Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-01-07 Bd Comm minutesItem Number: 4.a. J anuary 7, 2020 AT TAC HM E NT S : Description Historic P reservation Commission: November 14 MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL November 14, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Gosia Clore, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile Kuenzli, Lyndi Kiple, Quentin Pitzen, and Jordan Sellergren MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: 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: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: Agran recused himself from voting on these two agenda items since he is on the Board of Public Space One and is serving as volunteer general contractor for the projects. 225 North Gilbert Street – Local Historic Landmark (rear porch opening relocations). Bristow noted this is the first of two houses that recently became local landmarks, both purchased by Public Space One. Bristow noted that Public Space One must provide an accessible entrance for the public to both properties. A deck and ramp configuration for each house has already been approved. Bristow said especially with the corner house, a large run must be accommodated. Bristow showed a view of the deck and ramp that was approved. She said for this property it was easy to follow the guidelines for a deck and have something that could work as a gathering space on the back of the house. The deck will be set in from each side and will provide stair access to the north and south and ramp access to the north between the two houses. The current project before the Commission is the reorganization of the openings on the currently enclosed porch in order to access the ramp and deck in the most efficient way. Bristow explained the porch currently has one entrance door that faces north. There is a solid enclosed bit of wall facing west, and one existing window and one missing window on the south. Given some of the details on the porch including base molding above the porch floor and a railing, and infill with some beadboard, Staff believe this infill happened sometime around the 1940s, maybe just before, making it an historic enclosure of the porch. The way the door was set in is not necessarily optimal. It does have a good head height to hit the frieze board on the top of the porch, but it did not fill the whole space. Bristow said on the south side the two windows would have filled the whole space of the enclosure and she assumed the west wall also had storm windows ganged together when the porch was originally enclosed. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 2 of 7 The proposal in the application was drawn with one window each on the north and south side and relocating the door to the west wall with a window next to it so the existing exit of the house would go straight out to the deck. Staff talked to the applicant about this. Instead of treating the porch like walls with windows and doors centered in them, it seemed more appropriate, since it was historically enclosed, to treat it more like it was still an enclosed porch. Instead of putting just one single centered window in the south wall, it would retain the two paired windows. On the wall that now has a door (north), instead of having one single centered window it would have two paired windows like the south wall, and that would make space for the door straight from the existing interior door and then likely a pair of windows again on the west. Bristow said with this arrangement, these windows don’t need to be trimmed out; they will butt against the corner column on the porch. They will be able to sit on top of the railing, which will act like a sill as it does on the existing window. The head will hit under the frieze, so it will be a less invasive move to take out what is probably modern material on the west and put in the windows and the door, and replace the missing south window and do the same thing on the north side. Bristow said the applicant does intend to locate reclaimed materials. Staff talked to them about the possibility of using the Historic Preservation Fund in case there is a need to alter a reclaimed window and door, or to have something custom made if it doesn’t exist, because it would be best to match the existing window with all of the new windows and have an appropriate door. Staff recommends approving this project with the windows as described, allowing the window and door product to be approved by Staff in the future. Boyd asked for any clarifying questions, then opened the public hearing. Thomas Agran, in his role as a Board member for Public Space One and the volunteer general contractor, said he was available for questions. He said this whole project has been a schooling in what it takes to make an historic house into a viable commercial property. Kuenzli wondered if they would keep the shutters on the front. Agran did not know. Bristow said Staff would recommend the shutters be removed because they do not fit. Kuenzli asked if they had plans to put on the porch again. Agran said the front entrance is going to realign so it will have a better interface with the sidewalk. He did not know about plans for the porch currently. Boyd closed the public hearing. MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 225 North Gilbert Street as presented in the application with the following conditions: The plan is revised to show two windows matching the existing filling the space between column and wall on the north and south elevations and a door and at least two windows filling the space between columns on the west wall, and door product approved by Staff. DeGraw seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Agran recused). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 3 of 7 229 North Gilbert Street – Local Historic Landmark (rear porch opening relocations). Bristow noted this local landmark has synthetic siding all over it, making it difficult to tell how the porch was enclosed. She said what’s under the siding is not known and maybe the first time this porch was really enclosed was when the siding was put on. She said it was odd from the inside, as well. Bristow said this project will have a much longer ramp because it is out of the ground further. The proposal is to move the door around the corner to the west side so it could go onto the new deck, with stairs to what will be their ADA accessible parking spot, and sidewalk connecting to the neighboring house. The deck also adjoins with the ramp. The existing window would move around the corner and take the existing location of the door. She said it will still be fairly open, like a porch. In the future, Staff hopes the siding will come off. The openings may be reconfigured at that time. Staff added to this project the idea of removing the cellar door which is not needed for access to the basement. The basement can be accessed from stairs in the kitchen area. The cellar door will be covered by the deck, making it difficult to maintain and access. Animal activity would be hard to monitor. Staff suggests approving its removal. That would give the applicant the opportunity to determine whether they need to remove it or want to remove it. They could also leave it and let it remain under the deck. It would be completely covered. Boyd asked for any clarifying questions, then opened the public hearing. Agran was again available to answer questions. He said the long-term vision is to take all the siding off. Burford asked if they would want to use the basement for storage. Agran noted there is an internal staircase in the house going to the basement. Burford asked if it was easy to get up and down. Agran said it was surprisingly easy for a house from 1895. He also noted the basement is surprisingly small. Burford thought it would be a good idea to keep the exterior access for storage of large items that would be difficult to take through the house. Agran said the vision for the house is use as a gallery space and the second floor as studio rentals. He said in the other, smaller house, presses had already been moved into the basement. All the heavy equipment is in the other house. He said this basement would not be ideal for storing items. Sellergren said if animals were a concern, maybe a metal door could be an option. She said exterior cellar doors were one of the things she found fascinating about historic properties. Agran said he would share the comments with the Board of Directors. Bristow explained that as long as the property will be for commercial use the ramp must exist, so the deck that covers the cellar door will always be there. