Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-02 Bd Comm minutesU 1-U 1-~ U 4b ~ MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 17, 2009 - 7:00 PM -FORMAL CITY HALL, EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Freerks, Charlie Eastham, Michelle Payne, Wally Plahutnik, Elizabeth Koppes, Josh Busard, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Jake Rosenberg, Karen Howard, Sara Greenwood Hektoen OTHERS PRESENT: Devon Yoder, Marina Usacheva, Wally Pelds RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of SUB09-00010, an application submitted by Arlington Development, Inc. for a preliminary plat of Windsor West Parts Two and Three, a 58-lot, 25.78 acre residential subdivision located north of American Legion Road, south of Cumberland Lane, on Buckingham Lane. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairperson Ann Freerks. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Devon Yoder, 4183 New Castle Drive, said that he lives in Windsor West, on the east side where Fairway Golf Course used to be. Yoder questioned why sidewalks were not put in along American Legion Road when Windsor Ridge and Windsor West were developed. Yoder said American Legion Road is a main thoroughfare connecting the eastern part of the development with Scott Boulevard. Yoder said there are sidewalks and walkways within the developments, but there are none along American Legion Road. Yoder said he had grown up in Iowa City, east of American Legion Road and has been surprised as the area developed that no sidewalks were created. Yoder said that in warmer weather there are a lot of bicyclists, pedestrians, and joggers. Yoder said the lack of sidewalks is a concern for families wishing to travel and recreate along the very heavily trafficked road. Yoder said that his concern does tie in somewhat with the agenda item concerning Windsor West. Yoder said that if even more homes are added to Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 2 of 11 the area the City will need to make plans to develop sidewalks along American Legion Road. Miklo said that as the zonings for development along American Legion Road have been approved, the City has noted that the road is not up to City street standards. As a result, the City has required developers to pay into a fund for the future improvement of American Legion Road. Miklo said he believes that the project is slated for the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for 2015 or 2016. Miklo said that when the City improves the road, sidewalks will be added. He noted that priorities may shift as the project competes with other capital improvement needs over the coming years, and that the City Council will be reviewing their CIP in January 2010. He advised residents with concerns to get their comments about this issue to the City Council via letter or a-mail in the near future, as such concerns could factor into where the improvement of American Legion Road falls in the CIP. Freerks advised Yoder to consider contacting other residents with concerns to make their opinions know to the City Council prior to the CIP meeting. Miklo noted that the minutes of this Planning and Zoning Commission meeting will also bring the issue to City Council's attention. Eastham asked if it was not the case that part of the right-of-way for American Legion Road remains under County jurisdiction. Miklo said that even so that has not in the past prevented the City from working with the County to upgrade a road. Eastham said he had just been wondering if the issue would be a County one as well as a City one if a large part of the right-of- way remained under County jurisdiction. Miklo said that would be a detail that would be worked out during the construction program. Eastham asked if the trail system that the Parks and Recreation Department has planned will serve as appropriate pathways for residents. Yoder said that there is a section of American Legion Road that is about a third of a mile long stretching from Windsor West to Scott Boulevard that presents the greatest hazard to pedestrians and cyclists. Miklo explained that the lack of sidewalks is in part a consequence of "leap-frog" development; where development does not occur contiguous to other development, but skips an area of land. Miklo said that this is generally avoided; however, it was consciously done in the case of Windsor Ridge back in the early 1990's. At that time, Miklo said, there was very little developable land on the east side of town that was not in the hands of one or two developers. The City consciously decided to annex land a little farther out to help spur the housing market and provide some options on the east side. Miklo said that the lack of sidewalks along American Legion Road is a negative externality that resulted. Miklo said that as the city grows, it will be important to weigh the benefits and consequences of leap-frog development when considering whether or not to allow it. Payne noted that it is very easy to send City Council an a-mail through the city website. Marina Usacheva, 4402 Buckingham Drive, began to address the Commission on her concerns regarding the Windsor West subdivision, but was advised to hold those comments until the public hearing portion of the next agenda item. SUBDIVISION ITEM: SUB09-00010: Discussion of an application submitted by Arlington Development, Inc. for a preliminary plat of Windsor West Parts Two and Three, a 58-lot, 25.78 acre residential subdivision located north of American Legion Road, south of Cumberland Lane, on Buckingham Lane. The 45-day limitation period ends December 22, 2009. Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 3 of 11 Jake Rosenberg, planning intern, explained that the subdivision was formerly a golf course prior to being zoned RS-5. In 2005, a preliminary plat for Windsor West Parts One through Three was approved. That preliminary plat expired in 2007 with only Part One having obtained final plat approval. Rosenberg explained that preliminary plats expire after two years to make sure that changes in zoning and subdivision codes are applied to subdivisions. The applicant is now seeking re-approval for Parts Two and Three. In 2008, new subdivision regulations were adopted, so these new requirements will apply to this application. Rosenberg said the subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan identifies this area as suitable for low density residential. Windsor West Parts Two and Three meet current maximum density requirements, lot area requirements and lot frontage requirements. Rosenberg said the original plat was approved under old standards in 2005, which required only 50 foot right-of-ways and four-foot sidewalks. The subdivision standards adopted in 2008, require 60 foot right-of-ways and five-foot sidewalks for local residential streets. The increased right-of-way is intended to allow sufficient room for utilities and street trees. Because Cumberland Lane and Buckingham Lane leading into the subdivision have already been constructed using the 50-foot right-of-way and four-foot sidewalks, Staff believes that it is reasonable to continue those streets as they are. This will allow the maintenance of uniform frontages and avoid tapering the right-of-ways and sidewalks in the middle of the neighborhood. Other streets in the subdivision comply with current street standards. The Parks and Recreation Commission has agreed to accept Outlot C as a partial fulfillment of the open space requirement, and the owner has dedicated an additional swath of land to help facilitate the connection to Scott Park. To fulfill the remaining open space requirements, the developer will pay fees in the equivalent of .94 acres of open space at the time of final plat approval. At that time, the developer will also be required to pay per-acre fees for water main extension, sanitary sewers and the improvement of American Legion Road. Freerks asked if Staff had talked with Engineering about requiring 5-foot wide sidewalks on portion of Buckingham Lane, per Eastham's request at the informal meeting. Rosenberg said that Forestry had said that that sidewalk width, which would be one foot into the public right-of- way, would not be adequate for street trees. Miklo added that the 60-foot right-of-way was adopted to allow for room for street trees. Miklo said that the City Forrester says that 6-feet is the minimum space allowable for trees, and even then he does not feel it is sufficient room. Miklo said that adding five-foot sidewalks in that area would make it difficult to add street trees. If this was a new subdivision without existing streets, Miklo said, the new standards would be more strictly enforced. It is because there are existing streets tying into the subdivision at lower standards that the issue is somewhat murkier. Miklo said that going with the 60-foot right-of- way would make for some shallow lots in some areas. Weitzel said that it was his understanding that the new subdivision code was attempting to limit cul-de-sacs; he asked how that applied to this preliminary plat. Miklo explained that the code basically discourages cul-de-sacs except where there are topographic considerations that would warrant their use. In this particular case, Miklo said, there is one cul-de-sac; he said there does not seem to be any real benefit in extending it. He said the cul-de-sac is a fairly short one with only three lots on it, and did not seem a compelling reason for redesigning the whole subdivision. Miklo said that the regulations actually say that cul-de-sacs should be avoided except where topographic or existing street patterns warrant their consideration. He said staff felt that this design meets that standard. Freerks opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. No representative for the applicant was present, so Freerks invited other members of the public to speak. Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 4 of 11 Marina Usacheva, 4402 Buckingham Lane, said that her main concern with the opening of the new subdivision and the extension of Buckingham Lane is that she is afraid it will compromise the safety of the neighborhood's children. Usacheva said that nearly all of the homes on her street have elementary-aged children. She said that right now the street is very quiet, and that traffic primarily consists of neighbors only. Usacheva said the plan could make this a busy area, with the potential for a bus route. She asked what the City's bus route plan for the area was. Usacheva said that in 2007, the Windsor Ridge Homeowners Association voted not to include Windsor Ridge West in its association. Usacheva said that residents of her streets would like to know why the two subdivisions have to be connected and why Buckingham Lane needs to be opened to through traffic. Freerks asked if Miklo would address Usacheva's concerns. Miklo said that Arlington Drive is currently a collector street which runs from American Legion Road up to Court Street. Arlington Drive is designed as a collector street, with no turns or stops in it. He said that he would not anticipate the bus route changing from its current location on Arlington. Miklo said that the idea is to create a network of streets in the subdivision so that any one street is not overburdened; he said he believed the current plan is in line with that intention. Miklo said that when Buckingham Lane was built it was designed to continue; that it is why it is a stub- street and not a cul-de-sac. Usacheva said that this is one of the issues; when John Moreland built her home and her neighbors' homes, no one told them that Buckingham would be open to through traffic. Usacheva said that the dead-end street with a golf course next to it was one of the attractions to their property. Freerks said she was disappointed that the applicant chose not to use the Good Neighbor Policy and that there was no conversation with the neighborhood association. Freerks asked why Fairway Lane does not connect with Buckingham Lane and if there is a plan for the two streets to connect at some point. Miklo said that Fairway lane and its subdivision are currently in the County's jurisdiction; the plan is to connect the streets when the neighborhood is annexed in the future. Plahutnik asked if there are sidewalks on both sides of Buckingham Lane from its current stub to American Legion Road. Miklo explained that there are sidewalks on the lots that have been built upon. Sidewalks are not installed until each house is built, to avoid damaging them in the construction process. The plan is for sidewalks on both sides of the street, Miklo said. Plahutnik said that the presence of sidewalk should alleviate safety concerns because there is a place for children to walk to and from school. Usacheva said that Arlington is a pretty busy street presently and Buckingham is much narrower. Plahutnik noted that Arlington was designed to carry more traffic. Usacheva asked if someone could answer her question as to why the streets needed to be connected at all. Miklo said that it is the City's policy and it is generally accepted, good urban design to connect neighborhoods. Miklo said that without that policy it would be very difficult to travel from one neighborhood to another, or to provide public services such as snow removal, police and fire protection. Plahutnik said that speaking for himself only, with the amenities of joining the City (sewer, water, snow removal, and trash removal) comes connectivity to the City and your neighbors. Roads connect all throughout town. Plahutnik said that kids walk back and forth to school in many busy areas of town, and that, in fact, the traffic is often heaviest nearest schools. Miklo added that when this project was first approved, Phase Two was to occur with the extension of Buckingham Lane from the south. Phase Three was to be the eastern portion of Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 5 of 11 Buckingham as well as Sherwood Drive. The applicant is now proposing to reverse the order of the phases. Phase 2 is now proposed to be the eastern 33 lots that would have access from Buckingham Lane to the east. Miklo said that Staff had looked at the question of whether the City should insist the order be reversed; however, transportation planners estimated that based on the number of lots in the proposed Phase Two and the existing lots on Buckingham only about 300 vehicle trips per day would be generated from that development, quite a bit lower than the mid-point standard for a local street. Based on that, Miklo said, Staff saw no issue with the changes in order of Phases Two and Three. The development of these two phases, Miklo said, will not overburden the streets as designed. Plahutnik asked if it was the case that Phase Two would happen next and Phase Three would occur at some undetermined time in the future; Miklo said it was. Freerks closed the public hearing and asked for a motion. Eastham moved to approve SUB09-00010, an application submitted by Arlington Development, Inc. for a preliminary plat of Windsor West Parts Two and Three, a 58-lot, 25.78 acre residential subdivision located north of American Legion Road, south of Cumberland Lane, on Buckingham Lane. Payne seconded the motion. Freerks invited discussion from the Commission. Eastham said he would like to respond to the street-connectivity question that was posed to the Commission. He acknowledged the legitimacy of the concern, but said that he always hopes that when people purchase a home on a street or in a subdivision there is clear information given at that time about what is going to happen with that subdivision in the future. Unfortunately, Eastham said, that seems not to occur sometimes. Regarding the inter- connection between Arlington and American Legion Road via Buckingham, Eastham said that public safety is served by the connection of those streets. Eastham noted that the design of Buckingham does have some inherent speed control. Freerks said she agrees with Eastham. She said she thinks that it is unfortunate that information was not given to Usacheva fully or directly and that no communication has really been made with the homeowners' association. She noted that the applicant was not present to listen or respond to concerns about the subdivision and said that this was unfortunate. Freerks said that if Usacheva wanted to she could still try to contact the applicant and have some conversation, but that she was not sure it would really go anywhere at this time. Freerks said that the City does like to see streets connect to one another and not have isolated sections of the community. Freerks said she believed the street is designed in such a way that hopefully speed will not be an issue. Freerks noted that her street is really quite busy and that her kids still walk to school. She said that she also understood the concern when a person buys into a situation believing it is one way and then has it changed. Freerks said that nonetheless, she will vote in favor of the development because the plan is not that much different than the original plan and that she feels it is probably best to continue the streets in the way that they were originally outlined. Weitzel said that it is regrettable that the Good Neighbor Policy was not taken up in this situation. Weitzel said it may be that because the subdivision was already platted and approved the developer did not see a need for it; however, Weitzel said, that gesture of extending an opportunity to the residents to comment is an important one. Weitzel said he really hopes that Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 6 of 11 people will use the Good Neighbor Policy in the future. There were no further comments. A vote was taken and the motion was approved on a 7-0 vote. ANNEXATION /REZONING: ANN09-00001 8~ REZ09-00006: Discussion of an application submitted by Moss Green Development Corporation for annexation and rezoning of approximately 132 acres of land near the intersection of Highway 1 and Interstate-80 from County Agricultural (C-AG) to Interim Development -Research Park (ID-RP). Busard abstained from consideration