The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-08-05 Info Packet~~~~~ -•~a...~ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET August 5, 2010 MISCELLANEOUS IP1 Council Meetings and Work Session Agenda IP2 Memorandum from the Director of Planning and Community Development: Economic Development Project Update IP3 Letter from Lee Grassley, Mediacom, to the City Clerk: KPXR-HD to launch on channel 806 IP4 Quarterly Investment Report April 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010 [submitted by the Senior Accountant] IP5 Memorandum from the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Community Development: Update: Flood-related activities IP6 Building Permit Information July 2010 IP7 Email correspondence from Mark Edwards: 1730 Lakeside Drive [staff response included] IP8 ECICOG Express July -August 2010 IP9 The Planner -July 26, 2010 IP10 Minutes: Joint Informal Meeting of Johnson County Board of Supervisors and Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee: June 2, 2010 IP11 Minutes: Joint Informal Meeting of Johnson County Board of Supervisors and Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee: July 7, 2010 DRAFT MINUTES IP12 Airport Commission: July 15, 2010 IP13 Airport Commission: July 27, 2010 IP14 Board of Adjustment: July 14, 2010 IP15 Historic Preservation Commission: July 8, 2010 ~ - i ~~®°~~ 08-05-10 ~_~~ ,~~ City Council Meeting Schedule and IP1 CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas www.icgov.org TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE SUBJECT TO CHANGE • MONDAY, AUGUST 16 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Formal -Executive Session Regular Work Session Joint Meeting with Parks & Recreation Commission • TUESDAY, AUGUST 17 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Regular Formal Council Meeting • FRIDAY, AUGUST 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall 8:OOa Special Formal Council Meeting -Executive Session (City Manager Search) • MONDAY, AUGUST 30 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Work Session • TUESDAY, AUGUST 31 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Special Formal Council Meeting • MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 6 Labor Day Holiday -City Offices Closed • TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBD Special Work Session and Formal (combined) • MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBD Special Formal (City Manager Interviews) 6:30p Regular Work Session • TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Regular Formal Council Meeting • MONDAY-WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27-29 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBD Hold dates for City Manager Interviews/Meet & Greet • MONDAY, OCTOBER 11 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBD Special Work Session and Special Formal (combined) • WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20 Room 8/C ICPL 4:30p Joint Meeting (Separate Agenda Posted) • MONDAY, OCTOBER 25 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Work Session • TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7.OOp Special Formal Council Meeting _r~.--.~.y®~i d ® 1 City Council Meeting Schedule an ~"'r' CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas August 4.20,0 www.icgov.org • MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Regular Work Session • TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 16 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Regular Formal Council Meeting • MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Work Session • TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 30 Emma J. Ha-vat Hall 7:OOp Special Formal Council Meeting • WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Work Session • MONDAY, DECEMBER 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Regular Work Session • TUESDAY, DECEMBER 7 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Regular Formal Council Meeting ~.! ,.r,~,~ C i T l~' CJ F ! CJ W A CITY IP2 ~± ~ilr,~r.~'',c .~.~_ Date: July 30, 2010 To: City Council Economic Development Committee ~~ From: Jeff Davidson, Director of Planning & Community Development Re: Economic Development Project Update Ongoing discussions with our partners in the development community indicate that access to financing for development projects remains difficult. Although we are encouraged by positive indicators showing general economic recovery, lending for commercial and residential projects in our local economy continues to be tight. In this economic climate it is important for public sector investment in economic activities to be done carefully and shrewdly, but it is imperative that it occur. As is indicated in the information which follows, in this economic climate the public sector has the ability to use public money to stimulate private investment. Following is an update of ongoing economic development activities that the City of Iowa City is involved in. These eight projects are highlighted because of their ability to have substantial impact on our local property tax base. 1. Expansion of Southeast Industrial Park After working through several environmental issues on our new 173-acre industrial property, we are ready to take the preliminary plat to the Planning and Zoning Commission. When the platting has been approved by the City Council we will have the ability to sell individual building lots for industrial development. The delay in platting the property has not curtailed our marketing efforts. Our partners at ICAD continue to provide information packets to interested parties, in particular to the wind power industry. The global economic malaise has significantly impacted the wind power industry. ICAD is in contact with several wind power related companies that are evaluating location decisions. They have also provided information to general industrial prospects. We are currently completing an application to the Iowa Department of Transportation for a grant which would assist us in constructing the rail infrastructure for the industrial park. We are also putting the finishing touches on the shovel-ready site certification which we hope to achieve shortly. This certification will streamline the process by which interested companies contact the state of Iowa or ICAD and proceed through their evaluation process. 2. Moss Green Urban Village In June the formal groundbreaking was held for the Moss Green Urban Village development project. This project will create an office research park with a mix of uses on property west of Pearson in northeast Iowa City. This project is currently awaiting sign-offs by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on wetland and environmental issues which are required before we can proceed with the necessary approvals from the City. Once approvals have been secured from the Corps and a revised plat and wetland mitigation plan have been reviewed by the Planning July 30, 2010 Page 2 and Zoning Commission, the final reading of the rezoning for the property, the preliminary plat, and the resolution authorizing the development agreement which will enable TIF rebates to be used to reimburse the developer for infrastructure improvements will be forwarded for the City Council's consideration and approval. The developer is actively marketing the project and has indicated a great deal of interest in the property. 3. Single Family Residence New Construction Program This project is not in itself an economic development initiative, but it has a significant impact on our local property tax base. You are aware that the focus of our flood mitigation effort has been on the buyout of properties which are located in flood hazard areas along the Iowa River. This has resulted in the ongoing acquisition and demolition of approximately 94 residential properties. This is approximately $23 million in residential taxable value. We are fortunate that the state has established a replacement housing program to supplant our lost residential taxable value from buyouts. The initial round of the program granted us funds for 40 single-family homes. These homes have been constructed in non-flood hazard areas throughout Iowa City, and most are presently occupied. We have received approval for an additional 37 single-family residential units in the second round of funding. Construction of these homes is just commencing. The state has indicated that there is likely to be one or two more rounds of funding and that we are a good candidate for at least the remaining 17 units. Hopefully, we can exceed 94 new residential units by the time the program is completed. It is great news that we have been able to replace the property tax base of the bought-out homes and provide new housing stock in non-flood hazard areas throughout Iowa City. 4. Music School/Hieronymus Square The University of Iowa is expected to go to the State Board of Regents in August and announce that property acquisition issues have been resolved for the new Music School/Clapp Recital Hall/Hieronymus Square multi-use development project. Although the University's construction of the Music School and Clapp Recital Hall facilities will not be property tax producing, it will spur the construction of the Hieronymus Square multi-use development project on Block 102 adjacent to the Court Street Transportation Center. We anticipate that the entire multi-use project will create new commercial and residential property tax generation approximately equal to what was envisioned for the original stand-alone Hieronymus Square project. The City has a substantial role in this project in terms of providing two needed parcels of property, an agreement for parking in the Court Street Transportation Center, and the possible use of TIF property tax rebates to facilitate construction of the non- University portion of the project. This project is consistent with the City Council's desire to expand arts and entertainment venues in downtown Iowa City. 5. Downtown Business Incubator We have completed the Downtown Business Incubator Feasibility Study which was funded through a $60,000 grant from the Economic Development Administration. We are expecting to receive the final report from the consultant within the next few weeks. The report lays out a roadmap for construction of a co-work type downtown business incubator which would provide business incubator services in a niche not currently provided by the existing business incubators July 30, 2010 Page 3 in the community. Potential sites have been identified with the associated cost figures and possible revenue streams for getting up and running. We will bring a proposal to the City Council for moving forward during FY12 budget discussions. 6. Multi-use Parking Facility on former St. Patrick's Parish Hall Property We remain in the negotiating stage with two private sector partners who have expressed interest in locating in our proposed facility. These are multi-million dollar location decisions, so they involve great deliberation. We have also been awaiting the University's announcement regarding the Music School/Hieronymus Square project, which is approximately 1'/z blocks from our site. We are prepared to commence design and engineering services this fall with construction starting during calendar year 2011. Our goal is to create at least 30,000-60,000 square feet of taxable commercial or residential space on a property which has not generated property taxes since at least the 1920s. Additionally, we expect 600 new parking spaces to be a catalyst for further private development in the area. 7. Towncrest Our Towncrest redevelopment initiative continues to move ahead. We are focused on getting the overall master redevelopment plan and streetscape design plan prepared. We want to be ready for private investment once the economy improves. We are currently establishing an urban renewal area which would allow the use of TIF funds for reinvestment in the area. We have recently completed a business development analysis which outlines several catalyst projects for spurring redevelopment in the area. The general redevelopment model for Towncrest involves higher density development than exists currently. There will be a mix of residential, office, and commercial retail uses. We have recently entered into two contractual arrangements: one is with RDG Associates for completion of a streetscape design plan for the area. We commenced a public input process for the streetscape plan on July 28, which was well attended by businesses and residents of the area. This plan will lay out the City's intentions for the public realm and building facades in the area. We have also entered into a contractual arrangement with the National Development Council. Their work will begin August 2 and will involve coalescing developers, property owners, and lenders to enable specific redevelopment projects to move forward. We may also have some public projects that would be funded by the City for your consideration in the upcoming FY12 CIP process. 8. Riverfront Crossings We are currently entering into our second contractual arrangement with the Environmental Protection Agency for consultant services related to the Riverfront Crossings initiative. This second planning grant will enable us to do a more specific design plan for a Riverfront Crossings subarea. We also have several other initiatives for the Riverfront Crossings area: ^ Design and engineering is proceeding on relocation of the North Wastewater Treatment Plant. This will eventually include cleanup and redevelopment of the resulting Brownfield site. July 30, 2010 Page 4 ^ Johnson County is preparing to demolish the old National Guard Armory. Specific plans for the property have not been developed, but there are a couple of interesting ideas out there. We are working with the Iowa Department of Transportation and the Chamber of Commerce on the application for grant funds which would enable Amtrak service to be extended between Chicago and Iowa City. I attended a meeting with Amtrak in Chicago on July 22 on adaptive re-use of our old railroad station for the proposed service. • We have submitted a TIGER II /HUD Community Challenge grant for the Riverfront Crossings -River Landing Passenger Rail Corridor Land Use Plan. This is a joint project with Coralville and the University of Iowa which would create a more specific land use plan for the area along the planned light rail transit service line. Please bring any questions to the August 5 EDC meeting. cc: City Council Dale Helling Wendy Ford ppdadm/mem/ecodevcomm7281 O.doc - am y ~\ ~~ ~ _ ~ O O ~j 1 H . o, i ~ ~ ~. i a -~ N 00 ~~ -- ° _. C7 v ~_ O o. ~/ r~ C A~ W ~D A W N ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ 0 y N ~ ~ N "~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ F o o ~ W y C N, fD ~p y j a y N s s d C N ~ H O a ~, ~~ ~ 1 Vm O! N x O ~ F C d ~ r ~ c N N ~ N fD O ~ d m ~ S T a y y n. N W ~' 1 ~ `! ~~ r ~ , ... ^ .~.____ _,..__ 1~ J II~ I_, ICI II~., ~ I~III ~~~ ~~~~ _ ~ ~ _---.._.~~~ - -ice , " ~~ ~ ~' ~;~ ~ ~/ ~~~ f, i` . ~ ~- j ~' -~ ~ d~ ,~;~~ %~ __ ,. IN ~ 1,?~ ,~i ~~ ~ ~~~ l ~~ ~ /I . --~ r f \\ ,~--TII I~ ~,~-Y i ~~~ ~>~ K ~ r ~ _ i , ~~~I J J 7 --i -- e~A L - i 1 ~ l ;; _ - ..~ ~. ~.. ~ -~ ~~ 7 j. i~; F~ F_ _ _ - _z 0 C 'p Y E Y ~ T~ aa~ ~! per.- ~=~ ~ o ~~w mEy p . ,~ ~ ~ ~ m• T ~t~~ _. ~_ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ __ ~ ,~:~~. ~ T 7 ,i ~ ~ ~~ ,4 - • ~ (~ c .m n o E maim ~ ,~ Y Y i. > C ~ fA fA - N N ~ O ~ i' ~` ~, >r•. r C ~ C I ~ l S t ~ ~ fir ~ t~--.~ ~ E~ f°» mow. ~ f ,~ ~ • .. ~ per I ~ ~ - c°i vv ~ ! a -- _ -. _ ,~ ~ {{ L ~ -~- a ~ N r=Ci j~ ~ ~,~~ ll~~ L ` ~~ ~ Imo: ~%' I .~ , '` '`r ) ....~._. -- t _. ~ .~ ~ ,. _ I .- /~ ~ r ~'- .__, ~~ 4 ,~ E u, ! a- t, ~ 7 ~~ E ~x ~ 1 ---i U ~ `~' i ~ ~, -r ~~ '~~"~icq~~} 1~ ~m;~l.Z~~'~~`a ~ A r a i Tf `a ~ i ~ ~ k V 1x ! j 1 ~~ , ~S . i ~ r ~. a ~~ ~''t~ d i j'~~ ~ ~ `~it~ GEi~e ~ht(,~~py~y~'~wj~~,~~~~ ~~~_~. ~;_ zow ~~ ',, r ~~~X{yLI~~.i4=~1,[~`ift i-f'!(ag~~12.1';y'.,~. Fyn dxirlEfl2~6~ ~,! C TYl ~C1~6i3 L11 hi2~1lr hY, tllvl Y'yp ~~ ~., ~~ , ~ ~•~ ~ Q LL r s ~I .: ,j> ; ,J Ya'"~iYi~t~i`~~1i~lR~~i~~?TS°.~.!?ajra~t ~ ~_ ~"d ~~~+~a~e~IFF' ~"~"~`i~~'~°'tdfilf~~,~~ k~~~ to ' ~ e a c_ ~~ Y I ~'i ^~~ -,-~~~EL'4~r~~1~1~e'#~ 'iFf#3;~'~c+ ~~ '~"~` i ti ~ -~ m ~ _ ~®~i[d .d3~ ~ ~x-~~t ~~~ w 1 u a _ v ~( ~{ sJ' ~.~ lei ~. ~ '~ fA ~ V~~j ~` ... t -~_ ~ ~~t ae ~jW 3~~1~1}l. [1 "11'R ~'7t (. _ ,} .~1-. °` i ~ ~ c a 77" ~-'rr _ s•~~" 1Sn4 ~;., *~{`'Pl•S ill ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~~~,.~~t~~ J j ly ~ t ~~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ / ` it % r ~' ,- ~~ - ... ~-~' ~r o- `~+ ~ rn ~ 01; ,~, - ~~ ~ i1 ~ ~ ~ r~ t ~ ~/ n ~ } ~ ~ / t ~ u7 `i's ~~~'~ A~~ ~ ~`_ ~• ,r o ,~ . is .~ ~ U ' C Vi Y ( I'~ \~~^~ 5 ~ ~ \\\ ~ ~ ~ ~ t f ~/ ~ ~ ~f c E o b r a ~ ~~ ~ , : // i \y n > J •. ~ m p ~ ~ t..SS'1'e. \ C {{ V ~ ~, ,~ . p L V V f 0~ 77 f ~__ m o c ~ + N P O .~, I~ __..__ I -- ~/~ = i - G i o~A`I L 1 .~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ /~ r c'1'l ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~3t }..:"il i;: ! ~ sir ~.1~'.3 ._, ~ L ~~ = ~_ a ' r: ~ -~ ~ ~' .~. ~ - - o ~~~ ~ o w ~ ~ .~ N O ~~ V ,_V ~ 4___ ... m a c .. w ~ N N O ,. Z ~" U _. Mediacom July 27, 2010 Ms. Marian Karr City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Subject: KPXR-HD Dear Ms. Karr: _as __._. JUG ~0 2010 City Clerk ~`aH a Cary, icrva ,~ 5 /'ivj IP3 On or about August 31, 2010, KPXR (ION 48) in high definition will launch on channel 806. In order to view high definition channels customers will be required have a HDTV and to lease an HD converter box or a cable card from Mediacom. These channels will be available to all Family Cable customers at no additional charge who currently have an HD converter. At the same time ION 48 will be moved from channel 119.2 to 117.2 on the digital broadcast basic tier. Customers using digital TVs with QAM tuners instead of Mediacom equipment may need to run aone-time channel search by selecting that option from their television menu in order to view the channels. If there are any questions please call me at 319-268-5033. Sincerely, t~ ~~ Lee Grassley Senior Manager, Government Relations Mediacom Communications Corporation 6300 Council St. NE • Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 • 319-395-7801 • Fax 319-393-7017 IP4 CITY OF IOWA CITY QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT April 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010 Finance Department Prepared by: Brian Cover Senior Accountant OVERVIEW The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield. The primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The City's investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that cash management procedures anticipate. In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed with the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six month U.S. Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for riskless investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum standard for the portfolio's rate of return. The rolling average return on the six-month U.S. Treasury Bill for the prior 365 days was .20% at 06/30/10. The investment program seeks to achieve returns above this threshold, consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. The rate of return on the City's entire portfolio for the quarter was 0.63% which is 43 basis points higher than the threshold. (See exhibit A) Investments purchased by the City of Iowa City for the fourth quarter of this fiscal year had an average return of .41 %. Rates on new investment purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the fourth quarter were approximately 41 basis points lower than investments purchased at this time last year. Municipalities in Iowa are still having trouble finding financial institutions willing to accept public funds. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which banks lend to each other. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said the economic outlook remains "unusually uncertain" even as the central bank prepares to eventually raise interest rates. The FOMC will maintain the U.S. interest rate to "a target range" of between zero and 0.25 percent. (See exhibit B) The quarterly investment report lists investments by fund, by institution, by maturity date, and investments purchased and redeemed. New official state interest rates setting the minimum that may be paid by Iowa depositories on public funds in the 180 to 364 day range during this quarter were 0.20% in April, 0.20% in May, and 0.20% in June 2010. m ~' ca E-- 0 to v~ .~' V c~ 3 0 4- O ._ ~_ U = ~ ~ o ~ o ~ 0 ~_ ~ Ul co T T 0~~~~ a O ~ ~~~ ~ _ S~~~a I 6 0 O•q, 'I, j aS ~', Q 6p,~ i, ~ ~~ ~~ m sp,~~ ~ ~ , w ~`~a - 8 ~ O. cYaS ~i ~ ~ ~ 80,E I, ~~ `O~~a ~ of ~o, I as '~ ~ s ~, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~,~~ c~ ~ci ~ cYi c~i ~ o ~ j uan}aa }o aBe~ua~aad N N 0 L.~~ p~'/~ W sp'~a O~ 6p,4,a i S sp~~~ r 6p,~~ w 8p, ~I m ~a0 ' ~. m 8p-~ ~ as '~ w ~p~~~ r Sp,~~ ~, w ~p'~a O ~p,Q,a S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~~(~ III CO ~ ~ c~i CV ~ O ~~ a~a~ ~sa~a~u~ CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE 6/30/2010 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST IPAIT 13-Jun-02 N/A $ 3,000,000.00 VARIABLE IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST IPAIT 12-May-09 N/A $ 13,000,000.00 VARIABLE IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVEST TRUST IPAIT 28-Oct-09 N/A $ 15,000,000.00 VARIABLE IPAIT 2005 GO IPAIT 14-Dec-09 N/A $ 683,844.46 VARIABLE IPAIT 2006A GO IPAIT 17-Apr-09 N/A $ 1,170,988.51 VARIABLE IPAIT 2007 GO IPAIT 11-Dec-09 N/A $ 922,196.83 VARIABLE IPAIT 2008 GO IPAIT 15-Jul-09 N/A $ 2,769,544.64 VARIABLE IPAIT 2009 D GO IPAIT 12-Jun-09 N/A $ 213,030.50 VARIABLE IPAIT 2009 C GO IPAIT 12-Jun-09 N/A $ 4,646,671.53 VARIABLE FREEDOM SECURITY CD 01-Oct-09 01-Jul-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.720 WELLS FARGO CD 18-Dec-09 01-Jul-10 $ 4,000,000.00 0.250 BANK OF THE WEST CD 25-Jun-09 02-Jul-10 $ 2,000,000.00 1.290 IPAIT CD 01-Oct-09 20-Aug-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.990 BANK OF THE WEST CD 18-Dec-09 24-Sep-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 18-Dec-09 01-Oct-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.350 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 17-Nov-09 17-Nov-10 $ 6,000,000.00 0.630 FARMERS & MERCHANTS CD 17-Nov-09 17-Nov-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.610 IPAIT -WATER CD 28-Feb-OS 27-Feb-12 $ 450,000.00 4.100 IPAIT -WATER CD 28-Feb-08 27-Feb-12 $ 2,234,789.00 4.100 AMERICAN BANK & TRUST CD 12-Dec-08 12-Dec-13 $ 6,197,315.00 3.750 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 12-Dec-08 12-Dec-13 $ 2,000,000.00 4.180 UICCU CD 26-Jan-10 21-Jan-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.375 UICCU CD 26-Jan-10 07-Jan-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.375 UICCU CD 26-Jan-10 03-Jan-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.375 UICCU CD 26-Jan-10 01-Jul-10 $ 2,000,000.00 0.260 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 09-Mar-10 11-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.485 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 09-Mar-10 25-Feb-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.430 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 09-Mar-10 11-Feb-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.390 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 26-Mar-10 22-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.550 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 26-Mar-10 25-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.510 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 26-Mar-10 08-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.530 HILLS BANK MONEY MARKET 30-Mar-10 N/A $ 9,290,781.67 1.040 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 18-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 22-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 1-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 8-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 18-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.280 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 1-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.350 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 8-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.350 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 25-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.280 IPAIT IPAIT 15-Apr-10 N/A $ 15,914,663.52 VARIABLE FREEDOM SECURITY CD 16-Apr-10 16-Apr-11 $ 1,000,000.00 0.350 WELLS FARGO SAVINGS 20-Apr-10 N/A $ 10,000,000.00 VARIABLE MIDWESTONE BANK CD 13-May-10 1-Jun-11 $ 4,500,000.00 0.600 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-May-10 1-Jul-11 $ 2,000,000.00 1.050 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 20-May-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 10-Jun-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 6-May-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 3-Jun-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 UICCU CD 28-Jun-10 26-Jun-15 $ 846,700.00 2.510 UICCU CD 28-Jun-10 26-Jun-15 $ 300,000.00 2,510 TOTAL $ 162,140,525.66 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENT ACTIVITY FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2010 $ 142,274,595.22 INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 03/31/10 INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST INSTITUTION TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE PURCHASES 04/01/10 TO 06/30/10 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 18-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 22-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 1-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 WELLS FARGO CD 13-Apr-10 8-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.300 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 18-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.280 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 1-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.350 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 8-Apr-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.350 BANK OF THE WEST CD 14-Apr-10 25-Mar-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.280 IPAIT IPAIT 15-Apr-10 N/A $ 15,914,663.52 VARIABLE FREEDOM SECURITY CD 16-Apr-10 16-Apr-11 $ 1,000,000.00 0.350 WELLS FARGO SAVINGS 20-Apr-10 N/A $ 10,000,000.00 VARIABLE MIDWESTONE BANK CD 13-May-10 1-Jun-11 $ 4,500,000.00 0.600 LIBERTY BANK CD 13-May-10 1-Jul-11 $ 2,000,000.00 1.050 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 20-May-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 10-Jun-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 6-May-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 WELLS FARGO CD 13-May-10 3-Jun-11 $ 2,000,000.00 0.650 UICCU CD 28-Jun-10 26-Jun-15 $ 846,700.00 2.510 UICCU CD 28-Jun-10 26-Jun-15 $ 300,000.00 2.510 $ 58,561,363.52 TOTAL PURCHASES REDEMPTIONS 04/01/10 TO 06/30/10 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 16-Apr-09 16-Apr-10 $ (1,000,000.00) 1.630 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 16-Apr-09 16-Apr-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.950 BANK OF THE WEST CD 16-Apr-09 16-Apr-10 $ (10,000,000.00) 1.600 2007 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 11-Dec-09 N/A $ (402.76) VARIABLE 2008 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 15-Jul-09 NIA $ (10,866.86) VARIABLE 2009 C GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 12-Jun-09 N/A $ (15,195.55) VARIABLE LIBERTY BANK CD 11-May-09 07-May-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.015 LIBERTY BANK CD 11-May-09 14-May-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.015 LIBERTY BANK CD 27-Aug-09 01-Jun-10 $ (5,000,000.00) 0.515 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 01-Oct-09 01-Jun-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 0.450 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 17-Nov-09 01-Jun-10 $ (3,000,000.00) 0.450 WELLS FARGO CD 18-Dec-09 01-Jun-10 $ (1,560,000.00) 0.250 AMERICAN BANK & TRUST CD 11-May-09 04-Jun-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.750 BANK OF THE WEST CD 25-Jun-09 11-Jun-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.290 BANK OF THE WEST CD 25-Jun-09 18-Jun-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.290 2005 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 14-Dec-09 N/A $ (7,137.76) VARIABLE 2007 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 11-Dec-09 NIA $ (12,058.76) VARIABLE 2008 GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 15-Jul-09 NIA $ (338,644.98) VARIABLE 2009 C GO BOND (PARTIAL REDEMPTION) IPAIT 12-Jun-09 N/A $ (476,622.41) VARIABLE FREEDOM SECURITY CD 02-Jul-08 25-Jun-10 $ (300,000.00) 4.050 FREEDOM SECURITY CD 02-Jul-OS 25-Jun-10 $ (974,504.00) 4.050 BANK OF THE WEST CD 25-Jun-09 25-Jun-10 $ (2,000,000.00) 1.290 TOTAL REDEMPTIONS $ (38,695,433.08) INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 06I30I10 $ 162,140,525.66 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND SUMMARY BY FUND FUND TYPE 6/30/10 6/30/09 INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT AMOUNT ALL OPERATING FUNDS GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT RESERVE FUND BOND RESERVE FUND TOTAL CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND LISTING BY INSTITUTION $ 117,697,058.14 $ 118,142,974.47 $ 4,500,000.00 $ 1,564,000.00 $ - $ - $ 39,943,467.52 $ 35,980,165.36 $162,140,525.66 $155,687,139.83 6/30/10 6/30/09 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT INVESTMENT DEPOSITORY NAME AMOUNT AMOUNT LIMIT TWO RIVERS BANK (AMERICAN BANK & TRUST) $ 6,197,315.00 $ 13,197,315.00 $ 10,000,000.00 BANK OF THE WEST $ 12,000,000.00 $ 23,000,000.00 $ 75,000,000.00 FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK $ 2,000,000.00 $ 7,922,140.00 $ 15,000,000.00 FIRST AMERICAN BANK $ - $ 5,735,274.22 $ 35,000,000.00 FREEDOM SECURITY BANK $ 3,000,000.00 $ 4,274,504.00 $ 15,000,000.00 HILLS BANK & TRUST $ 9,290,781.67 $ 9,000,000.00 $ 25,000,000.00 IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST $ 62,005,728.99 $ 50,093,906.61 N/A LIBERTY BANK $ 2,000,000.00 $ 12,464,000.00 $ 25,000,000.00 MIDWESTONE BANK $ 26,500,000.00 $ 21,000,000.00 $ 35,000,000.00 U OF I COMM CREDIT UNION $ 9,146,700.00 $ - $ 50,000,000.00 US BANK $ - $ - $ 65,000,000.00 US TREASURY NOTES AND AGENCIES $ - $ - N/A WELLS FARGO BANK $ 30,000,000.00 $ 9,000,000.00 $ 50,000,000.00 WEST BANK $ - $ - $ 35,000,000.00 TOTAL $162,140,525.66 $155,687,139.83 ^~®~ CITY OF 1CJWA ~[TY RAN E~C~ Date: August 4, 2010 IP5 To: City Council From: Rick Fosse, Director of Public Works Jeff Davidson, Director of Planning and Community Development Re: Update: Flood-related activities Public Works and Engineering Dubuque Street Park Road Bridge Elevation Project • Melissa Clow has been hired as the Special Projects Administrator for this project. • Consultant interviews were completed and Staff is currently in the process of negotiating a contract with the selected consultant. • The proposed consultant agreement has been submitted to the EDA for their review and approval. • It is anticipated that the consultant agreement will be presented to Council at the August 31St Council meeting. Wastewater Treatment Consolidation Project • Rory Wiebel has resigned from his position as the Special Projects Administrator for this project. Ben Clark has been hired to fill the position. • A kickoff meeting was held with the IDNR on July 29tH West Side Levee Project • Design plans for the project are being finalized. • Staff has reviewed the application of I-JOBS II funding for the project. The application was submitted August 2nd. Demolitions • In the process of asbestos abating 3 homes in Parkview Terrace. It is anticipated these homes will be demolished next week. PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • This week, the City acquired one more property (816 Eastmoor Drive) with CDBG funds. The City has acquired a total of 52 residential properties and 16.5 acres of property from Parkview Church along Taft Speedway with Federal and State funds. Of the 52 properties, 32 of the properties have been acquired through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, 14 with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, and six with Community Disaster Grant (CDG) funds. A total of 38 properties have been demolished in the Parkview Terrace and Taft Speedway neighborhoods. All structures in the Showers Addition have been demolished and cleared. • Staff submitted an application to the I-Jobs II Program for a levee to protect the Baculis, Thatcher, and the Commercial Court areas. The funding request was for $2.1 million. The City Council will be holding a public hearing on August 17tH to discuss using CDBG funds the City will be receiving in January as matching funds for the grant. August 4, 2010 Page 2 Staff is continuing to work on an application to fund a tornado safe room near the Public Works building in Napoleon Park. The park is heavily used during the summer. The safe room would protect park users against high winds and tornados. • Staff continues to review Jumpstart applications for disbursing State Jumpstart 2 and State Jumpstart 3 funding for housing rehab/repair, down payment assistance and interim mortgage assistance. A total of $1.85 million in State Jumpstart funding has been used to assist 78 flood- impacted residential households and $861,000 in Federal Jumpstart funding has been used to assist 17 households. The City continues to accept applications for the following disaster business assistance programs: Loan Interest Supplement Program, Residential Landlord Business Support Program, Commercial Rental Revenue Gap Program, Equipment Reimbursement Assistance Program, Flood Insurance Reimbursement Program, and Expanded Business Rental Assistance Program. The deadline for all business programs is now December 31, 2010. ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~. ,. y BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION July 2010 KEY FOR ABBREVIATIONS .Type of Improvement ADD -Addition ALT -Alteration REP -Repair FND -Foundation Only NEW-New OTH -Other type of construction Type of Use RSF -Residential Single Family RDF -Residential Duplex RMF -Three or more residential RAC -Residential Accessory Building MIX -Mixed NON -Non-residential OTH -Other IP6 ,! :~ Page : Date : 2 8/2/2010 City of Iowa City Extraction of Building Permit Data for To : From : 7/1/2010 7/31/2010 Census Bureau Report Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD10-00306 ITC MIDWEST 635 RUPPERT RD ADD NON 0 0 $850,000 TRANSFORMER STORAGE AREA & CONTAINMENT BASIN Total ADD/NON permits : 1 Total Valuation : $850,000 BLD10-00400 DENNIS & KATHRYN BEFE 234 HUTCHINSON AVE Add attached garage and second floor addition BLD10-00422 JAN WATERHOUSE 55 CARLSBAD PL ADDITION FOR SFD BLD10-00345 DONALD E & LUCINDA RO 3951 MAIER AVE ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR SFD BLD10-00359 HEIDI ANDERSON 604 GRANT ST ADDITION FOR SFD BLD10-00383 H A & JANET J WICKS 2917 STANFORD AVE 12' x 16' room addition and 10' x 12' uncovered deck BLD10-00391 JEFFREY C CAPPS 20 N LOWELL ST 16' x 18' Screen porch BLD10-00389 BIRGIR JOHANNSSON 1329 WILD PRAIRIE DR 14' x 14' Screen porch BLD10-00371 THE PADDOCK LLC 289 PADDOCK CIR DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD10-00413 THOMAS G BURNS 609 WOODSIDE DR DECK ADDITION FOR SFD TO REPLACE EXIST ING DECK BLD10-00412 MARC A PIZZIMENTI 6 JENSEN CT DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD10-00376 JOHNIE K MCMAHON 1963 CHELSEA CT DECK ADDITION FOR SFD BLD10-00384 HAROLD D & NAN SCHUTT 1501 DICKENSON LN Install stairs off deck BLD10-00414 HARRIET GOODING 2402 LAKESIDE DR DECK ADDITION FOR SFD ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF ADD RSF 2 2 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $200,000 $ 81,000 $80,000 $65,000 $60,000 $26,000 $10,000 $4,300 $3,392 $1,500 $1,000 $900 $500 Total ADD/RSF permits : 13 Total Valuation : $533,592, BLD10-00356 MERCY HOSPITAL 500 E MARKET ST PHARMACY REMODEL FOR HOSPITAL BLD10-00348 EXTEND THE DREAM FOUN 730 S DUBUQUE ST REMODEL FOR GENERAL COMMUNITY SERVICE USE BLD06-00521 STEVE HARRIS & TARA CR 150 STEVENS DR RELOCATE STORAGE SEPARATION WALLS BLD10-00423 MIDWESTONE BANK 102 S CLINTON ST REPLACE CELL EQUIPMENT WITHIN EXISTING SHELTER BLD10-00435 ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY 611 GREENWOOD DR RESTROOM REMODEL FOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BLD10-00392 TOWNCREST INVS LP 2400 TOWNCREST DR Add two rooms within larger area and add one door ALT NON 0 0 $44,600 ALT NON 2 0 $40,000 ALT NON 0 0 $8,000 ALT NON 0 0 $5,000 ALT NON 0 0 $4,000 ALT NON 0 0 $2,500 Page : 3 City of Iowa City Date : 8/2/2010 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To : 7/ I /2010 From : 7/31/2010 Census Bureau Report Twe Twe Permit Number Name Address Imnr Use Stories Units Valuation Total ALT/NON permits : 6 Total Valuation : $104,100 BLD10-00385 DAVID J RANDA 2104 DAVIS ST ALT RDF 0 0 $250 Install egress window Total ALT/RDF permits : 1 Total Valuation : $250 BLD10-00378 LINN ST PLACE LLC 332 S LINN ST #402 ALT RMF 0 0 $13,000 Remodel bathrooms and install laundry BLD10-00417 BLUFFWOOD PARTNERS 640 STUART CT ALT RMF 2 0 $6,000 ADD PARTITIONS FOR DINING TO RMF UNIT S #3, #4, #5, #6, #8 Total ALT/RMF permits : 2 Total Valuation : $19,000 BLD10-00427 MARTHA C GREER 400 FOSTER RD ALT RSF 0 0 $100,000 ALTERATION AND REPAIR OF SFD BLD10-00401 UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHO 1207 MUSCATINE AVE ALT RSF 0 0 $54,454 Kitchen and bathroom remodel BLD10-00394 JAMES S & BARBARA B GI 313 N MOUNT VERNON D ALT RSF 0 0 $31,250 Kitchen Remodel BLD10-00364 PATRICK & STEFANIE RIE 1090 FOSTER RD ALT RSF 0 0 $31,000 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD BLD10-00370 NATHAN & ANN ERSIG 4471 TEMPE PL ALT RSF 0 0 $26,000 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD BLD10-00415 K W DESIGNS LC 1005 FLAGSTAFF DR ALT RSF 0 0 $22,500 BASEMENT FINISH FOR SFD BLD10-00397 MICHAEL G & JOYCE A MY 1711 MUSCATINE AVE ALT RSF 0 0 $19,683 Kitchen Remodel BLD10-00365 MARK & CHRISTINE DUNN 1016 GOLDENROD DR ALT RSF 0 0 $10,000 DECK STAIRS AND FRAME STUB WALL FOR SCREEN PORCH BLD10-00382 STEVE VANDER WOUDE 320 E JEFFERSON ST ALT RSF 2 0 $10,000 Install water closet and sink on both 1st and 2nd floor BLD10-00349 MOON R CHIN 712 TIPPERARY RD ALT RSF 0 0 $8,000 CONVERT SCREEN PORCH TO FINISHED ROOM ADDITION BLD06-00823 DOMINIC GABALDON 630 WHITING AVE ALT RSF 0 0 $6,020 ADD EXTERIOR BASEMENT DOOR AND STAIR S FOR SFD BLD10-00323 RICHARD LUNDGREN 514 E BENTON ST ALT RSF 0 0 $5,500 BEDROOM LOFT FOR SFD BLD10-00377 JOSEPH D BRISBEN REVOC 1715 ROCHESTER CT ALT RSF 1 0 $5,000 Replace deck with larger one and install window and sliding patio door BLD10-00396 BRENT O WILSON 163 S WESTMINSTER ST ALT RSF 0 0 $4,245 Partial finish of basement BLD10-00406 PATRICK & CYNTHIA ELBE 603 BROOKLAND PARK D ALT RSF 2 0 $4,000 Convert duplex to single family BLD10-00386 BRENT O WILSON 163 S WESTMINSTER ST ALT RSF 0 0 $3,600 Install egress window Page : 4 City of Iowa City Date : 8/2/2010 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To : 7/1/2010 From : 7/31/2010 Census Bureau Report ~. Type Permit Number Name Address Impr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD10-00425 JOSEPH R & IRENE W ASCR 827 RIVER ST ALT RSF 0 0 $1,575 BAY WINDOW FOR SFD BLD10-00380 SYSTEMS UNLTD 1900 ROCHESTER CT ALT RSF 0 0 $1,000 Install egress window in bedroom BLD10-00286 TIMBS, KEVIN J 1825 MORNINGSIDE DR ALT RSF 0 0 $955 FRONT STOOP FOR SFD BLD10-00236 EXTEND THE DREAM FOUN 2220 F ST ALT RSF 0 0 $250 3 new windows and one sliding glass door. BLD10-00405 JONATHAN D SHEAR 421 FAIRCHILD ST ALT RSF 0 0 $150 Install railings on existing porch Total ALT/RSF permits : 21 Total Valuation : $345,182 BLD10-00036 WAL-MART REAL ESTATE 919 HIGHWAY 1 WEST NEW NON 1 0 $16,152,401 NEW RETAIL STORE Total NEW/NON permits : 1 Total Valuation : $16,152,401 BLD10-00419 SHERI & JOHN SWENNING 4132 KILBURNIE CT NEW OTH 0 0 $48,900 IN GROUND POOL ADDITION FOR SFD Total NEW/OTH permits : 1 Total Valuation : $48,900 BLD10-00353 ARLINGTON DEV INC 261 S TAFT AVE NEW RAC 1 0 $95,327 DETACHED GARAGE FOR 12 PLEX Total NEW/RAC permits : 1 Total Valuation : $95,327 BLD10-00114 3 GUYS HOLDING 334 S DODGE ST NEW RDF 2 2 $492,370 DUPLEX WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGES Total NEW/RDF permits : 1 Total Valuation : $492,370 BLD10-00352 ARLINGTON DEV INC 261 S TAFT AVE 12 UNIT CONDO APARTMENT BUILDING 261-63-65-67-69-71-73-75-77-79-81-83 TAFT AVE BLD10-00188 APARTMENTS DOWNTOW 916 E BURLINGTON ST 6 UNIT CONDOMINIUM APARTMENT BUILDING BLD10-00213 JEFF CLARK 513 BOWERY ST 6 PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING WITH BASEMENT PARKING NFPA 13 sprinkler system BLD10-00409 ADVANTAGE DEVELOPME 721 ARCH ROCK RD 4 UNIT TOWNHOUSE BUILDING 721-725-729-733 ARCH ROCK RD PUBLIC FUNDS NEW RMF 3 12 $1,546,754 NEW RMF 3 6 $1,456,115 NEW RMF 2 6 $1,358,270 NEW RMF 2 4 $623,895 Total NEW/RMF permits : 4 Total Valuation : $4,985,034 Page : 5 City of Iowa City Date : 8/2/2010 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To : 7/ I /zo I o Census Bureau Report From : 7/31 /2010 Permit Number Name Address BLD10-00375 RUPP BUILDING INC 1151 MEADOWLARK DR SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD10-00351 H & H HOMEBUILDERS 1416 DUNLEY CT SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE Sump pump engineering BLD10-00331 REGENCY LAND CO 945 MANITOU TRL SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE 8 FEET SIDEWALK BLD10-00368 DON & SHEILA BEUSSINK 1054 MEADOWLARK DR SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD10-00369 DENNIS & JEAN SPENCER 47 QUAIL VALLEY CT SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD10-00388 WALTON BUILDERS, INC 1784 LAKE SHORE DR S.F.D. with three car garage BLD10-00403 KW CUSTOM HOMES 1783 LAKESHORE S.F.D. with three car garage BLD10-00404 KW CUSTOM HOMES 1762 LAKESHORE S.F.D. with three car garage BLD10-00446 B&H BUILDERS LLC 1923 CHELSEA CT SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE PUBLIC FUNDS ~~ Tvne Imnr Use Stories Units Valuation NEW RSF 0 1 $390,676 NEW RSF 2 1 $375,000 NEW RSF 1 1 $350,000 NEW RSF 1 1 $349,000 NEW RSF 1 1 $321,000 NEW RSF 2 1 $290,000 NEW RSF 2 1 $250,000 NEW RSF 1 1 $231,000 NEW RSF 1 1 $157,562 Total NEW/RSF permits : 9 Total Valuation : $2,714,238' BLD10-00074 MERCER PARK AQUATIC C 2701 BRADFORD DR REP NON 0 0 $169,000 NEW FIBERGLASS DECK SYSTEM AND REPLACEMENT FILTERS FOR POOL BLD08-00589 CITY OF IOWA CITY 220 CAPITOL ST REP NON 5 0 $86,000 REPLACE ALL DOORS FOR PARKING RAMP BLD10-00443 MOKA JAVA LLC 207 E WASHINGTON ST REP NON 0 0 $55,095 REROOF COMMERCIAL BUILDING BLD10-00434 GREENWOOD MANOR 605 GREENWOOD DR REP NON 0 0 $34,000 REROOF WITH EPDM BLD10-00193 CITY OF IOWA CITY 220 S CAPITOL ST REP NON 0 0 $23,500 DOOR REPLACEMENT FOR PARKING RAMP BLD10-00355 CITY OF IOWA CITY 220 S DUBUQUE ST REP NON 0 0 $23,500 DOOR REPLACEMENT FOR PARKING RAMP BLD10-00436 NATIONAL COMPUTER SY 2510 N DODGE ST REP NON 0 0 $21,193 REROOF COMMERCIAL BUILDING BLD10-00426 ASSOCIATION 312 E COLLEGE ST REP NON 0 0 $10,925 REROOF COMMERCIAL BUILDING BLD09-00560 STEVE HARRIS & TARA CR 150 STEVENS DR REP NON 0 0 $8,000 FLOOD REPAIR OF REAR STORAGE BUILDING BLD10-00399 SMITH, CHERYL L 1216 S GILBERT CT REP NON 1 0 $5,107 steel siding on commercial building Total REP/NON permits : 10 Total Valuation : $436,320 Page : Date : 6 8/2/2010 City of Iowa City Extraction of Building Permit Data for To : From : 7/1/2010 7/31/2010 Census Bureau Report Permit Number Name Address BLD10-00398 EWA J BARDACH 424 SAMOA DR Repair both first and second floor decks BLD10-00450 JERRY & RYAN WEAR 80 OLIVE CT WINDOW REPLACEMENT FOR APARTMENT B UILDING BLD10-00442 RIVER CITY PROPERTY MG 916 BENTON DR DECK FOOTINGS FOR EXISTING DECK Total REP/RMF permits : 3 BLD10-00329 ALLEN & DONNA GRUNSTA 721 WILLOW ST REPLACE ATTACHED GARAGE AND PORCH FOR SFD BLD10-00418 FREDERICK WOODWARD 1311 W BENTON ST REDO BASEMENT OF SFD, ADD EGRESS WINDOW BLD10-00379 JOHN YANKEE 3 WELLESLEY WAY Repair roof damaged by tree BLD10-00410 ED ROMANO & LISA COLLI 524 CHURCH ST REPAIR SFD DAMAGED BY TREE FALL BLD10-00239 DAVID G & MARY ELLEN R 2014 GLENDALE RD 5 EGRESS WINDOWS FOR SFD BLD10-00444 JIM & ANNA BARKER 342 LEXINGTON AVE FRONT CONCRETE STEPS BLD10-00321 REACH FOR YOUR POTENT 59 WAKEFIELD CT EGRESS WINDOW FOR SFD BLD10-00374 ADVANCEMENT LLC 1503 ROCHESTER AVE WINDOWS FOR SFD BLD10-00381 BENINGA, BRIAN R 905 S 7TH AVE Replace rear porch with treated lumber and front porch with concrete BLD10-00387 WILLIAM F & JANICE S DOS 415 CLARK ST Replace some of the siding in a historical zone BLD10-00261 SCHAEFER, NICHOLAS R 8 ASHWOOD DR EGRESS WINDOWS FOR SFD BLD10-00264 JIM HANSON 1721 MUSCATINE AVE REPAIR FRONT PORCH FOR SFD BLD10-00420 NOBLE, GREGORY E 106 S DODGE ST STAIRS AND RAILING FOR SFD Tme Tvne Impr Use Stories Units Valuation REP RMF 2 0 $7,500 REP RMF 0 0 $4,500 REP RMF 0 0 $500 Total Valuation : $12,500 REP RSF 0 0 $70,000 REP RSF 0 0 $20,000 REP RSF 0 0 $14,000 REP RSF 0 0 $8,100 REP RSF 0 0 $5,000 REP RSF 0 0 $4,500 REP RSF 0 0 $3,250 REP RSF 0 0 $3,000 REP RSF 0 0 $2,000 REP RSF 0 0 $1,640 REP RSF 0 0 $1,400 REP RSF 0 0 $800 REP RSF 0 0 $700 Total REP/RSF permits : 13 Total Valuation : $134,390' GRAND TOTALS : PERMITS : 87 VALUATION : $26,923,604 Page 1 of 5 Marian Karr IP7 From: Jones, Cindy [IGOV] [Cindy.Jones@iowa.gov] Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 1:44 PM To: mark edwards Cc: Dale Helling; Jann Ream; Council; Stratton, Virginia Subject: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive Iowa City, IA That is ok, we don't have a lot authority here but do want to make sure the public health and public safety concerns are addressed. I feel certain that the city will take appropriate action but it sounds like their hands may be somewhat tied by legal issues. I did ask the Attorney General's staff that handles foreclosure questions to review and give any suggestions she might have. thanks Cindy J. Jones Constituent Services Coordinator Office of Governor Chet Culver and Lt. Governor Patty Judge 1007 E. Grand Avenue Des Moines, Iowa 50319 Direct.• 515/281-0165 Fax: S 1 S/281-0217 E-mail: cindyjones(a~.iowa.aov Website: www.~overnor.iowa.aov _ _ _ _ ___ _ 3{ Moving Iowa Forward From: mark edwards [mailto:household5@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 5:47 PM To: Jones, Cindy [IGOV] Cc: dale-belling@iowa-city.org; jann-ream@iowa-city.org; council@iowa-city.org Subject: 1730 Lakeside Drive Iowa City, IA Ms. Jones, Thank you for the call back today. I appreciate the quick response by the Governor's Office. I wanted to forward to you some of the communication I have had with the City of Iowa City's Housing Inspection office. The e-mail traffic is attached. As you can see from the July 16th e- mail from Jann Ream with Iowa City's Housing Inspection office, the city has been involved with this property since Apri126th. I spoke with the Johnson County Public Health Department today and they agreed that the standing and unchlorinated water was a public health threat. The Health Department representative I spoke with today deferred to the Housing Inspection Department for action because the property is located within the City of Iowa City and their regulations are more stringent. I simply want this problem, and public health threat, remedied in an expedient manner. In speaking with the HUD/FHA Resource Center today, they stated that the contractor for HUD/FHA problem properties is Best Assets and their telephone number is 888.902.2378. Their role is to remedy property issues for HUD/FHA in Iowa. 8/2/2010 Page 2 of 5 This has been a frustrating issue and I would like it resolved in an expedient manner. 7/19/10, Jann Ream Mann-ReamnaJiowa-city.org> Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivewrote: Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive From: Jann Ream <Jann-Ream@iowa-city.org> Subject: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive To: "mark edwards" <household5@yahoo.com>Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 8:44 AM Mr. Edwards - We do appreciate your frustration with getting this problem abated - we are also frustrated. The cost to the City would not be recouped with a mechanics lien. When a property is foreclosed, all liens are erased. The City has lost many hundreds of dollars on mowing and snow removal because the property goes into foreclosure before payment is received. We can go onto a property to mow because there are sFw:Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivepecific tall grass and weed statues in state law that allow us to do so -there is nothing in state law that allows us to abate whatever the City deems a nuisance on private property unless we get a court order. The City does not survey land for platting and/or zoning -this is done by private engineers and surveyors who are hired by the owFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveners of the property. Mediacom disconnects service from boxes on public right away and MidAmerican through their franchise agreement with the City is allowed access to their gas and electric meters (which they own) even though they are on private property. I know tFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivehis seems very straight forward to you but we do notFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive havFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivee the legal right to abate this nuisance with out a court order. We will continue to work diligently to get this matter resolved. Jann Ream Code Enforcement AssistantFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DriveFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive From: mark edwards [mailto:household5@yahoo.com] Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 7:43 AMFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DriFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveve To: Joan Siders Cc: Dale Helling ;Jann Ream; Council Subject: Re: 1730 Lakeside DrivFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivee Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive Joan, Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DriveFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive I appreciate your attempts to solve this problem. The one thing I would disagree with is your description that this is a possible nuisFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveance. It simply is a nuisance and possibly a health concern to neighbors. Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive 8/2/2010 Page 3 of 5 I simply don't understand why the cost to drain and take down the pool cannot be placed as a mechanics lien against the property. The cost to the city would be recouped when the property was sold. Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive Also, you state that the city cannot go onto the propertFw:Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive RoE: 1730 Lakeside Drivey to mitigate the problem. Then under what authority does the city have to enter a property to mow the grass when it gets above the authorized length or survey land for zoning or Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveplatting? MidAmerican Energy has gone on the property to disconnFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveect service and so has Mediacom and other service providers. My only desire is to have the pool drained and disassembled. To simply drain the pFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Driveool in a one time effort does not keep it from filling again with rainwater . I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to it's resolution. Mark EdwardsFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive 1754 Lakeside Drive (319) 330-9421Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DriveFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive --- On Fri, 7/16/10, Joan Siders <Joan-Siders@iowa-city.org> wrote: From: Joan Siders <Joan-Siders@iowa-city.org> Subject: 1730 Lakeside Drive To: households@yahoo.comFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DrivFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drivee Cc: "Dale Helling " <Dale-Helling@iowa-city.org>, "Jann Ream" <Jann- Ream@iowa-city.org> Date: Friday, July 16, 2010, 5:46 PM Mr. Edwards 8/2/2010 Page 4 of 5 Your letter of July 11, 2010 regarding the above ground pool full of standing water at 1730 lakeside Drive has been referred to me for response. As you note, the property owner is not readily available for contact as the property is currently uninhabited and has fallen into foreclosure. The City is aware of this issue and has taken the following steps in an attempt to ameliorate the possible nuisance caused by the stagnant water in the pool. A list below will allow you to see what has transpired. 1. Apri126 I stopped by the property & knocked at the door with no response. Property appeared vacant. Neighbor stated that property has been vacant since mid March. Taped my business card to the front door in hopes of getting a call. 2. Sent notice of violation to current owners of property with a re-inspection odate of May 14. 3. May 14 I went to the property to re-inspect and the pool was still full of stagnant water. Neighbor stated it had gone into foreclosure. 4. May 14 & May 27 talked with BAC Servicing and they stated the property had been sold to Bank of New York. Called the Assessor and they did not show it had changed hands from BAC. They did state that an eviction was taking place at the property on Wednesday, June 2. 5. June 2 I stopped by the property and talked with two gentlemen who worked foro Mid American Property Management out of Nebraska . They had been hired for the eviction by BAC Home Loan Servicing. Called Mid American Property Management and talked with Joy Johnson who stated they had indeed been hired for the eviction. He will let them know the City is in need of the pool being drained. 6. Called and talked with Joy Johnson/Mid American Property Management to see if he has heard anything regarding the pool. Mr. Johnson stoated they had submitted a bid into BAC Home Loan Servicing to have the pool drained or removed. As of that time they had not been given permission to attend to the pool. 7. June 18 a notice of violation was sent to Bank of America in Plano , TX and a copy sent to BAC Field Service Corporation in San Bernardino , CA giving them until July 6 to come into compliance. 