists. Agran stated that the Downtown District's full recommendation was that if the benches were marketed as painted benches and gave credit to the artists, that the public could interpret the sale as supporting public art, therefore, if the money from the sold benches could not go towards public art, then the benches should not be advertised as pieces of art in order to not mislead the public. Agran stated that, because the benches were going to be sold as just a City asset, the Downtown District's recommendation was that the benches not be advertised as art in order to not mislead the public as to where the money from the sale of the benches was going. Agran said it felt unfair to credit the artists and leverage the value of the benches accordingly without any of that money going towards serving a similar project or program. Agran stated that his current understanding of the future of the BenchMarks program, given the Ped Mall renovations, is that the Downtown District has reallocated their title sponsor for the Benchmarks program to the downtown mural program. Agran stated that the last he was aware of, in regard to the Ped Mall renovations, benches were being set aside in order to be part of this program once the renovations are complete. Agran believes the benches will be installed near the playground area. Agran stated that he is not sure how things will pan out, but that as far as he knows right now, the program will continue as a funded opportunity. Tam Bodkin Bryk noted that she believes the concern over the de -installation and how it was handled centered around the artists feeling disenfranchised by not receiving credit for their artwork. Agran responded that he understands this frustration but that his view of the situation is that, in this specific context, he sees it as an issue of artist rights and that exposure is not necessarily a fair way of promoting the benches. Agran also mentioned that the Downtown District asked the City to be notified of when the benches went up on the auction site so that he could communicate with the artists, and that he was not ever notified of this. Vero Rose Smith arrived at 3:40 p.m. Rose Smith stated that the conversations she is aware of through her involvement with Blue Stockings was that there was miscommunication of professionalism in dealing with contracts and how much an artist should expect to hear after their work has fulfilled a contract. Agran stated that there had been a lot of conversation about how credit is given and how credit is leveraged for financial gain and that the Downtown District had taken the position of discouraging the City from using the artists' names because they did not think it was something that actually benefited the artists. Rose Smith thanked Agran for coming to clarify and discuss the situation with the Committee. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 4, 2018 MEETING Wendy Brown moved to approve the minutes of the October 4, 2018 meeting. Juli Seydell Johnson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. REVIEW OF SUBMISSIONS FOR THE PUBLIC ART MATCHING FUNDS Marcia Bollinger announced the first applicant is Jenna Larson, the editor-in-chief of Fools Magazine. Larson distributed copies of Fools Magazine's most recent publication, which was released in Spring 2018. Larson stated that Fools Magazine releases publications once a semester and has been in operation for a little over two years. Larson stated that Fools Magazine is a student organization that serves as an arts and culture magazine for students who are interested in expressing their creativity and for the city as well. Larson stated that they have both student and community members and that the entire editorial board for Fools Magazine is made up of students. Bodkin Bryk asked Larson where the magazine is distributed. Larson responded that Fools has their release days every semester and that this semester's release day is December 7. Larson stated that their location changes each semester and that last semester it was Merge and the semester before that was at the IMU. Larson stated that because the magazine is free and there are limited copies, the magazine is distributed very quickly. Brown asked if the libraries receive copies. Larson responded that as of now, Fools Magazine does not provide copies to the libraries. Bodkin Bryk asked how many copies are typically printed. Larson responded that they usually print around 300 to 400 copies and that last semester was the magazine's largest release, of around 450 copies, which was possible due to funding from the University of Iowa Student Government (UISG). Larson stated that they expect a smaller printing this semester due to financial reasons, which is also why she has applied for the Public Art Matching Fund. Bodkin Bryk asked how Fools Magazine's story is driven for each edition and where they get their ideas from. Larson stated that the theme of the magazine changes each semester, along with the cover. Larson stated that the editorial board works with the members throughout the entire semester to not only decide on the pieces that will go in the magazine but also to workshop and edit those that will be published on Fools' website, as well as pair members with a visual artist. Larson stated that the editorial board finalized the twenty literary pieces that will be included in this semester's publication and that the rest of the photo stories, illustrations, and other similar