of this application as he works for the County's Planning and Zoning Department, which has worked with the City of Iowa City on this annexation. Karen Howard explained that the Moss family has owned and farmed the land west of NCS Pearson for many years. They no longer wish to farm the land, and have formed a partnership to develop their property. Howard pointed out the property on a location map. Much of the Moss farm has already been annexed into the city and been zoned Interim Development Research Park (ID-RP). Howard said that the annexation is voluntary, meaning the property owners have requested to be annexed into the city. The main reason for the annexation request is to extend infrastructure -roads, sewer and water-to the developer's main piece of property in order to develop it. Because NCS Pearson's property has already been developed and because the only agreement for access to the property is farm access and there is no other good place to extend a road, the property to the north needs to be annexed in order to get a road to the main property. Howard said there is a planned arterial street in that area. The Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) Arterial Street Plan, an element of the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, indicates that Oakdale Boulevard is planned to extend from Coralville to Iowa City, crossing Dubuque Street, Prairie Du Chien Road and over to Highway 1. A location study was completed in 2003 that generally described the acceptable range of alignments for extending Oakdale Boulevard. This would be a long term roadway project, Howard said. While it is in the long range transportation plan, the road extension is not included in the current CIP program. The City has no current plans to fund or build the roadway. The applicants have yet to work out an agreement with the City for construction of the roadway and extension of services. Until an agreement is reached and a plan put in place to extend this infrastructure, Interim Development zoning is recommended. Howard said that the road and infrastructure must extend across properties not owned by the applicant -Neal Llewellyn and the Catherine Chase Trust, which is administered by Hills Bank for the benefit of Guy McFarland. Howard said that faxed statements have been received from the Neal Llewellyn and Bonnie McFarland that they grant permission for a portion of their properties to be annexed, however, official written permission from the trustee, Hills Bank, has not been received. Howard said the Hills Bank Trust Committee would be meeting the following week. Howard said there has been some confusion over exactly how much land the Llewellyn's and the McFarland's have given permission to have annexed, whether it was a portion of the land or the entire parcel. Staff recommends annexation of the entire parcel. One reason for this is that with Oakdale Boulevard not yet being built, it is difficult to determine precisely where the road alignment will be. It is also difficult to create a legal description for a parcel with a Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 7 of 11 boundary that won't be determined until the roadway is established. In addition, Howard stated, it is good planning practice to include property on both sides of an arterial street inside the city limits, so that any future development is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan and zoning and subdivision regulations. Howard noted that there are a number of sensitive environment features on the property in question, including the Rapid Creek stream corridor and floodplain, woodlands, steep slopes, and potential wetlands. Howard said that at present the city's growth area limit follows the creek line. One requirement for an annexation is that a property falls within the City's growth area limit. The current growth area limit was established several years ago with the knowledge that the City could provide water and sewer services for a limited area north of the creek, but had not yet established how far the City wished to grow in that area. Howard stated that there are several reasons to consider a limited extension of the City's growth area limit to include the area proposed for annexation: it is within the City's interest to allow the development of property that has already been annexed into the city; the property cannot be developed unless a roadway and other infrastructure is extended; it is in the City's interest to control land development adjacent to major infrastructure investment such as the extension of Oakdale Boulevard. Staff is recommending that the Commission set a public hearing for their next meeting to consider a Comprehensive Plan amendment to extend the growth area to include these properties. The second criterion for annexation is that development in the area will fulfill an indentified need without imposing an undue burden on the city. Howard said it is in the City's economic interest to promote economic development of land that is already within the City Limits. This annexation will make it possible to extend Oakdale Boulevard and to allow development of the Moss Green property that is already in the city. However, Howard said, Staff is recommending Interim Development (ID) zoning for this property because there is currently no plan to fund the extension of the roadway. The Interim Development designation will not allow the property to be developed until there is a plan for the development of infrastructure. Once a concrete plan is in place, the property may be rezoned to a designation that allows development for urban uses. The third criterion of annexation is that the control of the development is in the City's best interest. Howard said it is in the City's best interest to control the property surrounding the extension and construction of a major arterial street. Howard said that the ID zone would be the appropriate zone at this time. She noted that the applicant has indicated that in the future they wish to develop the property for office/research park uses, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Howard cautioned that it should nonetheless remain zoned Interim Development until infrastructure is in place or an agreement is in place to extend the infrastructure within a specific timeframe. Howard shared a map that illustrated the various alignments of Oakdale Boulevard that were considered in the 2003 location study. She had also handed out excerpts of the location study, which explained the various pros and cons of each of the alignments. The study did note that there are a lot of sensitive features in the area which will make the roadway difficult to construct. She noted that the preferred alignment identified in the location study is consistent with the alignment being proposed by the developers. With regard to extension of other City services, the City Engineer has determined that the Highlander lift station has the necessary capacity to serve the area; and, the new water plant Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 8 of 11 also has considerable capacity to serve this area. With regard to environmentally sensitive features, the development will have to be done in a very thoughtful way. There are wooded areas, stream corridors, floodplains, steep slopes, ravines and likely wetlands areas which will all need careful attention and be reviewed through the sensitive areas ordinance. When the development plans progress to the point that rezoning is warranted, a detailed sensitive areas development plan will need to be submitted and reviewed. Howard said that with all of the above in mind, Staff recommends ANN09-00001 & REZ09- 00006, an annexation into the city and rezoning of approximately 132 acres of land from County Agricultural (C-AG) to Interim Development-Research Park (ID-RP), be approved subject to a Comprehensive Plan amendment adjusting the City's growth limit to include the area being annexed. Eastham said that it looks to him like the road alignment shown in the annexation documents is essentially the same as 3A in the road location study. Howard said that was correct; however, she cautioned that the findings in the location report were preliminary and that only the intersection points were actually fixed. Eastham asked if the other alignments were outside the proposed annexation area. Howard said she believed that they were. Freerks noted that prior to any development there would need to be a sensitive areas assessment and a plan in place. Howard said that was correct; no clearing or construction until the sensitive areas development plan was submitted and reviewed according to the City's sensitive areas ordinance. Payne asked if the property would have to go through a platting process as well. Howard said that was correct. Eastham asked if Staff's position was that the agreement to annex should be contingent on the owner agreeing to this particular road alignment. Howard said the annexation was strictly to get the property into the city and that there is no agreement with the owner about the