8. July 7 I stopped by the property and again nothing has happened to bring the pool into compliance. 9. July 12 I emailed Bank of America Field Services & copied Mid American Property Management asking that someone contact our department no later than July 14 in regards to the swimming pool. I heard nothing. 10. July 16 received phone call from Debbie Cardenas with Bank of America Field Services stating this is one of four properties they no longer own. 8/2/2010 Page 5 of 5 The City is not authorized to go onto the property and/or take action concerning the coondition of the pool without an order from the court. The City had considered issuing a municipal infraction citation for the nuisance at the property in hopes of getting a court order to abate the nuisance violation. As of today we have heard that BAC no longer owns the property and that it is now owned by the Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development of Washington, D.C. I will be out of the office next week on vacation. Jann Ream ,Code Enforcement Assistant may be reached if you should have further questions at 356-5120. Fw: RE: 1730 Lakeside DriveFw: RE: 1730 Lakeside Drive 8/2/2010 8-05-~ 0 I P8 ,uiy-n~g~st zoio EC I C: G~~~~'~~~S" Business assistance tops $5 million In response to the rrahiral disasters of 2008, ECICOG is adnrirusterirrg anumber of state and federal recover} programs. Recentl~~ ECICOG surpassed the $5 nrilliorr mark in awardirrg business recovery assistance fiords, and anticipates a~vardirrg an additional $1 nullion ~vitlrirr the rre~1 several months. Here are,just a few stories of business recocerv in the region: Dan and Megan Dielun o~~ rr and operate the Cedar River Garden Center located in Palo. Damage to their business facility exceeded $1 nullion. Lost reverure exceeded $550,000. ECICOG a~~~lyded the Dielurrs fluids tluorrgh the origir><11 Jurrrpstart Program. ~~itlr an additional amount that vas used to purchase energ,• efficient items. The Deilun's also applied for and were awarded fluids tluough the Loan hrterest Supplement Program and the Eqrriprrrerrt Replacement Assistance Program. Brad Tischer o~vrrs and operates Brogan's Bar and Grill in Palo. Ihre to the flood. Brogan's sustained extersive damage and lrad to close for several months. The facilit<~ had to be conrpletel~~ recorrstnrcted. ECICOG a~~ arded Brogan's fluids tluough the original Jumpstart Program «•ith an additional arrrouut that was used to purchase energ}~ efficient items. Brogan's also applied for and ~~as awarded fluids tluough the Loan Interest Supplement Program. Brian arrd Bessie Ho o~vn and operate the Hturan Clriuese Restauruit err Corrlville. Like man}~ other businesses located on the "Coinh~ille Strip", the Hrurarr Restaurant sustained extensive damage due to the rising floodwaters. ECICOG awarded them fiends tluough the original Jumpstart Program. Thee also recei~ ed additional fluids drat were used to purcltilse errerg~~ efficient items. The Hos (rave also applied for and were approved for several of the rre~~ Jumpstart business assistance programs. Ili addition to o~~~rring and operating the Hunan Clunese Restaurant, the Hos are corrurrerrial and residential landlords err the Coral~~ille area. and (rave sustained additioiis~l econonuc loss due to lost rental revenue. Frolnveirr Office Phrs is a Hurd generation. farrrilc-o«~ned business operated b~~ the Parsons farrul~~. located in Coralville, Frolt~veiri s sustained over $200A00 iu damage to their facilir<. their walk-in business fell to zero for several months, and sales were do«n sigrrificantl~~. ECICOG awarded them fiords tluough the Jrunpstart Program and tlre~~ also received additior><•rl errergy efficient fiords. Frolmeirr's lras also applied for and is being considered for the Loarr Interest Supplement Program. Disaster recover' programs adrnirristered b~~ ECICOG serve residents and businesses in Lirur Countt• outside the corporate limits of Cedar Rapids. Jolurson Courrt<• outside the corporate limits of Iowa Cit,~. as well as all of Benton. Jones. Iowa and Washington Counties. For more information about business assistance, contact Trace DeKoter (ext. 130), or tiuc~~.dekoter~~i~ecicog.org. The Hunan Chinese Restaurant in Corakille sustained heav~• damage from the flood of 2(108. ECICOG receives national excellence awards EcICOG ~-as established in 1973 to promote regional RPO Amel7ca, a prob am of The National Association of Development Orgalizations cooperation and provide professional planning (NADO) Research FOnndation, has aniOnlCed the EaCellenCe in Regional services to local governments in Benton. Iowa, Transportation Awards. The awards program is honoring twent<T-t`vo projects that Johnson. Jones. Linn and Washington Counties. relate to rnral and small metropolitan plalning, programs and ser ice deliver . ECICOG also provides solid waste planning services ECICOG is being recoglized for its participation in t<ti0 Of the projects: to Tama CountS~ and h~ansportation planning services to Cedar County. Human Services Transportation Advisory Group: Partners anll Practices in Mobility Management 1ller~ibers of the ECICO(U A partnership beriveen ECICOG, the Corridor MPO, and the Ulited Way of East Board of Directors: Central Iowa, the Human Selvices Transportation Advisor- Group (HSTAG) has as its goal to improve mobility options for all tl>at lire and ~~°orli in ECICOG~s Lu Barron Susan Mims siY-conlty region, with a primary focus on older adults, persons ~tiith disabilities Leo Cook (Chair) Charles Montross alld h0~~"-111COllle wOrhiCTS. Bill Daily David Plti~man Garv Edwards Ed Raber U.S. High~~~ay 30 Corridor Study Tom Gill Ben Rogers Completion of the corridor sttldy by° a coalition led by the Region XII Council of Don Gray Sally Stutsman Govermnents, and including ECICOG, Metropolitan Area Planing Agency/ Ann Hearn Kathleen Vansteenhuyse RPA 18, Central Iowa Regional Transportation Planing Alliance, Region 6 Marty Kelzer David Vermedahl Planing Cominissiolt and East Central Intergovernnental Association Linda Langston Larry Wilson Adam Mangold Linda Yoder All t<l"e11tV-two award leC1p1e11tS R"111 bC hOllOred d1i1711g a TODndtable 5110~~~CaSC Jones County vacancy reception daring the National Rural Transportation Peer Learning Conference, October 20 - 22 in St Louis, Missouli. ECICOG Staff ~1T Community beautification grants available Doug Elliott. Esecrrtive Dzrector 122 Gina Peters, _4drrrznistradve ~sszsta>rt 120 Keep Iowa Beautifitl (K1B) has aniounced the KIB Comnnuit<- Beautification Grant Robyn ,Tacobson. Contracts ~ldrrrirrisrraror 134 Program, a competitive fiuiding source for comm~uities under 5,000 in population. Mary Rump, Transpor•tatiorr Director 128 Up to $5,000 will be awarded for beautification projects, and up to $15,000 will be Gina ,Tohnson,Alobi]itvAlcrnager• 137 awarded for projects addressing derelict buildings. Hil uy Copeland. GI4 Services 135 All ehglble project 11n1St have Olle Or lllOre Of the foh10\vlllg aS 1tS purpOSe: Chid Sandra ~ICP, Corrrnr. Deve7opnrentDirector 127 • Litter prevention /removal /education /implementation /public awareness Gary Hughes, Corrrnr. Deve7oprrrent 129 Adam Ralston. Corrrnr. Deve7oprrrent 133 • Recycling education /implementation /public awareness Rob Arnold, Horrstn~ Ser-,~~~es~ 124 • Beautification programs -flower, tree and shnl~b planting, painting & fil-up Tracv DeKoter, Ecorrorrrtc Deve]opnrent 130 and general landscaping. Jennifer Ryan Fencl, Errvirornrrental Services Dir 131 • Public nuisance abatement. Kristin Simon. Solid }I Este Planning 126 • Derelict buildings -removal /renovation including asbestos abatement and Mary Beth Stevenson,Io,ra TT rite Exchange 121 removal, recover and recycling of reusable materials and / or the purchase Kristine Cluafos, Disaster Recovery 135 Diana Stromer. Disaster Recovery 123 of recycled-content materials used in renovation efforts. Melanie Rilev. Disaster Recovery 138 Applications are due at x:30 p.m., or posrinarked, by Friday, August 20, 2010. For ,1,1 Breen. Disaster Recovery 139 a complete description of program requirements, visit the KIB website at www.keepiovvabeautifill.coln/grantsAvvards• East Central Iowa Council of Governments 700 16th Street NE. Suite 301 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 1 (319) 365-9941 Fas:(319)365-9981 August ~ Transit Operators Group meeting, ECICOG offices, 700 16ri' e-mail: ecicogrccecicog.org Street NE, Cedar Rapids, 10:00 am. August 12 Solid Waste TAC meeting, Eastside Recycling Center, Iowa Cit<, 201 Scott Blvd. SE, Iowa Cit<-, 1:00 p.m. August 18 Business Assistance RLF Loan Review Conullittee, ECICOG ~ offices, 700 16ri' Street NE, Cedar Rapids, 2:00 p.nl. ~ August 26 ECICOG Board of Directors meeting, ECICOG offices, 700 16ri' ~+,~T ~~NT~I ~~~i~ Street, Cedar Rapids, 1:00 p.nl• ~~uNC~~ d~ ~~E~N~~NT~ September 6 ECICOG offices closed in obsel-~ ghee of Labor Day holiday YOUR REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY September 9 Solid Waste TAC meeting, location TBA 1:00 p.m• E~j~ress~ is a bimonthly electronic publication of the East Central Iowa Council of Governments. September 30 ECICOG Board of Directors meeting, ECICOG offices, 700 16~i' Street, Cedar Rapids, 1:00 p.m. IP9 the Planner VOLUME 2, ISSUE 12 Week of JULY 26, 2010 Newsletter for the Iowa City Planning & Community Development Department Urban Planning ~ Historic Preservation ~ Housing Rehab ~ Community Development Economic Development ~ JCCOG Transportation Planning ~ Neighborhood Services ~ Public Art MILLER • ORCHARD: Happy first birthda ! ,~~ y Hard to believe, but it was a year ago this week that we debuted the first issue of The Planner, the e-newsletter for the Planning and Community Development Department. We've had a blast creating the newsletters and keeping you informed of all the news taking place around here, and we hope you've enjoyed them, as well. On to Year #2! Inside Towncrest streetscape The design firm hired to create the Towncrest streetscape plan moves the process forward. Page 5. Rummage in the Ramp It's going on this week -and there are bargains galore! Page 6. Art donation Two local families have made a unique donation to the City's Public Art Program. Page 8. Meeting schedule Get the schedule of upcoming meetings and events. Page 9. Positive change comes to the neighborhood It started out as a small spattering of homes, comprised mostly of mod- est, single-family dwellings built in the 1930s by owners who wanted to be located near the newly-built Roosevelt Elementary School. The neighborhood continued to flourish with new construction during and after World War II, including development of a small subdivision along Douglass Street and Douglass Court, south of Benton Street. Growth in commerce occurred, too, as businesses began to line both sides of High- way 1, just south of the neighborhood, providing jobs and services for the area's residents. As the neighborhood grew and aged, it began to face new challenges. Over time, owner-occupied homes turned to rentals, and as the invest- continued on page 2 In the garden Miller-Orchard residents built a community garden as one way to help revitalize their neighborhood. The garden is now in full bloom - as are many other projects that have been put into action with the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood Action Plan. The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 2 Change comes to Miller-Orchard continued from cover ment balance began to shift, some homes began to deterio- rate. New construction yielded higher-density apartment com- plexes, resulting in more people, and more traffic. Housing and traffic congestion, combined with unfriendly pedestrian routes and safety concerns, be- gan to have an impact. And then: the Iowa City School Board voted to close Roosevelt School, despite opposition from neigh- borhood residents. Most neighborhoods might have quietly slipped away, resigned to become just another piece of community history. But the resi- dents of Miller-Orchard had a different plan in mind: Revive, restore, and bring the neighbor- hood back. The Miller-Orchard Neighbor- hood Association and area resi- dents worked with the City's Planning and Community Devel- opment Department, Neighbor- hood Services Division, and a group of four graduate students in the University of Iowa's De- partment of Urban and Regional Planning to develop a neighbor- hood recovery plan. The group concentrated on the positives of the neighborhood -its family- oriented focus, the close prox- imity to the University of Iowa, convenient access to area busi- nesses and services, the mix of older and newer homes, ethnic diversity, Benton Hill Parl<, and area trails -and worked from there to create a set of strate- gies and projects that would re- invigorate the neighborhood and move it forward. continued on next page ....................................................... UNIVERCITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP: An investment in Miller-Orchard and other U I-area neighborhoods The home at 3 I 0 Douglass Court was one of the first homes purchased as part of the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership (www.icgov.org/univercity), a cooperative effort between the University of Iowa and the City of Iowa City. The program works to preserve and build upon the unique character of resi- dential neighborhoods adjacent to the University of Iowa. In one of the first phases of the program, rental properties - or properties that are under treat of becoming rentals -are purchased, rehab- ~ ~ -~ ilitated, and sold back to program _ .__ applicants as single-family homes. _ _ The program provides affordable ' home-ownership opportunities _ .~. that in turn help stabilize neigh- _~~ borhoods with a healthy balance ~,~ ~„ ~ ~ of owner-occupied and rental - _- -~ -- housing. Funds for rehabilitation - _ _ are provided by I-JOBS. 1 ~~ In the kitchen at 3 I 0 Douglass Court, white metal cabinets gave way to new wood cabinets, as well as new countertops, new flooring, a new window and door, and brand new kitchen appliances, including a dishwasher. The home is one o f four in the neighborhood that will be rehabilitated and resold through the UniverCity Housing Partnership. More photos on following pages. _ . ---~ ass ~~' ~' =, After Kitchen rehab The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 3 --.~. ,,. ~:<Ar .. ~. +. uh_ ,d_,.' ~. ~ r. r. ".. r., .t : l.. ~~,. ..; ~u ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~+I ~ The resulting document, the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood Action Plan, (www.icgov.org/millerorchardplan), outlined five core strategies for improving the quality of life in the neighborhood, along with a list of projects for each strategy that would help the neighborhood meet its goals. The five-year plan was released in Spring 2009. Now, a little more than a year later, signs of renewal are already visi- ble. Flowers planted alongside Benton Street offer a colorful welcome to residents and those who pass through the neighborhood. A com- munity garden located north of Douglass Street - a collaborative ef- fort between the Miller-Orchard Neighborhood Association, the First Mennonite Church, the Iowa City Area Association of Realtors, and Reclaiming Roots, a local nonprofit dedicated to neighbors helping neighbors -provides garden plots and a chance for residents to get to Know one another. New sidewalks are being installed, and next year, the City plans to construct a wide sidewalk /trail adjacent to Highway I, between the Iowa River and Sunset Street, for improved neighborhood connectivity, accessibility, and safety. Housing issues that had become a concern for the neighborhood are also being addressed. Three homes on Douglass Court have been purchased as part of the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership, a joint program between the City of Iowa City and the University of Iowa. The program seeks to preserve the character of established neighborhoods adjacent to the University of Iowa campus, ensure that they remain safe, affordable, and attractive places to live and work, and spur ongoing, long-term neighborhood reinvestment. A ranch-style house at 3 I 0 Douglass Court was one of the properties purchased by the partnership. Renovations have been completed, and the 832 sq. ft., three-bedroom home with asingle-car, double deep garage is now available for sale for $85,000, plus carrying costs. The continued on next page More progress Above: Work gets underway on a new driveway and sidewalk. Below: Before and a fter photos o f the living room at 3 I 0 Douglass Street. The room now features new energy-efficient windows, a new door, and new carpet. Before ~I ~ ~ ~._ _ ~-_ - y --~~ The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 4 .......................... Off with the old, on with the new Workers tear o ff shingles to put on a new roof at 310 Douglass Court. This home in the Miller-Orchard Neighbor- hood was one o f the first three homes to be purchased and rehabilitated by the UniverCity Neighborhood Partner- ship, ajoint project between the City and the University to help rehabilitate neighborhoods around the UI campus and provide affordable home owner- ship options. .......................... home now boasts a host of new features -energy-efficient windows, interior and exterior doors, bathroom, Kitchen, flooring, roof, sidewalk, driveway, and appliances, including stove, refrigerator, dishwasher, and washer /dryer. Some replacement exterior siding has been installed, and there's been some painting com- pleted, too. Worl< will soon get underway on the second neighborhood home, atwo-bedroom at 416 Douglass Court. A third home, at 336 Douglass Court, has also been purchased, and an offer on a fourth home has been ac- cepted, but the transaction has not yet been completed. There are other signs that show that positive change has come to Miller-Orchard. Residents of the neighbor- hood are coming together to meet, socialize, and work alongside one other on projects that will rebuild the area they call home. There are plans for more trails, including a link to the Iowa River Trail and a connector trail that runs between Harlocl<e Street and Benton Hill Parl<. Residents are working with area businesses to make aesthetic landscape improvements in the commercial sector that borders their neighborhood. This fall, Miller-Orchard will use funds it received from the City's Program for Improving Neighborhoods (PIN) grant program to host a Neighborhood Improvement Day with volunteers from Reclaiming Roots. The event will offer property owners a chance to work with others to make improvements to their homes, including painting, landscaping, and general clean-up. >,,;~, ~~ ~ _ s.;,. ~ ;;- . more than just the Miller- Orchard Neighborhood's beauti- fication project. They're also a symbol of the type of change that's possible when an individual or a group of neighbors plants a seed -and then urges it to ~_ -K`im'' _ °~' ~'` -, -,. ~. _ . ~~h~~ - ~.