elements will be decided soon by the visual team. Larson stated that the story for each edition depends on the submissions they receive, and that they love a mix of different literary genres and photo stories, illustrations, etc. Larson stated that they try to find a place for every member of Fools Magazine. Bodkin Bryk asked what Larson's role is in the magazine. Larson responded that she is the editor- in-chief and that her responsibility is to make sure that the magazine happens and the rest of the editorial board stays on track and she works with the treasurer to manage the budget and to look for financial support, which they currently receive from UISG, JMC, and the Magid Center. Larson stated that Fools also works with UI Printing to create the magazine, which is managed by the design editor. Larson stated that she is the overseer for the work created by the other members of the editorial board and the members of Fools Magazine. Bollinger asked what the hard costs of producing the magazine were. Larson responded that the overall cost of printing for Volume IV was around $7,000 and that the cost has been much lower in previous printings. Larson stated that the fourth volume has more pages than normal that they printed around 400-500 copies, which is much higher than normal. Larson stated that this semester, Fools is looking to print 400-450 copies with editions of around 52-56 pages. Larson stated that the cost ranges from $11-$13 per copy. Bodkin Bryk asked if UI Printing priced per issue or per page. Larson responded that UI Printing prices per issue and that the price per magazine generally ranges from $11-$13 and that if there are more pages, it tends to gravitate more towards the $13 mark. Larson stated that Fools works with the Journalism School and the Magid Center for Undergraduate Writing to secure this funding, in addition to funds they have received from the University of Iowa Student Government. Larson stated that UISG provided Fools Magazine with a grant of $5,000 for 2018, and that Fools used half of this grant for last semester's edition and will use the other half for this semester's edition. Bodkin Bryk asked if the magazine was also published online. Larson stated that they do publish an online edition as well, because physical copies are so limited. Larson mentioned that the virtual edition is also convenient as an archive. Bodkin Bryk commented on the many members involved with Fools Magazine. Larson stated that Fools' editorial board consists of 10 members and their assistants, and that this semester they wanted to become more efficient in how time during meetings is managed, and so they have been integrating workshops into their meetings which are run by workshop leaders. Larson stated that Fools has been working on cultivating a reputation as an empowering organization that helps, its members develop and expand their leadership abilities, which has motivated changes in their meetings and workshops. Larson stated that the editorial board has recently been redesigned to include assistants, so that editor's assistants are prepared to take on the editor's role when the time comes, if interested. Larson stated they also encourage editors, if they are in an editor role for more than one year, to take on a new role in their second year rather than stay in their current position in order to foster a deeper connection with and understanding of the organization. Larson also stated that Fools has members from many different colleges within the University, including STEM majors, which makes for more well-rounded and exciting content in the magazine. Bollinger asked how Larson found out about the matching funds. Larson responded that Chosie Titus, the Design Editor for Fools Magazine, knew about the matching funds because her boss had informed her, and Titus had then informed Larson. Bodkin Bryk clarified that Fools was requesting $2,000 in matching funds. Larson confirmed. Bodkin Bryk asked if the requested amount was specifically for publication costs. Larson responded that Fools would use the $2,000 for printing. Larson stated that Fools Magazine also receives funds from UISG, which they use to support their visual artists in projects that are unrelated to the publication, but that the matching funds money will specifically be used towards printing costs. Bollinger asked if there will be more opportunity in the future to get the magazine out into the public with the money from the matching funds. Larson responded yes, that Fools wants to place more editions in bookstores and coffee shops and become broaden its reach, which goes hand-in-hand with having the funding to produce more copies. The Committee thanked Larson for speaking with them. Bollinger brought in the second applicants for the public art matching funds, Green Iowa AmeriCorps, represented by Megan Hill, the Outreach Coordinator, Sheri Deal -Tyne, the Education Coordinator, and Rachel Oswald, the Logistics Coordinator. Oswald stated that their project is inspired by a project done by Green Iowa / Land and Water Stewards AmeriCorps of Cedar Falls where they organized an event in which they provided rain barrels for people to paint, which was open to the public and organized on a first-come, first-served basis, and then sold the barrels to cover the costs of materials used. Oswald stated that the Iowa City Green Iowa AmeriCorps plans to organize their event a bit differently and needs to account for only the