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 4 of 7 Boyd asked if Commission guidelines required keeping cellar doors. Bristow said no. They are considered as an opening on a house and the Commission reviews their removal. In the past, the Commission has approved the replacement of a wood cellar door with a Bilco metal cellar door at the rear of the Clark House on Kirkwood. If it was in good condition, usable, and more of an architectural feature then the Commission would likely want to retain it, but Staff does not feel that this one is an item of concern. Pitzen said in the last year he knew of an instance where a tunnel was put under a new porch floor to extend the old basement stairs out, and another one on Summit Street where a section of the porch goes up like a trap door. Agran said if they decide to revisit the cellar door, they will put two headers in the deck flooring for a trap door. Public Hearing was closed. Boyd said he was inclined to give maximum flexibility. DeGraw said she liked the door being there and believes they should consider keeping it. Kuenzli agreed. Boyd said the Commission needed to decide if they felt strongly enough to take it out of the motion or if they wanted to strongly encourage the applicant to consider it. MOTION: Clore moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness of the project at 229 North Gilbert Street as presented in the application and Staff report with the option of leaving or removing external access to the basement. Burford seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Agran recused). Agran said he would sincerely will bring these comments to the board to talk about leaving maximum options open. Boyd noted the last comment to be a point of personal order from the applicant. Agran rejoined the meeting. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Certificate of No Material Effect – Chair and Staff Review. 1034 East College Street – East College Street Historic District (roof shingle replacement). Bristow said this is a roof shingle replacement. She noted the owners wanted to replace all the windows, but after speaking with Staff they are replacing none of the windows. The owners were encouraged to cut back the plant material around the house so they would have less rot in the future. She said they did, and it looks great. 425 Clark Street – Clark Street Conservation District (soffit and fascia replacement). Soffit and fascia were replaced. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 5 of 7 Minor Review – Staff Review. 831 East College Street – College Green Historic District (roof shingle replacement on carriage house which is 215 South Governor Street). The carriage house at 831 East College, also known as number 215 South Governor, is getting its roof shingles replaced with architectural asphalt shingles. 601 Oakland Avenue – Longfellow Historic District (rear porch and front stoop reconstruction and new rear deck construction). Bristow said 601 Oakland is the house where the Commission approved putting a pair of French doors where the windows are on the back last month. They are now rebuilding the front stoop. The back porch is being rebuilt. There are original porch piers in both locations that are forming the basis for the rest of what they are doing. They will also be installing a simple rectangular deck with stairs. It’s more like a little platform that will be in the back corner. It will be set in from the side of the house. 1026 East Washington Street – College Hill Conservation District (metal handrail installation). This will be a simple railing at the front steps. 225 North Gilbert Street – Local Historic Landmark (rear deck and ramp construction). The deck and ramp for 225 and 229 North Gilbert Street were approved. 229 North Gilbert Street – Local Historic Landmark (ramp and landing deck construction). 424 Clark Street – Clark Street Conservation District (porch floor replacement). Bristow said this is a multiphase project. This is a Prairie School House, originally built as “flats” that could be a real gem. It is covered in two layers of shingled asphalt siding. The porch roof is probably original except for having metal soffit. She said the little pipe columns are not original. She said there are porch piers that are original and match. This phase of the project is only replacing the porch floor. There is a wood floor that has been covered with a very, very thin layer of concrete. It is all broken and rotted out. They will replace that. Intermediate Review – Chair and Staff Review. 416 South Governor Street – Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District (new driveway and curb cut). Bristow said this driveway is all broken up. It will only be slightly widened, but it will receive an appropriate curb cut because it had none. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 10, 2019 MOTION: Burford moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission’s October 10, 2019 meeting. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Historic Preservation Awards Update. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 6 of 7 Bristow said a meeting was held about the Historic Preservation Awards. The Commission’s subcommittee attended, as well as members of the Johnson County Historic Preservation Commission and members of Friends of Historic Preservation. It was a productive meeting. The awards date has been officially changed to May 7, 2020. Bristow said the Commission and Friends of Historic Preservation should have a greater role in locating potential award winners. Commissioners who represent a district should review what’s going on in their district for projects that might be worthy for a variety of categories. Bristow said she will send the Commissioners information outlining what she wants sent to her for nominations. She said they should not try to assign a specific category, just communicate any improvements that have been made. A determination about categories will come later. She said at-large Commissioners can take on the Conservation Districts and if somebody wants to drive around Manville Heights, Morningside or Lucas Farms to look for potential projects, please do. The Commission subcommittee should review nominations in February so the Commission can approve the winners right away in early March, then letters can be sent out to the winners and get information back so the presentation can be produced. Since May is Historic Preservation Month, the awards can be tied in with some other events and exhibits. It was decided to return to the idea of creating posters for the award winners. Bristow said long before her time, because she has never seen any of them, there were posters put up about the award winners in the Library and other places. Many people have mentioned how they liked seeing those posters. Having the posters up will give the Commission a presence in the community longer than the length of the awards ceremony. ADJOURNMENT: Agran moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Clore. The meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2019 Page 7 of 7 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 NAME TERM EXP. 12/ 13 1/10 2/14 3/14 4/11 5/09 5/23 6/13 8/08 8/19 9/12 10/10 11/14 AGRAN, THOMAS 6/30/20 X O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X X X X X BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X X X X X X O/E X X X X O/E X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X -- -- -- -- -- BURFORD, HELEN 6/30/21 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X CLORE, GOSIA 6/30/20 X O/E X X X O/E X O/E O/E X X X X DEGRAW, SHARON 6/30/19 X X O/E X X X X O/E X X O/E O/E X KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X -- -- KUENZLI, CECILE 6/30/19 X X O/E X X X X O/E X X O/E O/E X KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X PITZEN, QUENTIN 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X X X X X SELLERGREN, JORDAN 6/30/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 X O/E X X X X X O/E -- -- -- -- -- Item Number: 4.b. J anuary 7, 2020 AT TAC HM E NT S : Description Housing & Community Development Commission: October 17 MINUTES FINAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OCTOBER 17, 2019 – 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202 MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, John McKinstry, Peter Nkumu, Maria Padron MEMBERS ABSENT: Peggy Aguilar, Lyn Dee Kealey STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly, Darian Nagle-Gamm OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Fixmer-Oraiz called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. UPDATE ON THE IOWA CITY AREA TRANSIT STUDY: Darian Nagle-Gamm, Transportation Director for the City of Iowa Cit y came forward and acknowledged there's been some interest from this committee, and a lot of folks in the community over the last year regarding the upcoming transit study. They have commenced it since last month and are ready to share what they have been doing thus far. First Nagle-Gamm introduced the study team. The City of Iowa City is leading the study, and the City of Coralville and University of Iowa Cambus are joining the study as well. So all three agencies are working together for a comprehensive review of their systems. Nelson Nygaard is the consultant team that was awarded the contract, they are highly regarded in the transportation planning world and are a great group of experts to work with. Also on the team is the public and Nagle-Gamm talked about how important the public input and public outreach pieces are with this study. The stakeholder groups are everyone from this committee to advocacy groups, schools, the University, Kirkwood College, civic organizations, public health stakeholders, economic development folks, and those involved in sustainability. So there are people from many parts of the community who are interested in this study. Nagle-Gamm noted they had worked with City Council to develop a vision prior to going into this study and they envision transit being a sustainable, reliable, equitable, and safe transportation option for the community that connects riders to opportunities, whether that's economic, social, or recreational opportunities, seven days a week. Nagle-Gamm noted the study is are looking closely on how to expand Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 2 of 12 service so there's coverage through the whole week. The City has a lofty goal of doubling ridership in the next 10 years through policies and investments that seek to expand the levels of service provided and to eliminate barriers to access. The study will help find out why some people aren't using transit, and what they can do to help fill those gaps in service. Nagle-Gamm stated the underlying theme in the whole transit study is how to increase the level of service in such a way that more folks in the City can take advantage of this service and think of transit first. Nagle-Gamm noted another thing they are evaluating as new buses are procured is conversion to electric or other clean fuel vehicles. Electric vehicles are taking off in transit. Even outside of the study, they’ve been looking at electric vehicles for the last six or seven months. A question the City received a lot of is why reimagine public transportation? It's a great question, especially in Iowa City, because the Iowa City metro area has the 17th highest ridership per capita in the country. So of all the metro areas, including New York to San Francisco, Iowa City have the 17th highest, and is doing very well per capita. This is a strong base to build from and there is a long transit tradition here. Nagle-Gamm noted they can do better, they know they’re not meeting everyone's needs. There are a lot more people that can take advantage of the public transportation system if it worked better for them, so that is the goal. So first, improve service to meet the needs of a greater number of residents and visitors. Currently the system doesn't meet the needs of everyone and that's one reason why ridership has been declining somewhat or remained relatively flat. The slight decline the City has experienced has been nationwide over the last few years. Next, the City’s transit system hasn't been reviewed since the 1980s and since that time the City has grown 50% in population, and most of that growth has been outward. Thus, there is a point at which routes take longer and service levels start to degrade, so one must start thinking of changing the whole system. Another goal is to provide a reliable, accessible, affordable, equitable, high quality transportation option for those without regular access to a vehicle or for those who want to leave their vehicle at home, which is happening more today. The City needs to provide good service with a high enough quality that people can choose to leave their cars at home and take transit instead. To make that choice easier we need to support the local economy by better connecting people to work, shopping, education and recreational and social opportunities. That is, give people more real options for getting around town or alternatives to a personal automobile. Nagle-Gamm stated another reason the City is doing this study with Coralville and the University of Iowa is to better coordinate all transit partners in the area to become a more interconnected metro area. This is an opportunity for all transits to all sit down together and figure out how to better connect the systems and make those trips across a metro area more seamless for people. Nagle-Gamm next discussed the City's Climate Action Plan and climate action initiatives. Part of what is behind this transit study is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change, especially because the City has a growing population. The smartest way to move the most people and to improve people's mobility in the community is through municipal transit while also keeping up with the population growth and helping to reduce those greenhouse gas emissions. And finally, is to better leverage emerging technologies in terms of transportation, there are different fuel technologies, electric, hydrogen fuel cell, there are ride sharing technologies, and there are all sorts of new and exciting ways that people can access transportation. This study is trying to figure out how to leverage those technologies to help make mobility in this community easier. Nagle-Gamm noted the next step is how can the City achieve these goals. First, public outreach and public input are important. This study will be useless without the feedback from the community, what the community needs to be able to better serve themselves in terms of their daily transit transportation needs. Or what does it take to get someone out of a car and get them on a public transportation option that might be more affordable and certainly more sustainable. In terms of the nuts and bolts, the committee will review all stops, routes, hours of operation schedules, coverage areas, fares, and even evaluate a zero fare option. Ridership would need to increase to go to a zero fare system, but that is something the consultants are looking at. Also how many more buses would the City need and how many more drivers? If the City found a way to fund a zero fare system, there would be dramatic increases in