roadway. Howard said the owner is still working out proposals about that and the City Council has no funds budgeted for the project. Howard said that what will likely have to happen is for the developer to convince the City Council to change its CIP budget to include funding for the road, or to build the road using their own funds and negotiate an agreement with the City to be repaid over time as development occurs. Miklo said the annexation itself does not commit the developer or the City to building a road. Miklo said that Staff is unlikely to recommend approval of a rezoning from interim development until there is a specific plan in place to build the road and extend infrastructure to the property. Howard said that is why the ID zoning is recommended. Payne pointed out that realistically the developers could not develop until a road is built, but that if they waited for it to show up in the City's budget it could be several years. Eastham said that as he understands it the parcel could actually be rezoned with another access roadway. Greenwood Hektoen assured Eastham that this agreement would not in any way commit the City or the developer to building a roadway. There were no further questions for Staff. The public hearing was opened and the applicant was invited to speak. Wally Pelds of Pelds Engineering Company, 2323 Dixon Street, Des Moines, spoke on behalf of Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 9 of 11 the applicant. Pelds said the application for annexation is the first step in a project they are calling Moss Green Urban Village. Pelds said that this is the first step and there have been public releases regarding what the developers would like to do. Pelds said that they see Iowa City as a perfect fit for the kind of green technologies that a lot of companies and clients are moving to. Pelds said he saw Iowa City as a kind of sister city to Austin, Texas, a city trying to embark on a similar project. Pelds said Howard and Staff have been very helpful and knowledgeable. Pelds said that it has been nearly fifteen years of trying to access the already- annexed property. Pelds said bringing in the right businesses to grow the right way is what they want to do in Iowa City. Pelds said they have met with all of the neighbors and used the Good Neighbor Policy, and have gotten signatures of support for their project and for the Oakdale Boulevard extension. Pelds acknowledged that this may be a long process. Pelds offered to answer any questions from the Commission. No one else wished to speak to this issue and the public hearing was closed. Freerks asked for a motion. Payne asked if one motion could be made or if it was necessary to do two. Miklo said it would be cleanest to do two motions. Payne motioned to defer ANN09-00001 & REZ09-00006, an annexation to the city of Iowa City and rezoning of approximately 132 acres of land from County Agricultural (C-AG) to Interim Development -Research Park (ID-RP). Eastham seconded the motion. Freerks invited discussion. Payne asked if this would be deferred indefinitely or if a date would be set. Miklo said it would be deferred until January 7th, the same meeting when an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan's growth boundary would be considered. Freerks noted that both items need not be heard in one meeting. She said if there is public interest, conversation or unanswered questions that is fine because there are no deadlines to be met for this item. Payne said she just was trying to ascertain if they would be done in one meeting. A vote was taken and the motion to defer passed on a 6-0 vote (Busard abstaining). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Setting a public hearing for January 7, 2010, on an amendment to the Comprehensive plan to amend the long-range planning growth area boundary to accommodate the annexation proposed by the Moss Green Development Corporation. Eastham moved to set a public hearing for January 7, 2010, on an amendment to the Comprehensive plan to amend the long-range planning growth area boundary to accommodate the annexation proposed by the Moss Green Development Corporation Payne seconded. There was no discussion on the matter. A vote was taken and the motion was passed on a 6-0 vote (Busard abstaining). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: November 16 & 19, 2009: Planning and Zoning Commission December 17, 2009 -Formal Page 10 of 11 Freerks said she had a couple of small changes regarding some comments that she made, and asked if she could a-mail those changes to Staff. Koppes motioned to approve the minutes as amended. Eastham seconded. The minutes were approved 6-0 (Busard not present at time of vote). ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel motioned to adjourn. Koppes seconded. The meeting was adjourned on a 6-0 vote (Busard not present at time of vote) at 8:05 p.m. ~~X X XIXIX XIX I ~IXIXXIXIXIXIxI XIXIXIXIXIX X I oIoIXIXIXIXIXIXI c~IXIXIXIOIX OIX ~IXIXIXIXIOIXIX XIXIX XIXIX X Z ~ X X X X X X X O _ ti N ~ o ~ X O x x x x x C G L ~ W ~ ~ ~ X X X X O X LL ~ W LL Z W W o~ Z~o ~ Z ~ X X ~ X X X X ~ p N Q N Q a ~ ~ O ~ X X X X X ~ X ~ u Q W ~ LL ~ C9 H. Z Q ~ X X X X X X X Z Z a N x x x x x o x NIX X XIXIOIXIX r 1 =IXXIXIoiXIXiXI N ~W ~.-MNOOM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Wd~~~n~~n~.n~n ~Wooooo00 W ~ >- ~ m J J 2 Q Z ~ J w~VZQJ2 ~_ Q~ WUY~ Z ~ Q Y N~~ W ~=~aZ2N vQic~nwa~Q~ mw~Yaa~ N ~ X X X X O O ca ~ X X X X X X X ~- X X ~ X X X X T 0 0 x X X X X ~ r X X X X X X ~ ti M X X X X X X X M M X X X X X X X N X X X X X X X X X ~ X X p ~W ~ e- M N O O M ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.,.,X o o o o o 0 0 W W ~._., ~ m Q 2 Q Z Q ~ j ~ W Q N O = U Z Q N = V Y ~ ~ Z m Q Y W N ~ ~ W ~ _ ~ d Z 2 N a ~ ~ v i ~ v i Q w ~ n- O >- Q Q ~ = W m w u. l a a ~ E 0 ~d ~ o ~Z ~ X ~ .7 ~ ~ c ~~ ~~NEcu aNi,aQZ o aQ z n u u u n w ~~ , XOOZ w Y 4b 2) MINUTES APPROVED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 2009 - 5:00 p.m. MEETING ROOM B, ROBERT A. LEE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER Members Present: David Bourgeois, Lorin Ditzler, Maggie Elliott, Craig Gustaveson, Aaron Krohmer, John Westefeld Members Absent: Margie Loomer, Ryan O'Leary, Jerry Raaz Staff Present: Mike Moran, Terry Robinson, Matthew Eckhardt Others Present: Bill Graf, Mary Villhauer, Steve Schuette, Edward Miner, Andy Dudler, Clay Claussen, Barbara Kamber, Jason Armstrong, Allan Guymon RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): Moved by Krohmer, seconded by Bourgeois, to recommend adoption of the Recreation Division fees and charges for FY11 and tentative proposals for FY12 and FY13 as presented. Passed 5 to 1 with Elliott opposed; Loomer, O'Leary and Raaz absent. OTHER FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: Moved by Krohmer, seconded by Bourgeois, to approve the November 4, 2009 minutes as written, Motion passed 5-0 with Loomer, O'Leary, Raaz and Westefeld being absent. Moved by Bourgeois, seconded by Ditzler, to approve the November 18, 2009 minutes as written, Motion passed 5-0 with Loomer, O'Leary, Raaz and Westefeld being absent. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. Craig Gustaveson chaired the start of the meeting. Westefeld arrived at 5:30 and chaired the remainder of the meeting. P~JBLiC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None PROPOSAL TO WAIVE SWIMMING POOL USE FEES FOR AIDES OF DISABELED PERSONS - ED MINE Ed Miner thanked the Commission for letting him speak and for considering his proposal. Mr. Miner reviewed the background of this situation. He explained that the Parks and Recreation Department has a policy that allows disabled patrons that are on Medicaid a discounted price fcr their swimming passes. He further explained that in the past there had been an informal policy under the Terry Trueblood Administration that allowed their respite workers, assistants, caregivers, etc. to also be placed on that family swimming pass at a discounted rate. He further PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 2 of 13 stated that it was told to him by a Parks & Recreation employee that this was an informal policy, and, in fact, he was able to renew this pass two to three years under this same informal policy. This is something, according to Mr. Miner, that is known more or less within the disabled community in Iowa City and many have benefited from this informal policy. He further noted that many disabled people live in group homes and subsist on small SSI checks and live at a poverty level. Medicaid does not reimburse the disabled person for the cost of the respite worker; therefore, the fees come from the disabled persons SSI check. In a document that Mr. Miner provided the Commission, he states, "it is my contention here that the proposed extension and regularization of the former, unofficial policy is necessary to bring the City of Iowa City into compliance with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ADAII-3.6100 states: A public entity must reasonably modify its policies, practices, or procedures