costs of brushes and paints for the community painting event, and that they plan for the sale of the rain barrels to account for the cost of conversion kits. Hill stated that they have 25 conversion kits already provided by the River Network and 9 which were provided by the Cedar Falls Green Iowa AmeriCorps, therefore the Iowa City Green Iowa AmeriCorps needs 16 more kits to reach their goal of 34 conversion kits. Hill stated that the funds requested in their application would go towards purchasing brushes and paints so that community members would not have to take on those costs themselves. Hill stated that they already have the barrels, which were donated by Coca Cola. Brown asked what the barrels are like. Hill responded that they are white plastic barrels. Hill stated that the Cedar Valley AmeriCorps painted the barrels and used a sealant afterwards, which works well to ensure that the paint stays on the barrels. Hill stated that the Cedar Valley AmeriCorps group found that sealant worked better than using primer. Bodkin Bryk asked what kind of paint the group would be using. Hill stated that they are planning to use exterior paint because it is more durable and long-lasting. Bollinger asked about displaying the barrels so the general public could view the painted barrels. Hill responded that they had considered displaying barrels and having informational tables about the importance of rain harvesting at the Farmers' Market or displaying it at an Earth Day Festival. Welter asked if they had considered contacting Channel 4 News about the project. Hill responded that they had not considered that. Rose Smith asked how the Cedar Valley barrels look now, a year after they were painted. Hill responded that the barrels still look good. Bodkin Bryk asked for clarification on the specific paint that will be used and how it will be distributed. Hill responded that the group would hold a day event in the beginning of April to have the painting event, and that they would have pre -confirmed painters who could register online due to the finite supply of rain barrels. Hill stated that they would supply the paint, brushes, cups for mixing paint, etc. Bodkin Bryk asked what kind of sealant would be used and who would be applying it. Hill responded that they haven't finalized the type of sealant yet but that the AmeriCorps group will be the ones applying it. Hill stated that the painting event is separate from the event in which they will sell the barrels, which they plan to put on once the barrels have been finished and sealed. Hill stated that the barrels will be sold at a low rate to just cover the cost of the conversion kits and that any profit made will go back into the Outreach and Education Fund for Green Iowa AmeriCorps. Brown asked if they had thought about soliciting designs. Seydell Johnson stated that the group just intended on having people come to paint. Hill confirmed this and stated that guidelines will be provided for painters. Steve Miller asked what the plan was concerning painters wanting to buy the barrels they had painted. Hill responded that she had been thinking that painters could have first choice on their barrel if they wanted it. Bodkin Bryk asked what the requested $600 would be used for. Hill responded that it would be used for paints, sealant, and brushes only. The Committee thanked the Green Iowa AmeriCorps group for speaking with them about their project. Miller asked how much the Committee has allocated for matching funds. Bollinger responded that they have $8,000 dedicated to matching funds and that the next deadline is in the middle of March. Miller asked if others had applied, or if it was only the two applicants who appeared before the Committee today. Bollinger responded that they put out a press release in August that announced both of the deadlines for matching funds but that they should send out another reminder in the middle of January. Bodkin Bryk stated that Fools Magazine requests $2,000 from the Committee. Seydell Johnson stated that she liked Fools' project but she questions whether it is too University oriented to be considered public art. Bodkin Bryk stated that Larson had informed the committee that she intends to spread the magazine within the Iowa City community more. Brown stated that doing so is difficult when the run is so small. Miller asked the Committee members to remind him where Larson said the copies are distributed. Seydell Johnson responded that Fools distributes copies through a pop-up event. Miller asked if the committee could stipulate that with the provision of funds from the Public Art Action Committee, Fools Magazine could be required to put copies of future editions in more public places. Bollinger responded that the Committee could do this, but expressed concern on how limited that coverage may be. Seydell Johnson suggested that the Committee offer Fools Magazine $1,000 now with the provision that copies be made more publicly accessible and then Fools could re -apply for the Spring issue. Bodkin Bryk stated that she loves the magazine but that she is hesitant to provide the full $2,000 because the magazine feels very University driven, especially because few Committee members had heard of Fools before this proposal. Welter stated that if the Committee did not provide any funds to Fools there is a significantly lesser chance of it getting out into the community, therefore providing them with some funds with the stipulation that the