~ "" - _ .. _ ~~ ~,. Before and After: 3 I 0 Douglass The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 5 ROBERT MIKLO Senior Planner 3 19.356.5240 bob-mil<lo@iowa-city.org Web page: www.icgov.org/urbanplanning Next step A fter helping to create a vision for their neighbor- hood in a series o f community work- shops held earlier this year for the Southeast District, business owners and residents now move on to the next step: meeting with the design firm that has been hired to com- plete astreetscape plan for Towncrest. Towncrest streetsca e: p Design firm holds meetings with . business owners and residents Earlier this year, business owners and residents of the southeast side met in a series of community workshops to create a vision for their neighborhood, including the Towncrest business district. On Wednes- day, July 28, RDG Planning and Design, the firm hired to complete a streetscape plan for the Towncrest business district as part of a long- range urban renewal project, scheduled meetings with business owners, residents and the public to provide an opportunity to contribute to a specific implementation plan. The City of Iowa City Community Development Department sent invi- tations to business owners and residents to attend the series of meet- ings, held at the Church of the Nazarene at 1035 Wade Street. Topics of discussion were to include streetscape design, public open spaces and parks, sidewalks, parking, landscaping, signage, basic architectural treat- . ments, and other amenities. An open house and an overview session to summarize the information gathered at the meetings and discuss subsequent steps in the process were also scheduled. For more information, contact Christina Kuecl<er in the City of Iowa City Urban Planning Division at 319.356.5243 or e-mail Christina- , I<uecl<er@iowa-city.org. r ~. URBAN PLANNING The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 6 NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES MARCIA BOLLINGER Neighborhood Services Coordinator 3 19.356.5237 marcia-bollinger@iowa-city.or-g Web page: www.icgov.org/ neighborhoodservices ~::, Zit , .. ~2 Z/~ . It's time for Rummage in the Ramp! No matter what you're looking for to furnish your home or apartment, there's a good chance you'll find it at Rummage in the Ramp, the giant, eight-day garage sale extravaganza that's now underway. This is the fourth year for the event, which is organized by the City of Iowa City to help reduce the volume of furniture and household goods that are dis- carded each summer as people move out of their apartments. The program encourages tenants to donate, rather than throw away, their still-usable items, which are then offered for sale at Rummage in the Ramp at bargain-basement low prices. The event not only helps re- duce the amount of waste going into the landfill, but also provides a low- : cost way for incoming students and other residents to purchase items they need for their home. Rummage in the Ramp doubles as a fundraiser for local nonprofit organizations that help staff the event and then split the profits at the end of the sale. Most items are priced at $ I , $5, $ I 0 and $20. The event is held at the Chauncey Swan Parking Ramp, under the College Street Bridge. This year's event will run through Monday, August 2. Hours are noon to 8 p.m. daily, except for Saturday, July 31, when extended hours are scheduled, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Donations times and sale hours will run simulta- neously. More information on what and how you can donate appears on the next page. For more information, visit www.icgov.org/rummageintheramp or contact one of these City employees: Jennifer Jordan, City of Iowa City Recycling Coordinator 3 19.887.6160 or Jennifer-Jordan@iowa-city.org Marcia Bollinger, Neighborhood Services Coordinator 319.356.5237 or marcia-bollinger@iowa-city.org. %~~~ ~,n~, ~oav~vvy The City of Iowa City would like to thank the following spon- sors for their help in offsetting the costs of this year's event. Their donations will ensure that program costs such as signage and advertising will be paid from a different source other than revenue from the sale -which means that the 29 nonprofits that are assisting this year will ultimately be able to raise more funds for their organizations. Our 2010 sponsors are: City of Iowa City Aero Rental and PartyShoppe ECO Iowa City Her Soup Kitchen Hy-Vee Kaplan Test Prep KCJJ -the Mighty 1630 KRUI-89.7 KXIC AM 800 New Pioneer Co-op Old Capitol Screen Printers U of I Office of Sustainability The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 7 .......................... WHAT ITEMS CAN I DONATE Help from, and for TO RUMMAGE IN THE RAMP? ^ Beds, box springs, and bed frames ^ Books ^ Clean clothes in good condition One of the founding principles ^ Furniture -couches, chairs, tables, dressers, desks, end tables, cof- of the Rummage in the Ramp fee tables, and other furniture that is in good condition program was to use the donation- ^ Kitchen items -dinnerware, silverware, cups and glasses, pots and and-resale event to help raise funds for local nonprofit organizations. pans, baking sheets, mixing bowls, Kitchen utensils, and other The following groups will help staff Kitchen /cooking items this year's event, and then divide ^ General items -lamps, bedding, towels, tools, art, decorative items, the profits from this year's sale: fans, sporting goods, etc. American Association o f ^ Non-perishable food items Pharmaceutical Scientists ^ Electronic items will be accepted for a fee of $5 per item. Association of Latinos The fee will cover the costs of disposal in case the items do not sell. Moving Ahead Electronics contain lead and other substances which are harmful to Backyard Abundance the environment if disposed of improperly. Computers, monitors, Community Mental Health Center printers, TVs, stereos, copiers, cables, networking hardware, and other small electronic items are included on this list. Community Mental Health Center ^ Volunteers will be on hand to visually inspect and help unload your Compeer Program donated items. If your item is beyond reuse, it will not be accepted. Engineers for a Sustainable World ^ Donated items are tax-deductible. Remember to asl< for a receipt! Engineering World Health at Iowa Free Lunch Program HOW DO I DONATE ITEMS? Fre linic d Four Oal c ^ Drop off at Chauncey Swan: Family Self-Sufficiency Program Drop off items you want to donate at Chauncey Swan Parking Graduate Student Senate Ramp during the hours of operation listed below ... or Habitat for Humanity ^ Drop off at Roosevelt School: Iowa Humane Alliance On Friday, July 30 from 2 to 6 p.m. (one day only), Restore will be Mid-Eastern Council accepting donations at Roosevelt School to make it more conven- on Chemical Abuse ient for people who live on the west side ... or Nest of Johnson County ^ Schedule apick-up: Restore A pick-up service will be provided by volunteers from the nonprofit Successful Living organizations that are helping with the sale. Picl<-up fees are $ 10; additional fees will be charged if the load includes electronic items. Sigma Lamda Beta Payment must be made in cash. Travel for Change ^ To arrange for apick-up: TransCollaborations ^ Visit our website at www.icgov.org/rummageintheramp and Taproot click on the pick-up tab to schedule a time. United Action for Youth ^ Donors must be at home at the time of the scheduled pick-up. Environmental Coalition ^ Please have items boxed and bagged in front of your house or apartment at the time of the scheduled pick-up. UI Homecoming Committee ^ Remember: A $5 fee will be collected for each electronic item Urban Planning Student Assn you donate, to cover disposal costs in case your item does not sell Women in Science & Engineering or does not work. Women's Ultimate .......................... The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 8 Local families donate sculptures to City's Public Art Program The donation of four unique wooden carved sculptures has been accepted by the City of Iowa City Public Art Program and the City Council, and will soon be installed for public display at Blacl< Springs Circle Park. The park, located at the intersection of Dill and Rider Streets off Rocl<y Shore Drive, was selected in part because of its wooded setting, which will provide a natural backdrop for the sculptures. The donations were made by Art Small, Howard Horan, and Stephen Dewey, whose families had commissioned the four works from Russian artist Val Kovalev. The sculptures have been on outdoor display for sev- eral years at the Small and Horan homes. PUBLIC ART ............................................... MARCIA BOLLINGER Public Art Coordinator 3 19.356.5237 marcia-bollinger@iowa-city.org Small commissioned Kovalev about 15 years ago to create sculptures from an oal< tree that had fallen on his property. One of the two resulting sculptures depicts Small, while the other is of his late wife, Mary Jo, and their children. The two Kovalev works that have been donated by Howard Horan and Stephen Dewey were commissioned by their parents in 1996 of their favorite poets, Anton Chel<hov and Anna AI<matova. A dedication ceremony will be scheduled after installation is complete. Members of the Iowa City Public Art Advisory Com- mittee noted that the gifts are welcomed not only because of their high quality, but also be- cause budget cuts over the past year have constricted the pur- chase of additional works for the City's public art collection. For more information, contact Marcia Bollinger at the City of Iowa City at 319.356.5237 or e-mail marcia-bollinger@iowa- city.org. Howard Horan and Stephen Dewey family donation Art Small family donation The Planner, week of 7.26.10 -page 9 UPCOMING MEETINGS This is a tentative schedule of upcoming meetings. To verify that the meeting will be held, check the calendar on the City website at www.icgov.org or call the Planning & Community Development office at 356.5230. Meetings will be held at City Hall at 410 E. Washington Street. The individual list- ings below provide the name of the meeting room. Thursday,August 5 ^ Public Art Advisory Committee To view agendas 3:30 p.m., Lobby Conference Room & meeting packets ^ Economic Development Committee ' for City meetings 4 p.m., City Manager s Conference Room Agendas have not yet been ^ Planning & Zoning Commission written for some of these 7 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall meetings. To find out what's on the agenda, Wednesday,August I I visit the City website ^ Board of Adjustment prior to the meeting. 5:15 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall Go to the City's Calendar page at Thursday,August 12 www.icgov.org/default/apps/ ^ Historic Preservation Commission GEN/calendar.asp, 6 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall click on the date of the meeting, and then on the Tnur~day, ugust I name of the group that will ^ Housing & Community Development Commission be meeting. Agendas and meeting packets for all 6:30 pm, Lobby Conference Room scheduled meetings are ^ Planning & Zoning Commission posted to the web at least 7 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall 24 hours in advance. Thursday, September 2 ^ Public Art Advisory Committee 3:30 p.m., Lobby Conference Room ^ Planning & Zoning Commission 7 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall Upcoming events Wednesday, September ~ Party in the Parlc ^ Board of Adjustment July 29: Fairmeadows Parl<, 5:15 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall music by Ron Hillis August 3: College Green Park, Thursda , Se tember 9 y p music by The Juniors August 5: Highland Parl<, music by ^ Historic Preservation Commission Nic Arp 6 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall All parties are held from 6:30 to 8 p.m. Thursday, September 16 Sand in the City ^ Housing & Community Development Commission August 20-22 6:30 pm, Lobby Conference Room Another Summer of the Arts event! Discover the real art (and fun!) of ^ Planning & Zoning Commission sand sculpture in downtown Iowa 7 p.m., Emma Harvat Hall City, along Iowa Avenue. WHO SHOULD YOU CONTACT? PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT General Phone: 319.356.5230 Fax: 319.356.5217 Department Web Page: http://www.icgov.org/PCD ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY JCCOG Jeff Davidson DEVELOPMENT John Yapp Director Steve Long Executive Director 319.356.5232 Coordinator 319.356.5252 Jeff-davidson@iowa-city.org 3 19.356.5250 john-yapp@iowa-city.org Janet Dvorslcy steve-long@iowa-city.org Transportation Planners: Administrative Secretary Community Brad Neumann 319.356.5230 Development Planners: 319.356.5235 Janet-dvorsl<y@iowa-city.org Tracy Hightshoe brad-neumann@iowa-city.org Jodi DeMeulenaere 319.356.5244 Kent Ralston Public Information Assistant tracy-hightshoe@iowa-city.org 319.356.5253 319.356.5236 Doug Ongie Kent-ralston@iowa-city.org Jodi-demeulenaere@ iowa-city.org 319.356.5479 Kristopher Ackerson doug-ongie@iowa-city.org 319.356.5247 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• David Purdy Kristopher-acl<erson@ 3 19.356.5489 iowa-city.org URBAN david-purdy@iowa-city.org Darian Nagle-Gamm PLANNING Housing Rehabilitation 319.356.5254 Robert Miklo Specialists: darian-nagle-gamm@ Senior Planner David Powers iowa-city.org 319.356.5240 319.356.5233 Human Services bob-mil<lo@iowa-city.org david-powers@iowa-city.org Planning: Urban Planners: Jeff Vanatter Linda Severson Karen Howard 319.356.5128 Coordinator 319.356.525 I Jeff-vanatter@iowa-city.org 319.356.5242 Karen-howard@iowa-city.org linda-Severson@iowa-city.org Liz Osborne Christina Kuecl<er : Program Assistant : Historic Preservation 319.356.5246 ................................................. 319.356.5243 liz-Osborne@iowa-city.org Christina-I<uecl<er@ NEIGHBORHOOD iowa-city.org . ................................................. . SERVICES Sarah Walz Marcia Bollinger Board of Adjustment ECONOMIC Coordinator of 319.356.5239 DEVELOPMENT Neighborhood Services sarah-walz@iowa-city.org Wendy Ford & Iowa City Public Art Program Coordinator 3 19.356.5237 319.356.5248 marcia-Bollinger@iowa-city.org • Wendy-ford@iowa-city.org MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 1 of 21 MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE: - JUNE 2, 2010 I P 10 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Report from Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee Report from Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee Report from Facilities Subcommittee Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Discussion Re: Plans for Jul 7 2010 Meetin 7 with Re resentative of the General Services Administration (GSA) Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Report from Facilities Subcommittee Discussion Re• Plans for July 7 2010 Meeting with Representative of the General Services Administration (GSAI Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Report from Funding/Grants Subcommittee Set Next Meeting Date Supervisor Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building, Conference Rooms 203B and 203C, at 4:34 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, and Rod Sullivan: absent: Sally Stutsman. Justice center Coordinating Committee members present were: County Attorney Janet Lyness, County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek, Judge Doug Russell, Iowa City City Council Member Connie Champion, Bar Association Representative James McCarragher, Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton, Citizen Representative Bob Elliott, Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden, Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston, and Department of Corrections Supervisor Jerri Allen. Staff present: Executive Assistant Andy Johnson and Auditor's Office Recording Secretary Cynthia Courter. REPORT FROM ALTERNATIVES AND TREATMENTS SUBCOMMITTEE County Attorney Janet Lyness said MECCA staff attended initial appearances for 30 days in May 2010 and there was one furlough day. Thirty assessments were requested, 30 assessments were completed, and three of those required further assistance. Lyness said 17 weekend assessments were completed, one evaluation was completed with an interpreter, and the public defender referred three. She said they have ten MECCA counselors trained to provide assessments at the Jail in order to assure that assessment services are available daily. Lyness said MECCA Services Clinical Manager Megan Lavelle has been attending the CJCC meetings for years and has been with MECCA, and she is leaving to go into private practice. Lyness wishes Lavelle well in her new endeavor and says she will be missed. REPORT FROM PUBLIC INFORMATION/OUTREACH SUBCOMMITTEE Bar Association Representative James McCarragher asked whether the committee is ready to move forward on the Planning and Objectives outline that was passed out two meetings ago. He said he does not know if the subcommittees have met and agreed, or looked at the outline. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 2 of 21 Report from Facilities Subcommittee Sullivan said the Facilities Subcommittee thought they would have a better idea after hearing from the General Services Administration (GSA) Representative, which is further down on the agenda. He said that would give them a better idea of what kind of time frame they have. Neuzil said one of the things that would be helpful for this committee would be for each subcommittee to take a look at the list from the CJCC Planning and Objectives handout and if any amendments or changes need to be made, that would be the main objective in the near future. He said that Novak Design Group Architect Jim Novak and his committee will go through this and update it after hearing from all the different subcommittees. Neuzil said the main thing is to make this a realistic task. He said his guess is some of these dates will be moved back to make it more realistic. The most important thing is for each subcommittee to get together, look at the objectives that were laid out, and see if that is something that there is interest in within that subcommittee, or if it needs to be moved to a different committee. Neuzil said that Sullivan is right; the Facilities Subcommittee early on has a lot of tasks. He said the main thing is creating an actual plan that this committee collectively can agree on, so that maybe by July 2010, they can vote on this plan. Harney said when he and Sullivan went through this it appeared as though everything is legitimate, but they thought that after they met with the GSA, it would give them a more realistic idea as to what GSA is interested in pursuing. McCarragher asked if they think that is something they can do by July 2010. Harney said he would think so, by the July 7, 2010, meeting. Neuzil said then on July 7, 2010, they would actually vote on the CJCC Justice Center Planning and Objectives. He said Novak can work with the Facilities Subcommittee to update the list, send it out before that, and actually have a vote on it. McCarragher said if the committee chairs could just look at it and write down if they need additional time or if there are other things they want on it, they can email it to him and update it to form a document for July 7, 2010. Harney said they won't have it on July 7, 2010 because that is when they meet with the GSA. He said they will have a site visit, then meet after that, and make a recommendation following the meeting. McCarragher said that would be after the next meeting. Harney said yes. Lyness said the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee could certainly comply with that timeline in particular. Neuzil said they will go through Facilities and actually bump some things back to try to accommodate GSA and help some folks out if that seems realistic. Neuzil said they will bump some of these items back so it gives the Facilities Subcommittee a little more time to digest what happens with GSA. Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Lyness said Novak was asking if they can agree to this. She wonders what they are doing with his recommendation with that subcommittee. She asked if they want to try to comply with it and then ask for extensions committee by committee. It seems like it is a great framework and if they put it off for another month, they will be another month further behind. She suggested they say they will comply with it with possible changes, but it is at least a guideline for them to try to follow. Discussion Re: Plans for July 7, 2010 Meeting with Representative of the General Services Administration (GSA) Neuzil said he thinks they should vote on this in July 2010. He said his subcommittee will go through and take all the recommendations Novak has received from the committee chairs, and they will help out the Facilities Subcommittee and bump a bunch of these back a little bit to make it more realistic for them to deal with the GSA side of things. He said his committee can provide a copy at least a week http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 3 of 21 before so they can have the discussion at the July 2010 meeting. McCarragher asked if it is possible to have the next CJCC Meeting after July 7, 2010, after they have had a chance to talk to GSA. Harney said they can; they were going to have a group meeting including a site visit. The GSA representative has also agreed to come to a meeting at the Board office or with the CJCC to address any questions. Sullivan said they have a meeting planned that day. Neuzil said the plan right now is that at 8:00 a.m. on July 7, 2010, they will be touring with people from the GSA. At 9:00 a.m. they will meet with the GSA representatives and invite all committee members to attend, if they are available. Neuzil said the regular CJCC meeting is scheduled at 4:30 p.m. July 7, 2010. Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston said she wonders if it would make sense to vote to accept this plan of action subject to the revisions that happen in the next month. It seems like they keep putting this stuff off; there will always be revisions but she doesn't know why they need to put this off another month. Neuzil said the only reason he would suggest holding off is because they need to update the dates a little bit better now. Neuzil said most of the subcommittees should already be looking at that list and he knows the Funding/Grants Subcommittee has already begun checking some things off their list. Citizen Representative Bob Elliott asked if Neuzil is saying that on July 7, 2010, he would like the committee members to come to the 9:00 a.m. meeting. Neuzil said that meeting is open to everyone, but those who can't attend will get an update at the 4:30 p.m. meeting. Elliott asked if at the 4:30 p.m. meeting they will adopt something like a time and task schedule. Neuzil and Harney said yes. REPORT FROM FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE Facilities Manager David Kempf said the Facilities Subcommittee met and they tried to come up with some options on how they might be willing to make a deal in preparation for the GSA visit. He referred to a map handed out to everyone present which identifies seven locations. He said they asked Novak to look at these seven locations and see what kind of parking they can get for those spots. Kempf referred to the map and said they can see some of the locations worked and some didn't. He said they will go through them one at a time. Kempf said the first picture shows what the GSA existing parking is. The GSA has 219 spaces available to them. Kempf said the Facilities Subcommittee is operating under the assumption that GSA wants space for space, so that will rule out some of the options and let some of them in. Kempf said that Option #1 is looking at what they refer to as the former Sabin Elementary School property, which is the school-owned property located immediately to the south of the existing United States Post Office building. He said this shows 172 spaces, excluding one house to the south, on the east half of the property, which would allow for several more spaces if they could acquire that house. Kempf said that is pretty close as far as the number of the spaces. Kempf said that Option #2 is looking at the existing GSA property and basically making a swap with them. He said if the County were to acquire all the houses immediately to the east of the Jail, across the street, they would be trading the west strip for a strip along the north side of the GSA property. He said this wouldn't give them all of the GSA property, but it would give them a sizeable portion south of Harrison Street. Kempf said their goal with that would be to see if they could convince the City to vacate Harrison Street, which would allow them to have from the Courthouse to basically a third of the GSA property going south for construction. He said they could potentially increase the number of parking spaces they have because there are 223 spaces with this option. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 4 of 21 Kempf said that with Option #3 they talked about exchanging the houses across the street along with the Jail property and giving the GSA a split parking area. He said that netted 141 spaces. He said if they were to include the three houses the County already owns, they could probably increase that by another 30 spaces or so. Kempf said that Option #4 gives the GSA space to the west and gives the County space to the east. He said this would require constructing a partial two level parking space in order to give them enough parking spaces to have the space for space swap. Neuzil asked if that would look similar to what is found at the Health and Human Services (HHS) Building. Kempf said sort o£ He said it would be closer to the Mercy Iowa City lot where part of the parking is underneath but the majority of parking is single level up above. Novak said they would probably cut into the hillside and the upper level would be accessed halfway up the street and the lower level would be accessed from South Capitol Street. Rettig asked how many spots are in that lot. Kempf said 219. Rettig said she meant the HHS parking lot. Kempf said he thinks there are 230 spots in that ramp. Rettig asked how much that cost. Kempf said it cost $3.2 or $3.3 million. Neuzil said part of that cost was the footings to be able to build up. Kempf agreed. Kempf said there had been some confusion with Option #5, because he didn't communicate to Novak well enough. He said this is what they call the Pacha property up on South Dubuque Street. He said they would have to acquire all the property on the west half of that block in order to even get remotely close to getting the number of parking spaces they want. He said this would also have to be two level parking in order to get the number of spaces. Kempf said when he and Novak talked, he didn't identify those five smaller properties; he just said the little strip mall area. Novak said Option #5 would probably end up looking like Option #4. Kempf said it would look a lot like Option #4. Kempf said that Options #6 and #7 are what he will refer to as the former A & P Property. He said the majority of it is currently owned by the University of Iowa. Kempf said that Option #6 shows that property with leaving the former A & P building in place. He said they can get 149 parking spaces, basically with the area that is there. He said if they were to acquire that and remove the former A & P building, they could jump up to 220 parking spaces. There are also some businesses and a couple of houses in that area on that block that they could look at acquiring if they needed additional space. One area is where Marv's Glass is located, shown in the shaded area on the map, which is the southeast corner of that block. Kempf said in the northeast corner of the block is Bill's Plumbing & Heating and a couple of houses as well. Harney said they own all three. Kempf said when the subcommittee got together they just tried to brainstorm. He said they were going under the assumption that GSA wanted space for space and it needed to be close to where they are currently at. He said it won't do them any good to offer GSA a property on the outskirts of town that is nowhere close to the Post Office. Kempf said that as they looked at a city map, they looked at what would be within their reach in these areas and this is what they came up with. He said they got this back last week and the subcommittee actually hasn't even had a chance to sit down and look at this since they got it back from Novak. Kempf said everyone is getting a new look at it for the first time today. Discussion Re: Plans for July 7, 2010 Meeting with Representative of the General Services Administration (GSA) Kempf said that their hope was to narrow this down to two or three options to present to the GSA folks. Sullivan said there is another twist here. He said these options are assuming that they have to have surface parking and the GSA has led Harney to believe that they have to have surface parking. Sullivan said his first priority would be to find out if the County can buy spaces from the City of Iowa http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 5 of 21 City for GSA in either the Court Street Ramp across the street on the north, or the soon to be constructed St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp. He said that he doesn't know what Iowa City City Council Member Connie Champion thinks about this, but he has spoken to Iowa City Interim City Manager Dale Helling, City of Iowa City Director of Planning and Community Development Jeff Davidson, and Iowa City Mayor Matt Hayek and they all thought that would be a great idea, if GSA was willing. Champion said the Iowa City would be totally willing. Sullivan said the question is if they are willing. Champion said she wanted to add to that that flat space parking is not very environmentally sound. Rettig said it is in the elements. She said if she was an employee and had a choice to park in the ramp across the street or out on the surface lot during a hail storm or snow, she would use the ramp every time. Champion said she thinks the City would be totally willing to work with them on that. Champion said she wonders why they couldn't just build above the existing parking lot and leave the parking there. Neuzil said that should be another option. He said this was in part of the discussion of, if GSA couldn't provide any additional space for the County, what would the County do. He said it had the mentality that if GSA can't give the County any land, and the County can't build anything on their property, then the question is what options are available to the County. He thinks that is the way to approach this. Neuzil said if there are additional options, for instance, they know they will need parking for the justice center, if they can build something on top of their land, it would make a lot of sense. He said if GSA can't do anything other than trade a piece of property, this is the only way the County would be able to do it. Champion said exactly. Harney said, in his discussions with GSA, they refer to the 1959 Act where Federal regulations were put into place that they have to follow regarding exchange and sale of excess of property, and the guidelines that say what they can and can't do. He said when he asks GSA about building a ramp on their property and sharing it, GSA says they want space for space and they want a buildable site, so if they want to expand some day, they can do that. He said GSA said the ramp would not work. Harney said that GSA also said that whatever it is, it has to be equal space and equal value. He said he talked to GSA specifically about the ramps because he also talked to Helling and the Parking Superintendent about that, and they have no problem having GSA use the ramp right next to the Post Office. He said that GSA told him they don't want parking ramp space, they want surface where they could put a building. Harney said this is all discussion they will have to have when GSA is here. Elliott said that if the surface parking is not primarily for surface parking, it is for future building. Kempf said it is a way of holding land. Harney said he told GSA that they could build on the spot where they park their trucks and then have parking on a higher space somewhere else. He said that GSA reiterated that they are bound by that 1959 Act and there are no provisions in it for that. Sullivan said there is a concern too about ownership. He said that Hayek had suggested considering some kind of a condo where the County buys spaces that would be transferred. He said if the spaces are rented, after a certain number of years they would have paid more in rent than they are worth. Sullivan said Hayek suggesting buying an entire floor of a condominium parking ramp for GSA. Champion said the only reason she is questioning what GSA has told them is because when Iowa City did the Tower Place & Parking facility, they traded GSA parking spaces in the ramp. She said that it was Federal land, and they build a ramp on it. Harney asked if GSA has spaces there. Champion said yes, their spaces are under the ramp and they have their own separate entrance. Rettig said she didn't know that part of the ramp is built on old GSA land. Champion said Iowa City built GSA's parking spaces space for space and GSA has their own entrance. She said their entrance is on Gilbert Street. Harney suggested that people review the 1959 Act, which lists all of the rules and regulations. Champion suggested taking the GSA representative to see that ramp. Elliott said he http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 6 of 21 thought that could be one of the sites to visit. McCarragher asked if there is still paperwork in connection to that ramp. Champion said sure. Neuzil asked who it was that probably coordinated that. Champion said she thinks it was probably Karen Franklin and Elliott agreed. Neuzil said he wonders if they could invite Franklin or someone from the Iowa City staff to come over and review that and be a part of that discussion. Champion said she could be mistaken. She said maybe because it was Ecumenical Housing and not a Federal office building that there might be different rules. Harney said he was thinking that was what it was, the Senior Center and parking. Neuzil said they will find that out, but the main thing is to pare this down first, assuming that there is no alternative other than having to trade space for space. Sullivan said they need to negotiate with what they want. Neuzil agreed that they need to create a big list, but it has to be pared down. Sullivan agreed. He thinks these should be their second, third and fourth options. Neuzil agreed. Elliott said that even though he often disagreed with Franklin, she really knows a lot of stuff that might be helpful about what has gone on in the past. Neuzil said he will see Franklin tomorrow and will ask her then if that is okay with the committee. Champion said she assumes that is who it was. Neuzil said Franklin would know otherwise. Neuzil said they can start with this list and then prioritize what their options would be. He said he thinks Option #6 and Option #7 are pretty unrealistic for parking for the Federal lot. Rettig said they are on the other side of the train tracks, three blocks away. Harney said it is the same side of the tracks. Lyness said if what they are wanting is property to build another building, maybe the County could do a combination. She suggested buying some spots for GSA for parking, and then also let them have another further location for future building. She said it depends on what they want. Sullivan said he thinks it would be easy to eliminate Option #4. He said everything Novak has shown them has been building on the backside and the lower side, using elevation. He said if they traded to get Clinton Street, they have essentially captured one level of building, where if they have Capitol Street, they could build three to four levels. Sullivan said Option #4 wouldn't even be to the County's benefit. Neuzil said unless Option #4 was considered with more of the Durrant design using Clinton Street. Sullivan said it just seems like there is much more height with the other options, by building on the west side, and it doesn't make sense to trade west for east. Champion said that is a really good point. Harney said in the conversation with the GSA representative, they said they wanted to be close to the Post Office, which would ensure that they should stay on the east half if they could. Sullivan said there is also the additional expense in Option #4 because they would have to build a partial ramp that drives the cost up quite a bit. He restated that Option #4 could be eliminated in his opinion. Lyness asked if they could reverse the design. Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members McCarragher asked if they wanted the entrance to the justice center to be off of Clinton Street. Novak said not necessarily. He said it depends on the philosophy of the addition onto the Courthouse. He said his first reaction was to build it into the hillside behind the Courthouse and making the connection off the backside. Novak said he doesn't want to have predetermined notions of what that ought to be. He said the program and the schematic design will tell them what the best solution is. Neuzil said he doesn't disagree with Novak. He said it would be advantageous to share with the community that they are utilizing existing land owned by the County. He said it would also be advantageous to be able to build something on the back side of the Courthouse. He asked Novak if that http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 7 of 21 is something that can be determined to be an absolute, that it can be done. He would hate to negotiate a parking lot and then find out that building in that spot is not possible. Novak said he thinks that can be done, but it really comes down to the efficiency of the building, to the best location. Until that process is started, Novak stated he doesn't know what that is. Kempf said the County would have to spend money to find that out. Neuzil said the County is going to have to do that at some point anyway, but he would hate to negotiate it and get everything settled with GSA only to discover another hole in the back side of the Courthouse like was recently found. Harney stated if it comes down to it, he likes Option #2. Neuzil said he really likes Option #2 with the potential of building a ramp on top of it. Rettig said at least a partial ramp on top of it. She referred to Option #2 on the handout. She said it's unclear to her if they take the ramp out and put it in the block, how much of it would take. Kempf said that's basically half of a city block. Rettig asked whether they could put a ramp there and still have a surface lot. Novak said, because of the way it slopes down, they dig in so they have some parking with a flat structure above it. Instead of having the expense and the area that takes out for the circulation, like the drive they have in one ramp, they would be able to enter the top ramp higher up off of the street and enter the bottom ramp off of the street. Rettig said that's just like at City Hall with the Chauncey Swan Ramp. Harney said he thinks Option #2 would be more appealing to the GSA if there was an entrance off of Clinton Street where they could get in and out. He said it would be onto Clinton Street, so people could walk right to the Post Office, rather than going all the way around to Prentiss Street. Neuzil said regardless of how it would be configured, the main question is whether the GSA would allow the County to have parking on their property. Champion said it is the County's property. Kempf said it is the taxpayers' property. Neuzil said he wishes he could totally agree with Champion. Sullivan said with Option #2 the County is working on the assumption that GSA is getting land where those houses are. Kempf said GSA is not losing anything. Sullivan agreed. Novak said with Option #2 it is just shown as on-grade parking, but it could be a ramp where they have maybe half of it below, as parking for the justice center and then the parking that's open above it would be for GSA. Harney said he was thinking the same thing. He said if they were to try to do something like that they could do one of two things. He said if they paid for building a half ramp there, they could use it until they needed it for building, so it wouldn't be a problem. He said if they want rent for a long time, he isn't sure if the County wants to get into that. Novak said that would also give them the whole strip along Harrison Street as buildable area, assuming they can close off Harrison Street to make the connection over to the Courthouse. Neuzil said the main thing is also providing additional space for future expansion. Novak said if they built a flat ramp, GSA could park up above, exposed to the elements and the County would have a covered area under it that could hold as many as 223 parking spaces. He said then there is still the green strip plus the street for building on. Sullivan said it seems like he sees a lot of heads nodding. He asked if those present feel like Option #2 is the best of these seven options. Champion said it looks really good to her. Harney said it is his second choice. He said his first choice is to try to get the Sabin building and do a swap for the whole thing, but Option #2 is the next best option. Rettig asked why the School District would give up Sabin. She said the School District basically has free rent there. Harney said the School District doesn't need the space and it is too difficult to make handicap accessible, because there are so many different levels within the school. Harney said the School District is looking at moving their offices out of there and Jim Clark wants it, the Board of Supervisor's had the option on it, and it is going to go one way or another, whether it is to Clark or to this project. http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 8 of 21 Neuzil said he doesn't disagree with Option #1, but he thinks it is an expensive option. He said when looking at what it will cost to acquire Sabin, and then likely to have to acquire that additional house, and then have to build a parking facility beyond that, it's a pretty expensive option. Harney said he doesn't think it would be much more than the ramp. Sullivan said it is also out of their control. Neuzil said the County still has to have some parking for itself anyway, so that's out of their control, too. Sullivan said that's why in his opinion, it isn't as good of an option. He said it is hard to offer the GSA something that doesn't belong to the County and that they don't necessarily have the ability to get. Neuzil said they are kind of saying that with those houses, but he understands what Sullivan is saying. Sullivan said they can use eminent domain on the houses if they have to. He said he doesn't know if they can do that with the School District. Neuzil said they wouldn't want to. Rettig said she has a question about Option #1. She clarified that they are not proposing that the apartment building is part of it; it would be on the east. Harney said no. Kempf said it is towards where the school building is. Rettig said the school has a parking lot along Harrison Street also. Kempf said that's why that little strip is included, since it is already owned by the school. Neuzil said it is not even space for space. He said the GSA would lose spaces with that option. Kempf said he thinks if they acquire that one property, they could get pretty close. Neuzil said that as Sullivan pointed out, he thinks it brings an element of more complexity into this, because an entire other government body has to get involved. He said that looking at the timetable of things; that could take some time. One of the things the School District has identified also is that they need a location for their offices. Neuzil said that is a process that is probably a few years in the making to be able to get accomplished. Harney said the School District has that laid out. Rettig said what she is hearing is they would like to do Option #1, if they could get it, but there are a lot of roadblocks, and Option #2 is better. She asked if after Option #2, the preference would be to go to the City. Sullivan said that he thinks that going to the City is the first preference. Rettig clarified that the City lots are the first preference. Sullivan said if GSA will take spots in a ramp, that the County can just pay for, that is by far the easiest and best option. Neuzil asked Sullivan for clarification. Sullivan said to do a condo with the City and say they will take the second floor of the Court Street parking ramp and hand it over to the Federal government. Sullivan said, like Harney said, they may not do that, but he thinks that is their best offer. He said he thinks it the best thing for the County. Rettig said the Court Street ramp or the new St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp. Sullivan said right, one or the other. Rettig clarified that Court Street is the number one preference, the new St. Patrick Catholic Church is number two. She asked if Option #1 or Option #2 would be the County's third preference. Neuzil said before moving on to that, if there is an option to do a little bit of both, say if they could provide some surface parking for them on the current GSA property, say 50 spots, and then be able to provide and pay for an entire floor in a ramp, in other words split it, could they do that. He said he thinks that is an option that needs to be realistically out there. Neuzil said one of the things he remembers GSA talking about early on was that they wanted something very close to their own facility, because it would enhance their ability to be able to rent out empty spaces that they currently have in that building. He said they would want some customer traffic flow, but some of their employees could actually park at a different place. Novak said that Neuzil is exactly right. He said if on Option #2, if they took that area and just gave GSA a third of the block, so there would still be circulation, they could do the same thing by providing parking below that for the Courthouse. Harney said a couple of things he was told from GSA was that, no matter what it is, if there is a trade of any sort, it has to be of equal value. Harney said he isn't sure http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 9 of 21 how to figure that out. He said the other thing GSA said was that there are no provisions in the 1959 Act that allow for shared space. Neuzil said he isn't looking at potentially shared space. He said it is more about whether the County could put a structure on top of GSA's property, and if they can trade parking for parking, and argue it that way. Champion said they need to get someone from the GSA invited to one of their meetings and she asked if anyone has talked to any the state legislators about this. Sullivan said he asked Executive Assistant Andy Johnson to invite the State representatives to the July 7, 2010 meeting. Neuzil said they are aware of what is going on. Champion said that is great. Sullivan said that when he talked to Senator Chuck Grassley's assistant, she said if they can help the County out, and it doesn't cost them any money, they will be happy to be here. Rettig said they had a meeting with all three offices a few months ago and this was on the list. Neuzil said those are the general options he would like to see, as far as their top potential choices. Rettig said this is the order that she wrote down, and wants to make sure it is right. She said that preference number one is Court Street, preference two is the St. Patrick Catholic Church lot, preference three is the hybrid option which was just described, preference four is Option #1, which has a lot of problems, and preference five is Option #2. Sullivan said that he thinks Option #2 is a better choice than Option #1. Neuzil agrees. Sullivan asked what other people think. Rettig said she thinks Option #1 has way too many questions in it and the Board doesn't control the timeline on it. Harney said that he thinks Option #2 is the easiest one to get. Champion said that's true, it is. Neuzil said that worst case scenario, looking at Option #2, it doesn't provide the County with any parking, but at least it gets the County the property that they would need to build a facility and allow for future expansion. He said then it would be on the County's end of where they would find parking for the justice center. Neuzil said at that point, they could look at putting something on that piece of property, or try to negotiate with the University who will be building a gigantic ramp. Harney said even if they don't share a ramp on GSA's portion of it, it would still provide the County with the opportunity to get space from the University or from the City, for parking. Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden said, if GSA sticks to the criteria, the Board keeps talking about, Option #2 is the one that has the least number of variables. Neuzil agreed. Elliott said he hopes the Board can come away from the meeting with the GSA representatives with a confirmation of what GSA must have and what they won't do, so at least some of those variables are eliminated. Neuzil said he wouldn't be surprised if the GSA representatives will have to take the information from the meeting next month back to their superiors. Harney said the representative from GSA said they present plans before a specific committee or group and this committee reviews the whole thing. Harney said the GSA Representative said the decision isn't with him or his assistant, but with a group that oversees it. He said it sounds like how the Board of Regents functions more than anything. Neuzil said he would suggest that the Facilities Subcommittee or whomever, revise that list as Rettig pointed out, if everyone is comfortable with it, so the Board has something to give to the GSA representative. Sullivan said they could include photos, too, of the ramps and their proximity to the existing building. Neuzil suggested including a sentence or two about why each option is most advantageous. Sullivan asked if Rettig could run through the list again. He wants to make sure that everyone, or at least the majority of those present, is okay with the preferences. Rettig said that number one is the current Court Street ramp, number two is the new St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp. Neuzil said in other words, the County would acquire the GSA property in exchange for giving them parking in the http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 10 of 21 City ramps. Rettig said yes. She said they need a photograph and a sentence to describe that. Sullivan said to include that GSA would own those spaces. Harney said when he talked to the GSA representative, one of his concerns was the long term maintenance of a ramp. Rettig said that preference number three is the hybrid option where the County buys some ramp space and provides surface parking lot land area. She said that preference number four is Option #2 on the handouts provided for this meeting. Champion said she wants to bring up one thing before they bring up these options. She thinks the Court Street ramp is pretty full, because the University leases 600 spaces. She said when the University builds their new ramp, that will free up some of those spaces in the Court Street ramp. Champion said, with the new St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp, which is really close to the GSA lot, if that is agreeable, they could have it designed so GSA has their own entrance, and their own spaces. Kempf said it could be designed to accommodate them. Sullivan said the St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp is the best choice because GSA could have it the way they want it. Champion said she knows the City would be willing to work with the County. She said she isn't sure where the City is with designing the ramp yet. Neuzil asked if Champion could get that information for the Board. Champion said yes. She said she thinks the Court Street ramp is going to be problematic. Sullivan said, when he spoke to the City, he was informed that the ramp is full, but that because this is a big enough deal to the City, they would try to negotiate moving tenants from the Court Street ramp to the Old Capitol Mall ramp, if they had to. Champion said that the University's lease on the Court Street ramp spaces is not permanent. She said it is known to be a temporary thing. Sullivan said that when he spoke with Davidson, he said he thought that would be something the City would be willing to try to help with. Champion said she would hope the City would be willing to help work it out. Neuzil said when the committee puts together the list for the hybrid option, he isn't sure how to do that, but he thinks Novak has the general idea. He said there are two tiers of that parking lot and he could imagine having GSA keep the top tier, and the County would acquire the bottom tier. He said it is most important to have something for GSA to take with them. Harney said, when he was talking with Helling, it sounded to him like the Court Street ramp wasn't as much of an option, because of the businesses and so forth that are taking space in that ramp. Sullivan asked if Harney meant the new