to avoid discrimination." He then stated, however, moving away from that, he feels that staff and Commission should use ADA guidelines as a moral compass. Many cities across this country, including North Liberty, have taken the position that an individual whose presence is required for a disabled person to access a tax supported facility should not be charged an admission fee. He said that the helper is there just like a pair of crutches or a wheelchair, which are not charged admission. Therefore a human being should not be charged admission if they are required by the disabled person to access admission into a facility. He said that if people could see the level of assistance that is needed to use the pools by some of these individuals, there would be no question that an aide or an attendant are not deriving any recreational enjoyment out of this time. He noted that they take a lot of burden off of the lifeguards in keeping that individual safe. He wonders if considering the kind of community that Iowa City is, the things that Iowa City stands for, whether the Commission could make the decision to waive the fee for the assistant. Perhaps Commission would consider waiving the fee when the disabled person is able to provide physician documentation that they cannot safely use the pool without the assistance of another human being. Gustaveson asked for Commission comments. Ditzler stated that she has no objection to waiving the fees for a respite worker Gustaveson noted that he sees this family at Mercer often and admires the amount of effort necessary by the respite worker so that this person may use the pool. However, he also sees where there could be some advantage taken of this situation so would like to further discuss with Commission before making a formal decision, noting that there will be a need to put some safeguards in place. Bourgeois asked Miner if he had spoken with the Coralville Recreation Center and what their policy is for such a situation. Miner reported that Coralville did not give a clear answer with one employee saying that they allow them in the pool without paying a fee and another employee stating that they are charged a fee. Gustaveson again noted that he would like to check with other recreation facilities regarding their policies. Krohmer suggested that this item be added to the January Commission agenda giving time to further investigate other facilities policies. Ditzler said that while she doesn't think it is unreasonable to see what other facilities are doing, she also suggested that perhaps this department and Commission be the leader in making such PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 3 of 13 a decision to waive this fee. She further stated that she is ready to vote on such a decision tonight. Krohmer said he would like to review the actual language that other facilities use in their policies before going ahead with a vote. He would also like to hear from them what, if any, revenue loss they incurred. Gustaveson agreed that sometimes we do worry about what everyone else is doing, however, feels it is important to at least have a written policy in place. Gustaveson, on behalf of the Commission, thanked Miner for attending tonight's meeting. AFFILIATE GROUP PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Bill Graf from Boys Baseball spoke first by giving a history of the Boys Baseball organization. He noted that this organization was started by Bill Williams and a group of boys. It is his understanding that Lower City Park was donated to the City with the express purpose of playing baseball on this property and that if it wasn't going to be used for that purpose that it would be returned to the relatives of the owners who deeded this property to the City. It started with two diamonds at that time and now has eight. He noted that ICBB put in and paid for the backstops and the fencing and built two clubhouses (the first one burning down). He said that they paid for lighting for two of the diamonds which the City now rents out. They were in talks with Terry Trueblood about adding lighting to a third diamond. However, due to the flood, they were unable to follow through with this plan. ICBB paid for the utilities prior to the flood with Parks and Recreation taking over these payments following the flood. He feels that they have always worked very well with the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department and are willing to continue this relationship. He feels that over the past 53 years they have put a lot of effort into building the diamonds and feels it is an insult to be asked to pay rent to use these diamonds, further stating that they have built them up to the point that the City can rent them out to other people. He stated that ICBB has charged the same registration fee to kids for the last 20-25 years; they never turn a boy or girl away due to ability to pay or not to pay (registration fee is $30). He noted the low income provision written into the letter; however, he does not intend to ask people for proof of their income as he feels this is an invasion of their privacy. He would guess that approximately half of their kids would fall within the low income category. Graf said that ICBB had started a program with the neighborhood centers a couple of years ago on the south side of town. This program includes bussing of about 15-20 boys to the fields. A number of those kids have never played baseball. This has proven to be a great program and many of the fees are waived for those kids. Graf said that they are very willing to work with the City and lower City expenses in any way they can. Mary Villhauer also spoke on behalf of Boys Baseball. She reported that the program began in 1956 with 16 teams, 220 boys and 2 bags of equipment. Games were played at Longfellow School and Lower City Park on the big diamonds near the entrance. In 1959 a man died and left 27 acres to be used for boys to play baseball on. From the boys baseball parking lot to the river was farmland. Her husband Howard and she joined the program in 1960. At that time there were two diamonds. Over the years they made many improvements to now include a total of eight diamonds. Each year they paid to have lime hauled in from Stone City to spread on the diamonds, they installed permanent fencing and lights on two diamonds. They paid a boy to chalk the diamonds and paid their own electricity. Her family was the ground crew. When it rained, her family went out with brooms and swept the water off the diamonds in the early morning and again in the afternoon so that they would be able to play that night. When Bobby PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 4 of 13 Oldis, one of the coaches died from muscular dystrophy, the money from his memorial was used to build a clubhouse with all volunteer workers. Boys Baseball moved into the clubhouse in 1983. On June 23, 2004 that building was lost to a fire. Again it was rebuilt with the help of many contributions and volunteer labor. With the flood in 2008, they again received much damage and lost a lot of equipment. The Parks staff did a beautiful job of cleaning up. It was after the fire in 2004 that the Recreation Department offered to help us. They took care of the diamonds from then on and paid the utilities. Villhauer does not believe that when Mr. Jensen died and left the land, that he intended for Boys Baseball to have to pay to play ball. Steve Schuette, with Iowa City Girls Softball spoke next. He reported that he has been on the board for 7 plus years. He stated that it has always been a goal of the board to get as many people to the park to play ball and to provide as much fun for the kids as they can. He stated that the group has worked very hard to keep the fees down and have worked to improve the facility. In working with some of the previous presidents of the group and with the City, they have succeeded in turning this into a great softball facility. It was the understanding of the presidents and the board members and his understanding that the unwritten relationship is that they would work with the City to improve the facility and that the City would continue maintenance. In exchange, Iowa City Girls Softball would have access to these fields from the middle of March through July at no charge. ICGS has in their budget a certain amount of money allocated annually to improving the facility. They make special efforts to get people to donate to them and partner with the City to make improvements to the facility. He reported that the board talked about a couple of options if required to pay rental fees. First, would be to eliminate money that they are putting into the City that comes out of their budget. Second, they have discussed increasing the number of kids on each team from 13 to 15 or even 16 players. However, this would reduce the amount of playing time for each child, which may, in turn, cause them to drop out. The board feels that if they raise the fees, their numbers will drop. They also provide free enrollment for those who can not afford the registration fee. They do not, however, ask for proof of income from the parents, also feeling uncomfortable doing so. Schuette said that in looking at the proposal, if they have to pay for practice time, and therefore, use less number of fields, he doesn't see how valuable that will be when the other fields may sit empty during the early months. He is not sure that the City would be able to rent all eight fields for four hours a night at $10 an hour. A couple of questions that the board has are: 1) How much will they be expected to pay when they have given so much time and money to the City previously to make these fields what they are today? 