ridership. They are also reviewing all transit stop amenities, which is something they’ve heard loud and clear from the community, they want more amenities, benches, Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 3 of 12 shelters, etc. They are also looking at improving trip and route planning, arrival information, all the things one would need to know in order to use transit, because it takes a little work to use transit, and there's a variety of new tools the City will evaluate to make trip planning easier. Those of course are smartphone based, so they also must find ways to serve the entire population. Finally they need to figure out how to use all these emerging technologies to best serve the population. Eastham asked if Nagle-Gamm could talk about how the consulting firm will evaluate the public input and findings. Nagle-Gamm said they are not yet done with the full public input process. However, last month the consultant team was here and surveyed 1000 riders while they were on the bus, partly demographic information, partly where riders were going and where they came from, all to get a sense for how people move around the town. They also asked about service levels, like what riders need, what is lacking right now. The consultant team also collected ridership data with a team of folks here for a whole week to determine where riders are getting on and getting off, which is a large task. It takes a lot of effort to get this data and automatic systems that do this aren’t great at it and are expensive. They hope to have the data from the team and public input sessions within the next week and will share it through the City's channels. They will publish a web based system to show different options for different aspects of a transit system that people would like to see more or less of if you have $20 to spend. Each option has a price tag relative to how much it costs in the real world. This information is going to give the City and consultants a sense of what the greatest priorities are. Some options given are Sunday service, later evening service, earlier service, more transit stop amenities, more ITS, or intelligent transportation system or more infrastructure development to make transit easier. So the combination of those data collection activities and the feedback from the first round of public meetings will help the consultants develop service scenarios. Then in January, Nagle-Gamm will have scenarios to share with the public and with everyone here. After that they will get more specific responses from the public, so that is the process. Eastham asked if they are going to try to figure out if there are parts of the communities that are not providing input. Nagle-Gamm stated that is one thing they will look at, as soon as they have the survey data back and the demographic data, they will see who is responding and who they need to do a better job of reaching out to. Nagle-Gamm noted from the first survey to the first public meeting, there is time to get out into the community and reach out to those that they don't feel have been represented thus far. Nkumu asked for more information on the zero fare option and noted he is trying to understand the main reason for this study, is it to find more revenues or to obtain more riders. Nagle-Gamm stated it is because they have a goal of doubling ridership over the next 10 years. Nationally and here, transit ridership has been leveling off. She thinks it's due to a variety of factors and transportation network companies. Gasoline is inexpensive, we're rebounding from the Great Recession, etc. But for those reasons, and because the City recognizes that transportation is one of the major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, the City needs to plan for the future and create a system that more people can choose for their daily transportation and give them a real option besides a personal automobile. So the goal is to increase ridership by providing an option that meets the needs of more people in Iowa City. Regarding zero fare, Nagle-Gamm stated it is something that communities across the country are starting to seriously evaluate. Fares don't make up a significant portion of the cost of transit, it's heavily subsidized because it's a public service and a public good. So the thought in many communities has been if this is a public service, let's remove a barrier to transit and remove that fare. Nagle-Gamm acknowledged they don’t know at the end of the day what that will look like and how much that will cost but they do know exactly how many fares and how much money from fares they take in every year. The zero fare option is something they need to evaluate and see if that's something they could do. The consultant team said that they would expect ridership to be increase anywhere from 30% or 40% just from zero fare. Fixmer-Oraiz noted that when evaluating City infrastructure 30 plus years going unexamined is a long time. Nagle-Gamm concurred noting it has been since the 1980’s which is probably fairly standard for some smaller towns, standard college town. A lot of cities are in the same boat where they are seeing ridership’s decline even if they have the best transit system in the world. All systems across the United States and really across the globe have been making do the best they can with the resources that they have. Also questioning if the City is able to put more resources towards transit, what more could they do? Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 4 of 12 McKinstry asked if there is computer modeling that the consultant can do. Nagle-Gamm confirmed they could. McKinstry noted he lives six blocks north of here, there are more people who walk from that area than ever before, but about half of them don't live in the neighborhood, they drive in from someplace else and park in the neighborhood and then walk downtown or to campus or whatever. Some even bicycle, they drive to town, park, unpack a bicycle off the rack, and off they go. Alter noted that Minneapolis just created something like a hub for where one can park their car, there are bike racks, there's the e-bike plugins in a bus shelter. So you have all these different options. Granted, Minneapolis is a larger, but it’s the same kind of situations where the cars come from somewhere, but you're also not adding to more congestion. McKinstry noted Minneapolis has an extensive bike trail system in the heart of their city. Nagle-Gamm stated they hope to have many of those similar options in the future too, with the expansion of bike facilities and the community, the bike share coming on, and adding a thorough evaluation of our transit system. So the City is, step by step, looking at all of these systems that haven't had as much focus as traditional automobile transportation has in a long time. McKinstry noted this intersects with housing, for instance, the more high rises built near downtown, the more people who can walk and the fewer roads needed to build all the infrastructure to spread the City out to half acre lots for single family dwellings. He stated it is just so complex. Nagle-Gamm agreed it is complex and will show the project timeline next. She noted it is going to take the better part of the year to get through because it is complex, there is a lot of modeling and there is a lot of synthesizing the public's thoughts and what pieces of service do they need the most and how to lay that out. Nagle-Gamm admitted that's the reason why this has not been reviewed since the 1980s. She said it was her understanding this has been attempted internally before and it's nearly impossible while you're actually running operations. It's taxing when the City is running operations and has a consultant hired for it, but to try to do all this internally, it's a lot and it's going to take the better part of the year. Going over the rough timeline of what to expect is the project was kicked off in September, in November they’re starting the public outreach campaign and