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