2) How many other affiliate groups that fit into the same tax code would have equal access to the fields? He summarized by saying that they just want to maintain their current access to the fields, keep as many kids playing on those fields as possible at a reasonable rate and continue working with the City to maintain and improve the facility. Barbara Kamber with Iowa City Kickers then spoke. Kickers was developed in 1978 well before the soccer park was developed. Previous to that, they used the facilities at Scott Park, Willow Creek Park, Court Hill Park, and Penway Park in North Liberty. Eventually their program outgrew those facilities. She recalls that impotence for the development of the soccer park actually came from the City. There were traffic and maintenance problems when using all of the other locations. Kickers was extremely happy with the development of the Soccer Park. She reported that Kickers have donated several hundreds of thousands of dollars to the City for the park. She noted that in the early 90's they had almost 2700 kids in their program. That number is down to about 1600, as growth in Iowa City is heading north towards Coralville and North Liberty. The board has had many discussions about how to get their numbers back up, possibly by moving to different facilities, building a facility closer to the kids, but none of these ideas never made much sense to them after the City built the soccer park. She reported that they do PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 5 of 13 not want to use facilities elsewhere, but if they have to pay to use this facility, they may as well pay to use other facilities as well that are closer to the kids in North Liberty and Coralville. Allan Guymon, President of Kickers, then addressed the Commission. He reported that he is amazed with the amount of money that Kickers as donated for the development of this park. He also noted that there is a written agreement that states that fees would not be charged to Kickers for use of the fields. He is in the process of locating that document. Some of the boards concerns are as follows: Making sure that no matter what the final decision is regarding fees, they hope that the groups that are here tonight are not asked to pay the same rates as groups that come from outside the area, even if they fall within the same nonprofit tax status. Another concern is that while they can absorb some of the cost, fees will have to go up for the players, having an ill-effect on their numbers. He also noted that about 100 to 150 of the kids that are registered of the 1400 are on scholarship. They could potentially have to raise their fees 20% - 40% by the time the eight year period of time passes. He did express that the board does, however, understand the need for more revenue for the City. Westefeld noted that the differentiation of the different groups is something that Commission has spent a lot of time to figure out and understand it is a very complex issue. He asked the groups to help them determine how to differentiate the groups that fall within the same tax status. Guymon noted that the other groups that use the facility include Alliance Soccer Club and the Iowa Soccer Association. These two clubs also fall in the same tax status at Kickers. General consensus of the groups present tonight, is that regardless of the tax status they fall into, there are other things that need to be considered when determining their fees, such as their contributions to the City. Krohmer noted that it is his understanding that groups that come from outside Iowa City would not qualify for the same fee structure and groups such as Alliance, for example, which do fall within the same tax status, would not quality for the same fee structure as Kickers-that Kickers contributions should be considered. He does feel, however, that a 40% rate over 8 years is reasonable and that the groups will have to make considerations when working on future budgets. He also noted that when talking to the public, that they are surprised that these groups are not already charged for their use. Kamber asked if the fees are for both games and practices. Robinson stated that they would only be for games. Robinson said that when scheduling tournaments for outside groups, they are projecting a 100% recoup in City costs. He further explained that when scheduling tournaments that it is necessary for staff to prep the fields as well as aerate and at times even seed and fertilize previous to the event so -that they are already coming back before the next games are played. Graf said that he would respectfully disagree with Krohmer's statement that people are surprised about these groups not being charged a fee. He believes that the majority of the people of Iowa City have the understanding that they do not pay fees and he thinks that they would remain very supportive of this practice. He asked the Commission that if they do approve the fee structure, what is the recourse for these groups. Krohmer said that they speak to Council as this proposal has to go to them for approval. Schuette commented that in talking with the people in the club, that they report it was the members from 20 or 30 years ago that really got the Iowa City Girls Softball Club up and PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 6 of 13 running. They are the ones who donated their time and partnered with Iowa City to make the facility what it is today. They also commented to him that if it weren't for that donated time and money, that this facility would probably not exist as it does today. He feels that is the case for all of these facilities and groups being discussed tonight (Girls Softball, Boys Baseball and Kickers). He would also disagree with the assumption that most people would want to charge these groups for the use of these facilities and that these groups should be treated differentially than other groups because of their relationship with the City. Ditzler noted that she would like to have more discussion about this policy and consider the differentiation between the different groups that fall within the same tax status. She said that perhaps the Commission and Staff should consider creating a formal definition of an affiliate group, therefore, giving them special consideration. Krohmer said that we do have a special consideration here in that they still have preferred use and are being asked to recoup just 40% of the costs incurred by the City. Ditzler said that her understanding from previous meetings is that we still don't have a definition of what an affiliate group is. She said that while we talked about a new policy and the various nonprofit statuses, it was never determined how to define the difference between an affiliate group and any other nonprofit group. Krohmer thought we were dropping the term affiliate group. Ditzler reported that that is also her understanding, however, she thinks that the Commission should reconsider having affiliate groups but need to have a formal definition of what that means. Krohmer's understanding was that we wouldn't have an affiliate group but these organizations will still have preferred use or first use rights. Guymon said that he would, as a parent, be offended as a Kickers participant if he were charged the same amount as Iowa Soccer Club for instance. He feels that putting all groups in the same category just because they are from Iowa City would be unfair and upsetting. Robinson reported that his recommendation to the commission is going to be that the groups (Kickers, ICBB, BR, ICGS) pay a much lesser amount than any other group that is not an "affiliate" group. He wanted to make sure that he was stating that clearly. Krohmer said that if the Commission and Staff can come up with a formal definition of affiliate groups that isn't just arbitrary, then is he fine with that. Perhaps it may mean having each of these groups sign a preferred use agreement based on their past contributions. However, he did state to the groups that these facilities that they have created are very nice; they do cost a lot to keep maintained at this level. Graf offered to maintain the boys baseball fields themselves. This was not an acceptable option by Staff or Commission. Gustaveson noted that he can attest to this as when he lived in Ottumwa the baseball fields were maintained by individuals and they were not of the same quality as the fields that are