people will see things come out through the City channels very soon. Padron asked what it was they kicked off in September and when was the consultant hired. Nagle-Gamm said they hired the consulting firm in August, in September they came for one week and surveyed the transit riders on board and collected ridership data over one week. Padron is confused since they have been talking about this transit study for two years, she thought the data had already been collected. Nagle-Gamm noted it is a long process, first the Council had to go through a funding process then there was the process of selecting a consultant firm which includes writing the RFP (request for proposals) and it takes time to write an RFP to make sure they are getting everything they want to see from a consultant team. Then it takes a while for the proposals to come back in, they need to be reviewed and evaluated, an interview process and finally a final selection. Padron asked then if the consultant was just hired in September 2019 it will be a year of collecting data. Nagle-Gamm confirmed that was correct, last month the consultant team and the subcontractors were here, they collected 1000 surveys from riders on the bus and then they collected ridership data because that's the basis for a lot of information that they use to make route and stop recommendations. Now and through November, the consulting team is working on the existing conditions analysis, the state of the system today. They are also putting the final touches on the web survey, which is a design your own system tool where everyone can weigh in on what relative aspects of the transit system are most important. Finally, Nagle-Gamm talked about the public input meetings coming up. Coralville will have one and Iowa City will have two, one of which will be on campus. So there'll be multiple opportunities for public input November through December. Then the consultants will synthesize the information they've received from the public, the City will work with them to develop different service scenarios based on what they've heard from the community, and they'll do the analysis for Iowa City, including the zero fare analysis. Cambus already has zero fare. If zero fare is not the direction determined possible, they’ll look at other ways to make it easier for folks to get on the bus, such as mobile fares with a smartphone, or a variety of different things that are out there. All this background research will be done in January through March and then they will bring this information back to the public and they will have an opportunity to weigh in on these service scenarios. From there, the City will take that information and sort of come up with a preferred scenario. Nagle-Gamm expects to finalize the study around June which will start discussions about an implementation plan and discussions with Council about different funding options. The City asked the Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 5 of 12 consultant team to do a lot of legwork when it comes to costs for each of the scenarios, because it is important to know the price tags on each different type of service. Council will have a lot of decisions to make beginning this summer, and then from that point they can move forward with implementation. Fixmer-Oraiz asked during summer 2020 when the analysis is done and the recommendations are out, can Nagle-Gamm talk about how other cities have done this because there will be a host of options so how quickly can any of this be implemented. Nagle-Gamm replied she researched that herself and found she had to call other communities who have done this because not many people have done this once in their careers, let alone multiple times. Houston famously did a complete overhaul of their system and one thing to expect is new routes. So the routes will likely not be the same as they are today and that involves a host of things to make that happen. Houston was able to do it quickly, they picked a date, got their recommendations, looked at their scenarios, and figured out how to swap out all their signs overnight. She noted other communities have phased improvements in. Additionally because the whole system is interconnected, the consultant team will have to recommend how to phase that in. Overall she does not have an exact answer but feels it could take a couple of years. Fixmer-Oraiz wondered if the consultant or any other contenders in the RFP process gave an idea of length of time to implementation. Nagle-Gamm stated she has not posed the question to the consultant directly, most of the research she did was prior to the consultant coming on board, but if she were to inquire about it she bets they would give a good answer. Eastham noted this scenario puts the decision making onto Council during the budget approval process, so assumes the City Manager has a plan on how to do any re-budgeting for 2020 for implementation as opposed to having to wait another year. Nagle-Gamm acknowledged they know some changes are coming, they don't know what all they will be, nor have a sense for the price tags yet. There is some thought being given during this budget cycle so they will be able to make some quick start changes and are accommodating for that. Nagle-Gamm next shared information on the public meetings. There are three upcoming in the first round of public meetings, Coralville Public Library is kicking it off on November 12 in the evening, 6:30pm to 8:30pm. It will not be a formal presentation, more of an open house format, the consulting team wants to talk one-on-one with people. There'll be an opportunity to fill out the online survey, they will have some computers there and then also a lot of the information that they’ve collected through data collection and public input. The Iowa City session will be at the Public Library, in meeting room A, again 6:30pm to 8:30pm. The final one will be at the Iowa Memorial Union, room 347 on Thursday evening. Then in January, there will be another round with some service scenarios to respond to. She feels a lot of people are going to be interested in that meeting, although they want folks to come all and get engaged throughout the whole process, the more people get engaged, the better the results are going to be. Nagle-Gamm showed the website where the information is housed about the study. On the website one could sign up for an email list and receive updates. There's also going to be information on the City’s social media feeds and on the website as the process moves forward. Another way to get involved is attending the public meetings or by telling people about them, not just people who ride transit every day, everyone. The goal is to find out what can make it easier for someone to choose transit as an option. Nagle-Gamm encouraged committee members to tell friends, family and coworkers, about the meetings and pass the web survey link along noting the more feedback the better the results will be. Padron asked about the bike sharing. Nagle-Gamm stated the City does not yet have the bike share up and running. They have a signed contract but again is another process they have worked on for the better part of the last year and over the last couple years the bike share technology in the bike share world has changed dramatically which slowed up not only Iowa City but many communities progress in getting bike share on board. They have not had a kickoff meeting yet, they just heard from the vendors. The vendor is Gotcha which is a dockless system and means you don't have to park the bikes into a dock at one specific location, there will be designated locations to park them at. The designated locations will be geo fenced which means an app will tell the user if they park this bike where it doesn't belong or in an unauthorized area and there will be some fine levied. The City doesn’t have a launch date yet but is scheduling a meeting, hopefully within the next couple weeks and will know more then. Padron hopes Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 