publication is more publicly accessible in the future is the best option for the Committee. Rose Smith asked if Larson had said whether there are copies at Prairie Lights Bookstore. The Committee agreed that she had. Rose Smith stated that having copies at Prairie Lights but not at the Iowa City Public Library indicates that the magazine needs a more fleshed -out distribution plan. Seydell Johnson motioned to provide $1,000 to Fools Magazine with the stipulation that Fools Magazine provides the Public Art Advisory Committee with a distribution plan and that the copies produced with the $1,000 from the public art fund are distributed at a non -University location or locations. Miller seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Seydell Johnson stated that she would encourage the Green Iowa AmeriCorps group to re -apply for matching funds in the Spring with more information on the event. Brown and Miller expressed concern over whether the AmeriCorps proposed project could be considered public art. Bollinger stated that she would like the painting to be done by professional artists instead of randomly - selected community members. Miller stated that he agreed. Welter asked if the Committee could require that the barrels be placed in public areas. Seydell Johnson responded that they would have to discuss where those public places would be. Seydell Johnson stated that they had also spoken with her about painting around storm drains, which is a project Seydell Johnson has more interest in than the rain barrels. Bollinger stated that she knew about the storm drains project as well but that she questioned the longevity of that project. Seydell Johnson stated that she liked the idea of commissioning a few local artists to come to the community painting event to offer guidance or ideas. Bollinger stated that there also needs to be the opportunity for the public to see the rain barrels after they are completed and that she is concerned the barrels will just end up in people's backyards where they will not be visible. Welter stated that he agrees that the project needs to be expanded on more in order to be considered public art. Miller agreed that the project has a lot of potential. Seydell Johnson stated that Green Iowa AmeriCorps is always welcome to come back with another proposal but that, as of now, the project seems more well- suited to receiving a sustainability grant than public art funds. Miller motioned to not provide public art matching funds to Green Iowa AmeriCorps and to inform them that the Committee chose not to provide funds for the rain barrel project because they did not see a connection between the proposed project and public art. Welter seconded. Motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION OF CITY HALL LOBBY ART PROJECT Tim Adams was present from Stony Creek Landscapes to discuss the City Hall Lobby Art Project with the Committee. The Committee introduced themselves to Tim Adams. Bollinger stated that the Committee's intention in having Adams attend this meeting was to have a conversation about what the Committee likes about Adams' other work, such as "Freebird" in Cedar Rapids, and to discuss other design expectations for the City Hall Lobby project. Adams asked the Committee if they had thought his first proposal was too busy. Brown responded that the Committee had thought it was too focused on the University and writing, and not enough on the other aspects of Iowa City. Bodkin Bryk stated that she believes the Committee is looking for something elegant and simple for the lobby. Seydell Johnson stated that the Committee does want color, but also simplicity. Bollinger agreed that color is desired, though the vividness of the colors used is up for discussion, and that the Committee is also interested in including lighting with the design. Adams reviewed that elements of his past proposal for the Committee members. Brown stated that she would like Adams to create a beautiful piece of art more than something that has a strong conceptual link to the Iowa City community. Bodkin Bryk stated that there are a lot of challenges with the space to keep in mind as well. Adams responded that he got familiar with the space during the time of his first proposal and understands its limitations and challenges. Adams asked the Committee for their opinions on the florescent colors he had proposed earlier. Rose Smith responded that she likes them but would perhaps prefer just using one to keep a streamlined design. Brown responded that Adams should feel free to explore other materials as well. Bodkin Bryk and Miller stated that they liked the colors as well. Bollinger stated that the piece needs to appeal to the wider Iowa City population and should include elements that reflect the community. Adams stated that he appreciates the Committee's opinions and feedback. Adams asked if the Committee wanted to stay away from literary elements. Brown responded that because City Hall is used by so many different people, the Committee wants a piece that a lot of people can relate to and that it doesn't need to be so literally tied into Iowa City so much as it needs to be beautiful. Bollinger reminded the Committee and Adams that the City Manager had requested the piece demonstrate an attachment to Iowa City. Rose Smith suggested a piece that has a broad concept but still relates to something like civic life and what it means to be a participant in the Iowa City community. Seydell