maintained by parks staff. He noted that the struggle the Commission and Staff have is that they have to figure out a way to pay for these facilities. He recognized the history that all of these PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 7 of 13 groups have with the City and agrees that they do deserve preferential treatment. He explained that there is still a lot of discussion that needs to take place and asked the groups to be patient with the Commission during this process. He assured them that the Commission and Staff are not taking their concerns lightly, that they want to be equitable while still maintaining these facilities at the same level that they have been maintained in the past. However, the reality is that there are costs associated with this and there may have to be some fees associated for the use of them. Ditzler expressed her confusion to Robinson about his fee structure that he mentioned. P.obinson explained that for instance, if someone from outside Iowa City wants to schedule a tournament, that their rental costs are going to be substantially more than those that are within the City. Ditzler again asked that there be a differentiation defined for those groups within the City. Robinson suggested that there be a different rate for out of town groups, groups within the City and yet another fee for the groups here tonight. VJestefeld asked then would Babe Ruth, Kickers, Boys Baseball and Girls Softball all be treated the same. Robinson said that is how he is looking at it at this time. He said that he didn't look at it and say this group has done this much so we will charge this much. He tried to make a level playing field between all of the similar groups; however, he wouldn't go to soccer and say that it is the same as a baseball field. Westefeld reiterated then that it we are not just looking at groups inside Iowa City, but groups that are within these sport clubs. Robinson reported that the phrase "the same" would mean that a local "affiliate group" is going to have a significant discount, for lack of a better term, than a club team or an out of town team. ~T'hat discount is relatively the same between all the baseball, softball, and soccer groups. But to say that the fees are going to be the same is not accurate. There will be a differentiation simply because the amount of time it takes to maintain a baseball field vs. a soccer field. Ditzler replied that it appears that the policy is accounting for that by recouping 40% of the cost for maintenance, not a set dollar amount. Krohmer said his understanding is that the Commission is setting a policy to recoup 40% of the maintenance costs and that staff will then set the actual fees for the fields. Moran said that tournaments do not affect our affiliate groups. Robinson said he was just responding to the fact that somebody said that we don't want to pay the same amount as an out of town group. Moran said that it his understanding that while there is a fee proposed for groups that fit within the same tax status, there is a concern among these groups here tonight that they will be charged the same fee as groups who do not have a history of contributing to the City for PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 8 of 13 maintenance and improvement of these facilities. Therefore, it will be necessary to look at this again and redefine the groups within each tax status. Gustaveson asked to conclude this discussion at this time. He expressed his appreciation to the groups attending tonight and that there were good points made. He told them that Commission and Staff want to keep the dialogue open. Moran noted that groups have been invited to attend tonight and the January meetings. After hearing from all groups, staff and Commission will draft a revised proposal if necessary. Westefeld also expressed his appreciation to the groups who attended tonight and their comments, noting that it is a really complex issue and, like many people here, he too has been involved with these groups over the years. He reminded the groups that everyone is dealing with very touchy economic times, and as such it is a very difficult situation to resolve. He told the groups present that if they have any further comments, concerns, etc., after tonight to please pass them along to commission members or staff. Bourgeois noted that everyone has to come to grips with what it costs to maintain the different type of fields, and he has confidence that staff will come up with the right figures. He assured the groups that the Commission and staff are going to look at them in depth and make them as fair and equitable as possible. Moran noted that any input from the groups after this evening is welcome. PARKS AND RECREATION FEES REVIEW AND APPROVAL: Moran reviewed the chart of fees and charges that was included in Commission packet. He explained that the chart shows three years of history, but will be voting on the 2011 fees tonight. He pointed out a couple of items on the chart. The proposed potter's studio prices took a significant jump due to increased costs for clay and firing etc. He also noted a small increase in costs for adult and senior high basketball registration due to increased personnel costs. He reminded Commission of the proposed increase in park shelter fees as well. Elliott voiced her concern that we may be recovering more than we need to. Krohmer stated that since we are in budget cuts, it doesn't appear that we are recouping more than we need. Elliott asked if there has been official word given that we need to cut the budget. Moran said nothing to date; however, he would like to be proactive. However, he will go with what the Commission decides. His concern is that if we aren't asked to cut budgets this fiscal year, but then are asked the following year, we will have further cuts and revenue increases to try to deal with. He doesn't want to have to close a building down or a pool down to make up for the budget deficits. He mentioned took, that if we need to cut for FY11 but then do not need to in future years, the Commission always has the option to not increase fees etc. that following year. PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 9 of 13 Gustaveson said that was his thought as well--that everybody is hurting financially, that if the budget improves and we don't have to worry, he would assume that we say okay we are going to waive the 2014 increase because we can maintain at the 2013 level, for example. Krohmer said it is his personal opinion that the goal should be to recover 40% of the maintenance cost and that is how it should be written in the policy. Elliott stated that what she is hearing is that this increased revenue proposal is really not tied to anything other than just wanting to recover 40% of maintenance costs. Gustaveson explained that this is the case and it is a self-imposed mandate that the Commission created. He also stated that the Council has used this Commission and Department recovery plan as an example to other departments as something they should consider. Westefeld asked if Commission need to vote on this tonight. Moran said he would like Commission to vote on it, but could wait until January if they preferred. Westefeld asked Commission for any further comments. Krohmer said that he was ready to vote tonight, however, wanted to know how to handle the numbers for affiliates when there is no formalized policy. Moran stated that that part of the fees and charges will be removed from this chart before going before Council, as these will not play a part in tonight's vote. Moved by Krohmer seconded by Bourgeois, to recommend adoption of the Recreation Division fees and charges for FY11 and tentative proposals for FY12 and FY13 as presented. Passed 5 to 1 with Elliott opposed; Loomer, O'Leary and Raaz absent. CIP REVIEW: Moran reminded Commission that they had asked for a more detailed CIP report for the department. That report was included in their packets. This will go before Council on January 8. The department heads will be presenting the Council at that time as well. He invited Commission Members to attend. The department heads will give a short PowerPoint presentation and then will answer questions from Council. Moran will report to Commission at the next meeting. Krohmer noted that he is planning on attending that meeting. He also mentioned his idea of asking to have money set aside for replacement of one basketball court per year at a city park. He would like to see this as a way of using the CIP plan to implement the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Moran reported that until there is a cost estimate for such projects available, this could be taken out of the Parks Annual Improvement Fund. PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 10 of 13 BUDGET UPDATE: The budget will be released to department heads on December 23. Moran will update Commission once he receives that report and Commission can discuss in more detail at the January meeting. There will be several budget hearings in January and February. Council has