6 of 12 there will be a way to combine the new bus system with the bikes. Nagle-Gamm noted that is one of the items under review and the study will answer how to potentially integrate bike share with transit. She stated she had spoken with Cedar Rapids recently and they're on that same mission of trying to integrate their transit system . The bike share locations will be spatially connected to transit so one can hop off transit and then onto a bike, it is called micro mobility. DISCUSS CDBG PROJECTS WITHOUT AGREEMENTS: Lehmann noted next he would update the Commission on CDBG projects without agreements. Currently Old Brick is the only CDBG project that does not have a written agreement as of September 30. Brianna Wills, the director of Old Brick, provided an email Lehmann shared with the Commission. Lehmann noted the Commission awarded Old Brick $36,000, originally it was a little less, but there was more funding than expected, so they got bumped up to $36,000. It was awarded for the kitchen and accessibility improvements or whatever would fit into their needs based on what would be allowable from HUD because staff had concerns about whether it would be an eligible expense and they had not yet heard from HUD. Since then, HUD replied that accessibility improvements were not allowable without surveying those using the building. So the City has been communicating with HUD to figure out what could be eligible. Old Brick hosts nonprofits and meals for the homeless once a week so maybe they can apportion CDBG with the cost of improvements. The problem is the national objective, it has to principally benefit low and moderate income persons, and they have a lot of events which makes it nearly impossible to get the income surveys that are required to prove that is the case. Lehmann noted this is the first deadline Old Brick has to meet, to keep the possible path forward staff would recommend keeping funding as they continue to work through it, the next deadline is March 15, by which if they don't get 50% of their funds spent, they would have to return to HCDC and at that point, the Commission would decide if it was still a viable project or if you wanted to reallocate the funds. Lehmann added that Old Brick has gone ahead with the exterior work they needed to do, the storm drainage, which was their highest priority. Eastham suggested asking Council if Old Brick could be given City funds for this project. Lehmann noted that would be a different agenda item. Lehmann also noted that when talking with the director of Old Brick, their attitude is this would better serve the people that come through use the facilities so it would be beneficial for the facilities. Lehman reviewed the application Old Brick submitted, for their projects they had $40,553 requested in HOME/CDBG which was a mixture of private and CDBG funds and included ADA improvements, kitchen improvements, stair improvements, and replacing bathrooms to make them ADA accessible. The total budget was $50,500 as they were expecting $10,000 in private funds. Padron asked if Lehmann thinks HUD will approve this as an eligible expense. Lehmann replied he feels they would be able to use part of their funds if it's apportioned by time, he would probably recommend to them that they step up the amount of lunches they were hosting to increase their ratio of time that they use the kitchen for an eligible service. McKinstry recommended the Commission do nothing at this point and see what progress can be made with HUD and revisit in March as per staff’s recommendation. Lehmann feels they will have an answer before March. Alter confirmed, noting as a group they still believe that this is important enough that it should be funded and may have to look for alternative funding through City Council. Lehmann noted this can become a future agenda item if need be and that would be the time to discuss possible contingencies. Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 7 of 12 AID TO AGENCIES (A2A) QUESTIONS AND FOLLOW UP: Fixmer-Oraiz opened the conversation up to the Commission to discuss if there as any questions or issues that jumped out. Eastham stated he didn't see anything interesting in terms of the amount requested, but two agencies still have low participation rates by Hispanic and non-white, because of the nature of their service, but he feels it should be included in decision making. Padron noted the coalition said they have a few agencies that have not participated with them and wondered if there were agencies that wanted to participate but were not asked. Lehmann heard Inside Out expressed they wanted to be more involved but that's the only one that he heard speak up about not being part of the agency coalition meetings. McKinstry noted the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship hasn’t been involved either. Lehmann requested a breakdown of their funding request by agency as to how they internally determined their request but hasn't heard anything. Fixmer-Oraiz noted this round of applications, perhaps because of conversations with agencies and because of the coalition, is the best round of applications. There was a lot of succinct descriptions, more meaningful discussions about funding sources for matching funds. She wanted to go on the record for saying she appreciates the work that everybody's put into these applications, and also the Commission for putting in the time. Eastham noted Horizon and Pathways are two agencies with relatively low Hispanic and non-white participation. He would like to give them an opportunity to talk more about that. Drabek noted both agencies specialize in elderly care and disabled persons with disabilities. Fixmer-Oraiz has a question with the free lunch program, they had some red items for their fund balance. The carryover balance from the previous year and their ending fund balance was also negative. Lehmann stated he hasn’t talked them about it, when he was going through the applications his hunch is that it was more an error in boxes and misunderstanding possibly as to what the carryover funds meant. Or maybe they just don't have carryover funds and so they're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It is something the Commission can ask them about it. Padron noted regarding the two agencies not serving enough diversity, she feels it is unfair to ask them about diversity when every year they receive no information from the Free Lunch Program on who they serve, so she doesn’t think it can be held against one agency for not serving enough people when another agency doesn’t report at all. Lehmann stated they are trying to quantify some of these things asking agencies to address it in their narrative. So it is going to be a less subjective measure than for the ones that provide the data. Fixmer-Oraiz said they added the question regarding if the agency promotes racial equity and positivity for marginalized populations within the LGBTQ, immigrants, refugees and those with disabilities. She stated they specifically added that question because of the Free Lunch Program. They state they do not discriminate, they serve whoever comes through their door. Padron asked then what Horizons stated for that question. Lehmann stated “Horizons is committed to supporting and promoting equity and inclusivity, our services are available to all community members in need and we do not discriminate. We are resident partners with Nordstrom to provide opportunities for employees in Nordstrom, recovering from a short-term disability to work at Horizons with adjusted duties or necessary make adjustments to our services in order to create access to those who may need it. For example, two of our NTS vehicles are wheelchair accessible. Additionally, a partnership with Habitat allows us to address the racial wealth divide and housing through assisting refugees, minorities, LGBTQ individuals, etc. We also partner with Shelter House provide money management services to individuals experiencing