Johnson suggested building off elements of the physical world. Adams stated that one of his earlier concepts was an abstract piece that involved maps of Iowa City and its waterways. Bodkin Bryk and Bollinger stated that they like that concept. Bollinger stated that there is a piece in the Johnson County Auditor's Building that also involves the river and that they should be careful that the City Hall piece does not look too similar. Adams asked the Committee why they had stopped working with the artist who was initially chosen for this project. Bollinger responded that there had been a lot of continual redesign and that the Committee could not get a finalized concept of the piece that would be installed. Seydell Johnson stated that this is why the Committee thought it was important to discuss things with Adams before he begins on the project. Rose Smith asked what the process for the next steps of the proposal should be. Adams stated that he could provide the Committee with concepts and sketches within a week. Adams asked the Committee when they want to have the project installed. Bollinger responded that they want it to be installed by June 2019. Adams stated that he would like to have the project installed by the first part of March because Spring and Summer are busy seasons for his company. Adams stated that he would need a lot of time to install it. Seydell Johnson stated that Adams could install over a weekend. Adams provided the Committee with a break -down of those involved in his team and informed the committee that they fabricate their own projects in-house. Adams stated that they complete around four to five projects a year. Brown asked if the Committee had included information about where the piece should be oriented on the wall in order to avoid interference from passersby. Bollinger stated that the original call suggested making sure the piece is stable and sturdy in case it was interfered with. Bollinger stated that as long as the piece is out of arms reach and is maintainable it should be good. Bollinger stated that they also need the piece to not take away from the light fixture which is currently installed in the lobby. Kumi Morris stated that the project would also need to be easily removed in case there is construction or a remodeling project happening in the area in the future. Bollinger stated that the wants to propose a process for going forward and confirmed that Adams could provide the Committee with initial concepts and designs within the next week, then suggested that the Committee forms a subcommittee to review the designs and come back to the Committee with more fine -turned designs. Adams stated that he will email sketches to Bollinger and then the subcommittee, which will be decided among Committee members, can get back to him on their thoughts. Adams stated that by November 30th they could finalize a concept. Adams also suggested that he could email the Committee a time table for his own process that the Committee could agree upon. Bollinger stated that she and Adams can work together more on those details. Bollinger stated that the Committee members need to decide on when they want a final decision to be made as well. The Committee thanked Tim Adams for taking the time to speak with them. Bollinger asked the Committee members who would like to be on the subcommittee to work with Adams more directly. Miller stated that he would. Bodkin Bryk stated that she would as well, but reminded Committee members that her term ends in January 2019. Rose Smith stated that she would also like to be on the subcommittee. COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR REPORTS Brown asked Rose Smith when the pop-up exhibition she has been organizing with architecture firms will open. Rose Smith stated that the grand opening begins Friday, November 2, from 4-6 p.m. Bodkin Bryk asked for more information on the event. Rose Smith replied that she has been coordinating a pop-up exhibition with four architecture firms—OPN, Heery, Shive-Hattery, and Neuman Monson—that will occupy the pop-up spaces on the Ped Mall that were developed by Sanjay Jani from AKAR Architecture. Rose Smith stated that the pop-up event is in response to an exhibition she curated at the Figge in Davenport and that they will present ideas of home in the twenty-first century. Rose Smith stated that during the opening on Friday there will also be a costume contest and that there will be an opportunity to receive a free drink from the Dandy Lion for the first 50 people to visit the two pods on the Ped Mall. STAFF REPORTS Bollinger stated that she will be meeting with the Summerwill's and the Paul's to update them on the Snelson sculpture and get their feedback. Brown asked how the development of Riverfront Crossing Park is going. Seydell Johnson responded that it is going well. ADJOURNMENT Welter moved to adjourn. Rose Smith seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 5:15 pm. Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2018 Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member Term 2/1 4/5 5/3 6/7 7/12 8/2 9/6 10/4 11/1 Name Expires Bodkin Bryk, x x x x x x O/E O/E x Tam 01/01/19 Brown, Wendy 01/01/20 x x x x x x x x x Erin Fitzgerald 01/01/20 x x x x x x x x -- Knoche, Ron x x x x x x x x x Seydell- Johnson, Jul! x x x x x x x x x Vero Rose Smith 01/01/21 O/E x x O/E x O/E x x x Steve Miller 02/01/21 x x x O/E x x x x x Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member