to approve the budget by March 15 to send to the State for adoption. INTRODUCTION: Moran introduced the newest commission member, Clay Claussen, who will begin in January. CEMETERY COLUMBARIUM ART: Moran announced, as per the CIP project list, an infant columbarium has been added to the cemetery at a cost of $85,000. He noted that there will be an art component with this feature as well. This component will be a bronze statue depicting a mother in a rocking chair holding a baby. The cost for this component is $24,000. He wanted to make Commission members aware that this project was approved two years ago by Council and that the art piece was a part of that proposal at that time. He wanted to make Commission members aware of this in case they are approached by the public. He feels this will be a very nice addition to the cemetery. Elliott asked is the Public Art Advisory Committee was allowed to spend money this year on artwork. Moran reported that they were only allowed funds to maintain current art that is already in place but no funds for additional artwork. Elliott asked if this project may be something that the Art Commission could work towards in the future. Moran said that while that is a possibility, this particular piece has already been funded and approved and if we don't move on it, the department will lose the funding for the project. FLOOD PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS: Moran met with the Parkview Terrace group to discuss a proposed secondary access to Lower City Park and to also discuss the possibility of using some of the green space in this area for a community garden. The participants in this meeting made it pretty clear that they do not like the idea of a community garden going in. Moran and staff decided that it is best to cease any discussion about this for the time being. Parks and Recreation will continue to maintain this area. PEDESTRIAN MALL DISCUSSION: Moran put this on the agenda at the request of O'Leary and Raaz, who are both absent. Westefeld asked Gustaveson if there was any update regarding the general concept of cleanup for the downtown area. Gustaveson is no longer a downtown employee; however, he reported that he knows that the DTA was going to try to do semiannual or quarterly cleanups. The biggest challenge is getting everyone to coordinate their efforts. NAMING POLICY DISCUSSION: Moran included in the packet a memo from Dale Helling recommending a naming policy for the City. Helling will be sending a formal letter out to boards and commissions asking for their input for such a policy. PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 11 of 13 ELECTION OF OFFICERS: There was a committee of three Commission Members who approached Gustaveson to run for chair and Ditzler as Vice-Chair. Both agreed. Moved by Westefeld seconded by Elliott to nominate Gustaveson as Chair and Ditzler as Vice-Chair for the Parks and Recreation Commission. Passed 6-0 with Loomer, O'Leary, and Raaz being absent. CHAIRS REPORT: Westefeld noted that as it is his last meeting as chair he wanted to thank everyone for their support during the long and somewhat difficult meetings of the past year and really appreciates how people have kept with the process. He also thanked O'Leary (this being his last meeting) for his commitment to the Commission over the past several years, noting that he has been a very involved member and really cared about what the Commission was doing. Westefeld also wanted to formally recognized Robinson, Neumann and Moran for everything they have done over the past year during this very difficult, traumatic transition with the loss of Terry Trueblood, coming out of the flood and trying budget times. He expressed his gratitude for everyone on the Parks and Recreation staff for their work during this time as well. COMMISSION TIME: Gustaveson expressed his gratitude to Westefeld for being an outstanding Chairman, thanking him for his leadership, ability to keep meetings moving and staying unbiased during it all. He also expressed his appreciation for the work done by Neumann, Moran and Robinson and the rest of the Parks and Recreation staff. He thanked Moran also for the Friday updates finding these very valuable in keeping everyone up to date on Commission activities. Elliott, Ditzler and Bourgeois also thanked Westefeld for his time as chair. Krohmer suggested that the Commission consider holding another special session to discuss the fee structure and proposed policy. Moran suggested that they look at this possibility after the January meeting where more groups may attend the Commission meeting to give their input. DIRECTORS REPORT: Council Meetings: Moran announced that the CIP session with Council will be held on January 8. The special work session for Boards and Commission will be held on Thursday, January 14. The Parks and Recreation Commission is scheduled to report at 7:30 p.m. Moran will include other upcoming council meeting dates in his Friday updates. Animal Shelter: The animal shelter has been awarded their FEMA money so are now looking at sites for their new shelter. They are no longer considering Terry Trueblood Recreation Area as a site, but may look at the site next to this area which is the buffer between the river and the outside border. There is also some property on both the north and south side of McCollister Blvd. that they may consider and also an area at Water Works Prairie Park. One other property is the Hieronymus Property located near Scott Park. None of these properties are park property; however, they may still want to come to our January meeting to discuss ideas. PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 12 of 13 School District: Moran met with Lane Plugge, Superintendent of Schools, to discuss the future plans for the property located at Camp Cardinal Road. This is the property that has been determined as the site for a new elementary school in the future. As there has been discussion about meeting the needs for a west side recreation facility, Moran wanted to discuss the possibility of incorporating this into their future plans for the development of this land. Plugge invited Moran to attend the meeting with the architects in January. There are some possible issues as this land currently belongs to Coralville but may be annexed back into Iowa City in the future. Krohmer asked if there would be any talk of using Roosevelt as a possible location for an additional recreation facility. Moran reported that there has been some discussion about this, however, it was determined that this building is not in very good shape and they don't feel it would service the west side as it is very close to the downtown recreation center. DogPAC: Andy Dudler is the new liaison between Parks and Recreation and DogPAC. He will be working together with Parks and Recreation. Moran also included the DogPAC treasurers report in Commission packets. Krohmer asked when their one year extension on their contract is up. Moran reported it will end with the fiscal year which is June 30. Krohmer reported that he has spoken to some of the public who do not like the idea of their money going to DogPAC, which is an advocacy group, rather than the City. He said that they may feel that the group may be making decisions that they don't necessarily agree with. Krohmer wanted to reiterate that he does not want to renew their contract as written. He feels that they are there to advocate for something, but that the funding should go back to the City. Moran reported that they did just recently send a check in the amount of $2925 reimbursing the Parks Division for work they had done which included laying asphalt and sod. Holiday Lights: Robinson handed out a report to Commission members showing the installation and maintenance costs of the Holiday Lights in the Central Business district. This report includes hours worked by each employee along with the total personnel cost, cost of the lights themselves and the extension cords which totals $8375.13. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Krohmer seconded by Bourgeois to adiourn meeting at 7:30 p.m. Motion passed 6-0 with Loomer, O'Leary, and Raaz being absent. PARKS AND RECOMMENDATION PARKS COMMISSION December 16, 2009 Page 13 of 13 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2009 NAME TERM ~ ~ ~ M ~ o ~ ~ rn ~ ~ v r O v ° - ao ~ cp •- N ~' N M '~ lA ~0 n 00 ~ ~ e r ~ r r EXPIRE ~ S David 1/1/11 X O/E X O/E X X X X O/E X O/E O/E X Bourge ois Lorin 1/1/13 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Ditzler Maggie 1/1/13 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Elliott Craig 1/1/11 O/E X X X X X X X X O/E O/E OIE X Gustav eson Aaron 1/1/13 * X X X X X O/E X X X X X X Krohme r Margar 1/1/12 X O/E X X OIE X OIE X X X X O/E OIE et Loonier Ryan 1/1/10 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X O/E O'Leary Jerry 1/1/12 X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X Raaz John 1/1/10 X X X X X X X X X X OIE X X Westef eld KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member at this time