homelessness. In summer 2019 Horizons partnered with a safe, equitable, and thriving Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 8 of 12 grant fund focused on decreasing violence in Cedar Rapids, to provide meals for at-risk youth engaged in a mural project. Last year some employees of Horizons were able to attend the white privilege symposium and implicit bias training. Horizons demonstrates its commitment to inclusion, their involvement in our community celebrations dedicated to supporting diversity like pride and Juneteenth as well as our participation and support community events like Gathering the Voices of Black Maternal health event, we continue to shape and plan our work through the Horizons inclusivity committee.” Padron feels that is enough if the statement is enough for the Free Lunch Program. Fixmer-Oraiz said it's great to have this question to get an understanding of the depth and what resources an agency has internally and are they training people and what is their commitment, but it's different because they are tracking it to show the outcome and say, okay, but what institutionally are you doing, to actually reach people of color? Padron understands but since they don’t have the data for every agency why punish one but not another. Eastham is not thinking that Horizons or Pathways are not serving the right proportion of people of color, he just thinks the Commission has some responsibility to ask them in their view why their proportions are lower than other agencies and if they have some ideas for increasing participation or service programs. Lehmann noted the new scoring sheet is not going to be perfect and he is already noticing tweaks he would make for the next one. Eastham notes the Free Lunch Program has a policy they use, which is not to ask any questions from guest, would mean they would not know what race or ethnicity people are. That is a policy decision on their part, and we should make allowances for that policy decision even if it makes it impossible to gather specific demographic information. For him that distinguishes the Free Lunch Program from other agencies. Drabek agrees in the case of the Free Lunch Program, it's incredibly likely that most people served are very low income. But there may be other agencies that we think may have some chance of serving mostly higher income populations and could question them. Alter agrees and notes this serves as a reminder of there may be more that an agency can do, just because they have a mainly white elderly population, which based on demographics and statistically speaking in Iowa, does that make sense, and yet, it can be noted that while it’s great an agency is serving that community can they talk about what kind of outreach they’ve done to reach other people who may be in need of your service, particularly people of color. Lehmann will try to relay the intent of the question and see how they respond. His plan is with all the questions the Commission generates he will send out to the agency a week before the meeting so they can be prepared. Eastham stated in his view it extremely important that this Commission talks about race in every element. So that's why he wants to ask Pathways and Horizons about race. Alter is curious about some of the requested amounts, because after the conversations last time it was clear that agencies weren’t asking for what they need, just what they thought they could get. She wonders if those conversations influenced what they're asking for, that they felt now they can be a bit more honest about what we they need, because for several agencies the amount actually went up. Even though they sat in that Council meeting and heard it was a onetime deal. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the Coalition had an estimate of what they thought and she thinks it is reflective in some of these applications because it is much more than they’ve seen previously years. Patron is concerned if when these agencies got together and came up with a budget if they didn't include Inside Out Reentry Community that's $40,000 more. McKinstry noted that's Inside Out is not a legacy agency but rather a new agency. Padron would like to know if Inside Out was not invited to the Coalition or if they just didn't participate because they are not a legacy agency. She thought the Coalition was Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 9 of 12 open to all the agencies. Eastham notes it looks like Inside Out apparently is increasing their staff. Lehmann noted Inside Out is now part of the legacy agencies because they have received funding in the past five years. Fixmer-Oraiz understands Padron’s concern and can reach out to the Coalition about their processes as she attends the meetings. Lehmann noted if any Commissioner has a question on any application, send them to him so he can get the questions out to the agency a week prior to the next meeting. Fixmer-Oraiz everybody was assigned to an agency and the expectation is meet with the agency and build a relationship. Lehmann stated the interest is not just for the liaison to have the relationship. The liaison will organize tours, but they should be limited to four Commissioners. He suggested getting tours completed prior to the November meeting. The Commission felt that would not be possible to get them all done in November so Lehmann suggested as many as possible and so long as they are done by the January meeting when they make the allocations with a goal of having information to make decisions. Alter feels it would be an extra metric or criteria. If the visits and the Commission’s impressions are to impact decisions it should be a very transparent clear process. Drabek added it changes the nature of the visit as well, it would be better to develop a relationship with the agencies to be used for longevity. Lehmann agreed and said the visits would be spanned throughout the year then. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the spirit of this was to really be able to have a liaison and build relationships. McKinstry noted that all Commission members are going to have different kinds of relationships with the people involved at various agencies and there isn’t any way to erase that. He works on Habitat house and when he looks at those figures he may have biases, but will admit he has biases. Just by living in a community, we're going to have attachments to or impressions of agencies. UPDATE ON COUNCIL DIRECTION FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT (LIHTC) FUNDS: Lehmann noted the Commission made a recommendation last time about extending it to as many people as possible. This went to Council in a work session to let them know, and the initial intent was to prep the MOU, bring it to the Commission for approval, and take it back to Council. Council said the language is fine and they would adopt or add the intent of the HCDC discussion into the MOU and then just bring it back to Council. As such, staff drafted an MOU that has in a provision about that and they’ve added more reporting requirements to keep track of these things over time where they haven't had as much of that annual reporting after the fact. So the specific criteria they had put in was potentially given to for viable projects, providing the most units at the highest levels of affordability. DISCUSS ANNUAL CITY STEPS 2025 REVIEW PROCESS: Lehmann noted when they were doing the review process last year this was discussed and because the City is now updating the five year plan, it presents a chance to think through this. Historically, what we had done is Kubly or Lehmann would visit one or two community groups that were related to a topic that had come up. For example last year was racial equity and they met with the Center for W orker Justice and with the South District. A lot of what they hear isn't directly related to CBDG or HOME funds, most people just want a good place to live, affordable housing, to be able to get to where they need to, and to take care of their children. This year they’ve added in a yearly meeting with agencies to ask report what they hear on the ground. Lehmann opened it up for other outreach ideas the Commission has. Eastham stated that trying to figure out what people in the community think about, what they want to happen in the community, and then including that in a document like City Steps is a perplexing, daunting undertaking. He thinks however it is one they have to continue to work at. To have a whole meeting here and have people come and talk about City Steps hasn’t worked particularly well. Going over and talking to groups about City Steps would work better if he had a better way of telling people what City Steps actually is. Fixmer-Oraiz agreed, it's almost an educational outreach before it's a feedback. They need to know what it is before they can give concise feedback. Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 10 of 12 Lehmann noted historically they’ve choosen a couple groups a year and go to those groups. Realistically, outreach takes a lot of time so that's where he was wondering if there may be a way to augment outreach because one of HCDC duties is to go out and talk about these sorts of things. Would it make sense for Commissioners to take 15 minutes with groups in which Commissioners are involved and let them know what's happening, give opportunity for feedback, and then the Commissioner could come back and report on what they’ve heard. Lehmann said staff participates in many events that relate to affordable housing, but usually those are things other people put on and he doesn’t want to take over their meetings, so it's always a balance. Fixmer-Oraiz stated a couple things come to mind. From a planning perspective, community outreach is always more intensive and we want to go to the people and make it fun and make it interesting. City Steps is none of those things. She noted they need to decide what would be a goal and go after that goal, because from planning methodologies, there's so many ways to approach it that aren’t static. Fixmer- Oraiz thinks looking at a more comprehensive study is the way to go, she is happy to help with that because she owns a planning company. She would not charge for it as she thinks it is important, not just the process but what are the goals. Lehmann noted it sounds like this is something to give some thought to first, possibly tap some people, bring it back when we've got a better idea of even where to begin with this. Padron asked when the City conducted its meetings, who attended and did they collect data. Kubly said they track demographics, last year when they went to the Center for W orker Justice it is more of a spontaneous experience. When looking at these timeline reviews, the City is looking at priorities and throughout the five years, the priorities don't really change much. Generally people saying similar thing over and over, which suggests the City has found the right goals. However a benefit of these meeting is to educate people and connect them with things the City offers, or help someone with an issue, so it tends to have a more personal impact than an impact on the City Steps. Fixmer-Oraiz said it would be good to get a group together to discuss and look at what City Steps is and create a strategy moving forward. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 19, 2019: Padron moved to approve the minutes of September 19, 2019. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. (Nkumu absent) HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION: Lehmann noted the next meeting is scheduled for November 21 at 6:30pm in Senior Center room 202. He asked if the Commission would prefer a meeting in December, rather than November, to give more time to read applications. It would be December 19, same room, same time. That meeting would review and approve the Consolidated Plan, approve the FY21 CDBG and Emerging Agency application forms, and conduct the question and answer session with agencies. There would also be a monitoring update from four agencies. The Commission agreed to go with the December 19 meeting. Next, FY21 Aid to Agencies, the meeting with the City Manager is on October 30 is at 2:00pm at Emma Harvart Hall. At the Iowa APA, the City won an implementation award for the affordable housing action plan, it was an ambitious plan and was done in two and a half years, which was solid for planning standards. There is a Crafting Powerful Messages Affordable Housing training on October 22, sponsored by the City and County and organized by the Affordable Housing Coalition. Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 11 of 12 Census 2020 is starting to ramp up, they’ve already done some outreach and some canvassing and that's going to continue. We encourage everyone to just let people know it is coming. Eastham asked if the City is responsible for outreach for the Census. Lehmann said there's a complete count committee that the City is a part of with different subcommittees, the Census Bureau doesn’t do a lot of outreach honestly, they provide some materials and recruit workers and other than that it's pretty minimal. The bulk of surveys will be mailed to people in March and the census is for where you live on April 1. There are a lot of services that rely on an accurate census count and the City wants to be sure to get an accurate count. In addition to the City, the complete count committee has members from Johnson County, other cities in the county, as well as some University of Iowa representatives. Lehmann said they have materials in 12 languages which can be used for outreach now. Reminder that November 12, 13, and 14 are the outreach meetings for the transit study. The City is purchasing the second South District house at 2129 Taylor, it's another duplex side by side. It's in pretty good shape so it will be another affordable acquisition. Kubly said it will be $130,000 for both sides so they will be able to sell it affordably. The house was vacant so there's no one who lived there previously. But preference would be for people who live on Taylor or Davis. And then the second preference is from the broader neighborhood. Finally, Lehmann noted that Riverfront Crossings is at Planning & Zoning tonight, so based on some applications that we had for people to live in the rental units, we are recommending an asset cap because some people have low incomes, but they have high assets. The City wants to make sure that the people that are getting the units are the people that need them more. Also with complications with LIHTC funding, because the rents don't exactly line up with HOME, the City is recommending, if there are LIHTC units that are affordable to the people that live there then that counts as an affordable unit, whether it meets the HOME definition exactly. In other words, it simplifies the process for LIHTC developers that are potentially providing affordable units in the area. So two potential changes are going through Council right now. ADJOURNMENT: Alter moved to adjourn. Eastham seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0 (Nkumu absent). Housing and Community Development Commission October 17, 2019 Page 12 of 12 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record • Resigned from Commission Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Name Terms Exp. 7/11 8/15 9/19 10/17 12/19 Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22  X X O/E Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X O/E X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 O/E X X X Eastham, Charlie 6/30/20 X X X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30/20 X X X X Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook 6/30/22 O/E X O/E O/E McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X O/E X X Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X X X Padron, Maria 6/30/20 X X X X Item Number: 4.c. J anuary 7, 2020 AT TAC HM E NT S : Description L ibrary B oard of Trustees: November 21