St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp. Harney said yes. Champion said that won't affect it. She said those businesses will be down below, on ground level. Harney said he hasn't seen a plan. Champion said there has to be entrances into the parking ramp. She said the concept is that it will be like Tower Place or the Court Street ramp where there are businesses on the first level. She said there will be apartments/condos on top. Champion said she will call Davidson and see how far along that plan is. Neuzil added, to see if it is an option or not. Champion said she doesn't know how far along it is. She knows the City is planning on building the parking structure itself, and having private developers develop the retail area and the apartments. She knows that is a decision the City has made already. She said the apartments will be sold as condos, like they did with Tower Place. Champion said if the design is not totally far along and if GSA is willing to do this, the ramp could be designed for GSA to have their own entrance, which would be a real asset. Neuzil said he would like to get a little bit into timing and cost. He said a reason he still likes Option #2 the best, on paper, is in part because it is the cleanest way for the County to be able to do a trade for a trade. Champion agreed. Neuzil said he also gets into the costs associated with things. He asked if they http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 11 of 21 are talking about a cost to the existing County budget or a cost associated with a bond referendum, because those are two different things. Sullivan said he thinks it is a bond referendum. Neuzil said the point is that for the County to look at making modifications to the City's plans for a parking ramp, and the City will wait for a vote on it, he isn't sure the timing will go very well. He said, if they are looking at July, August, or September of 2011 to put this on a ballot initiative, he is pretty sure the City wants to be further along in their design concepts, which would then obligate the County to different standards in regards to the budget. Sullivan said the advantage to the ramps is that they could get the whole city block and then they don't have to worry about the justice center for the next 100 years, because they can continue to expand on that site forever, basically. He said that site has the potential to do everything they would need for a long, long time. Harney said that Option #2 gives the County plenty of space to do that with the closing of Harrison Street. Champion agreed. Sullivan said it gives the County plenty of space for the next 25 years, but the ideal thing would be to get the whole block and put it all to bed forever. Rettig said she doesn't think they can answer these questions because they don't have any clue what GSA has in mind. Neuzil said right, but the question is what is the best option for the County. Rettig said she thinks that Sullivan just said it, in the ideal world, the County buys GSA a floor in the parking ramp, because then the County would obtain the entire block. Neuzil said right, but if the voters vote no, then what. Rettig said they are spending $1.2 million this year on houses, and the County may never use the land. She said they would have property they could sell at some time. Neuzil said they would own the parking ramp, okay. Rettig said no, the County would own GSA's lots. Champion said, if the County owned the parking ramp, they could sell permits for it. She said parking ramps make money, people love them. Neuzil said his point is that it has to come out of the County budget, and not the bond. Sullivan said the County would have to pay for any of these options. He said if they put up a bond referendum and it fails, they are scrambling for other options, but they can always sell property. Harney said he doesn't think GSA will go for a ramp, but they can try. Sullivan said the County has to present their very best option, regardless what they think GSA will do. He said the worst thing GSA can do is to say no. Neuzil asked if GSA simply does not work out, does the County have the space to build a facility without GSA. Novak said he thinks so. Kempf said they could if they had Harrison Street. Sullivan said if they had the houses, too. Neuzil said the houses would be for potential future expansion. He said he thinks that just has to be in the back of their heads here. He said it doesn't necessarily mean that they have parking for the justice center, but at least they have space for the actual center. Kempf said he and Novak were talking, and he almost thinks that in Option #2, it might be in the County's best interest to offer GSA one third of the property with it being a two level ramp instead of offering them two thirds of the property. He said that would give the County more than enough space to build what they need to build and meet future expansion needs. Sullivan said that becomes a new option. Kempf agreed. Novak said he thought of calling it Option #2A. Lyness suggested giving GSA one third of that space plus the jail space property. She said then GSA gets their property if they want to build on it. Rettig said that just got really expensive. She said the County would be building a $3 million ramp for GSA and giving them a $5 million piece of property. Harney said he prefers selling that to the University, if they still want it. Neuzil said he sees Lyness' point, but he still thinks it is spaces for spaces. Novak said if GSA took the one third section, that would be flat and the entrance would be below, which would be GSA's property. He said it would be as inexpensive and as efficient as a ramp could be built because it doesn't have vehicular circulation. He said GSA would get all their parking http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 12 of 21 and the County would get two thirds of a block. Novak said they wouldn't be trading equal square footage of land, but they are investing in giving GSA a two level ramp. Neuzil asked then if the County would build their own separate parking structure or negotiate something with Iowa City. Novak said the value of building that ramp probably equals the value of the land that the County is taking. Neuzil said that could be an argument to share with GSA in regards to value for value. Sullivan said he doesn't want to get too hung up in this idea that the County has to provide hundreds of parking spaces for their own use. He said the County has the Health and Human Serivices Building ramp two blocks away and they can tell people who work in the Sheriffs Office and the County Attorney's Office that they can park in that ramp and walk the two blocks. He said there is a certain amount of public parking that needs to be available. McCarragher said there are security questions. He said if they are trying to make a secure facility, they need to make sure there is a secure space. Rettig said, if they close Harrison Street and take away twenty five parking spots, if she was the City, she would want those spots replaced. Kempf said that is a conversation that hasn't even taken place. Sullivan said the bigger thing for the City though, which he appreciates, is that the City wants judges, attorneys, and people who earn decent salaries to be downtown where they might walk to eat lunch and spend money. Harney said that has not been an issue with the City. Champion said the City would not be that petty. Neuzil said the County's parking needs for the justice center will be dealt with when they get ready to design the justice center. He said the main thing right now is figuring out if the County can acquire this particular piece of property and if they can negotiate some kind of way to reconfigure it, if anything else. Elliott said he was just asking former University of Iowa Campus Planner Larry Wilson about the University's expanded recreation center, which is in Phase two, and how the University wants to have the School of Music here. He wonders how much of the land they are talking about now; might the University be having its eyes on for something they are wanting to do. Harney said most recently, the Henry Sabin Elementary School property. Wilson said Phase two will change things. Neuzil said Phase two will have parking for that structure and a number of other things. Wilson said he is not with the University anymore, but these things have not changed. He said Phase one, which is being completed now, will not require additional parking. He said the surface parking will be adequate on the corner of Madison Street and Court Street. Wilson said when Phase two is built, which will be south of Court Street and west of Madison Street, it will probably require turning that surface lot into a parking ramp. He said if the University does that, they will probably build four or five floors to serve other issues. Wilson said that other than that right now, he doesn't know of anything that will affect it. He said that the School of Music can probably be absorbed pretty well. Sullivan said that is exactly what UI Planning, Design, and Construction Director Rod Lenhertz told them. Wilson asked if he could offer some other observations. Harney said sure. Wilson said one thing he is unsure of when looking at Option #2, is how they can get the surface lot flat enough to be workable without some huge walls. He said any parking lot that floats more than 4% or four feet per 100 feet, the doors to cars cannot open very easily. He said to him, it seems they would need to lower the lot down or raise the other end, and it is usually cheaper to dig into the hillside. Wilson said if they do that, they can't walk out of the lot and walk to anything at the Post Office because that is another level up, so they either need to add steps or something, which takes out parking. He said it also takes out one entrance, off of Prentiss Street. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 13 of 21 Wilson said his view is that the ramp is the best solution, if GSA accepts it. He said it doesn't give GSA the ability to build over. He said his view is that it is in the long-term interest of the County to have the clear lot. With Option #2, it might be difficult having pedestrian access. Wilson said with the Option #5 parking, instead of east-west north-south, it looks like they have about twice the length, and get about 120 stalls per level, so two levels would do it. He said they could enter off of Dubuque Street for the top level, and from Prentiss Street for the lower level, which slopes downhill. He said the problem is the County has to buy property, but apparently it is more available property. Wilson said it seems like he heard that there are some proposed developments discussed for that property in a tour he did for the River Crossing Project. He said someone was looking at having an apartment building with offices and underground parking off of Prentiss Street. He said if that memory is correct, then it suggests that that is a workable solution. Wilson said if they take Option #2A and build a two floor ramp on the west end, to him that is the next best option because it saves more property to be consolidated for the County. He suspects that might not be a big enough footprint to allow for possible future development that GSA might want. He said if he had to go from an ideal point of view, he would suggest looking into Option #5 and Option #2A. Harney said the reason he shies away from Option #5 is that he suggested it in conversations he had with GSA representatives and they didn't want to be that far away. Wilson said that looking at the distance, that is more perception than reality. Harney agreed. Wilson said that spatially, digging into the ground to get the ramp, there could be problems exiting from the east end of the ramp, to get up to the level they want to be at, GSA doesn't understand this. Neuzil said to remember that GSA wants parking for their tenants and their building. Rettig said they enter their building from the west. She said that Option #5 is three blocks away. Neuzil said the County is just looking at what would be its ideal, not what would be GSA's ideal. Sullivan said they have thrown in a couple of monkey wrenches to the mix. He asked if they can come up with a ranking of sorts. Kempf asked if there are any options they can throw out. Sullivan said he doesn't think Option #4 benefits the County. He said that Option #3 isn't big enough. Lyness said if they could reverse Option #4 it might work. She said, then the parking would be on Clinton Street, and build to the west. Sullivan said the reverse of Option #4 is basically what the County will do if they just bought those houses. Neuzil agreed. Kempf said that he is hearing that Option #3 can be eliminated. Sullivan said he thinks that Option #3 and Option #4 can be eliminated. Neuzil said that he also thinks Option #7 is particularly unrealistic. He said, if anyone has talked to the architectural people who just got done with the additional $1 million renovation that was just put into that building, that will be a hard one for the University to stomach. Sullivan said that Option #6 isn't big enough without tearing it down. Elliott said that if Option #5 is too far, then Option #6 and Option #7 are both certainly too far. Neuzil said that Wilson probably knows more, but the State Archaeologists have just invested $1 million into the basement of the building located on Option #7. Rettig said she can't see them ever selling that building. Wilson said, that because of recent remodeling in that building, it is worth quite a bit to the University, and the County might actually be ahead by buying two of those houses and expanding Option #6 and leaving the former A & P building there. Neuzil reiterated that selling the former A & P building is going to be hard for the University to stomach since they just put so much money into it. Harney said the problem he has with that location is the distance. He doesn't think it is very workable. Champion said they won't buy that. http://www. j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 14 of 21 Kempf said he is just trying to make the list a bit smaller. Sullivan said that is four options to throw out. Kempf clarified they are throwing out Options #3, #4, #6, #7. Rettig said, then they have to put in Option #1, Option #2, Option #3, and Option #2A. Kempf said he likes Option #2A before Option #2. Neuzil agreed. Champion said she wouldn't give GSA the Henry Sabin Elementary School property as an option, because she thinks they will like that. Kempf said they are going to like that because it is immediately across the street from GSA's property. Champion said it would be very expensive. Lyness said she thinks that was a discussion several years ago. Kempf agreed. Harney said he visited with former Iowa City Community School District Superintendent Lane Plugge and he said the University is very interested in that now. Kempf asked if that is a yes that they want to show GSA Option #1 as an option in their packet or not. Champion said it's not going to work. Rettig clarified that they are taking off Options #1, #3, #4, #6 and #7 and adding the Court Street ramp, St. Patrick Catholic Church ramp, the hybrid option, and Option #2A. Harney asked how many options they are giving GSA. He thought it was six. Rettig said that is right. She said that Option #2 and Option#5 would stay. Neuzil said Champion will follow up on some of those potential ramp questions. Champion said she will do that on June 3, 2010. Novak said that he thinks Wilson was absolutely right on Option #2 and the slope of that site. He said maybe the County should show Option #2 as a two level ramp with the County using the underground level as secure parking and GSA using the upper level which is two thirds of the lot. He said Option #2A could become two levels which is all GSA. He said it would make Option #2A look even better to GSA. Wilson said he thinks that makes a lot of sense. Elliott said he wants to go back to what Sullivan had said about availability of public parking. He said that as long as there are secure spaces for the security needs, people may need to realize that Iowa City is growing and people may have to walk a block or two sometimes. Neuzil agreed. He said the most important thing right now is seeing if the County can get some GSA space. Sullivan said, if someone has business at the Courthouse, there are literally thousands of parking spaces within two blocks of the Courthouse. He said he is not very sympathetic to someone who says they can't handle that. Champion said plus eventually Iowa City will have another ramp. Judge Doug Russell said they are talking about secure parking spaces for Courthouse staff. He said they could walk miles to work but the issue is with security. Sullivan said he was talking more about the public who is coming to do business. He said there, security is less of an issue. Novak said they really want to separate the judges' parking. He said those need to be more secure. Sullivan said that is a much smaller number. Harney said one of his concerns is that they are forgetting about the Oklahoma City bombing too soon. He has real concerns about a parking ramp next to a justice center or anything along that line. He said it could create a problem. Novak said the way he saw it is that if they did this, it would be GSA, but if the County was over there, it would be secured parking. Champion said people would have to have something to get in and out. Sullivan said that right now, someone can drive right up to the back of the Courthouse. He said anything they do will be an improvement. Novak agreed. He said right now the one thing he doesn't like is public parking under buildings. Sullivan said secured underground parking for staff is a different issue when they have to use an ID to get in. Neuzil asked if the Facilities Subcommittee could forward the packet for GSA to the rest of the committee. Kempf said they will get this pulled together next week and get it to Johnson who can send http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 15 of 21 it on to everyone. REPORT FROM FUNDING/GRANTS SUBCOMMITTEE Rettig referred to a handout, the Funding and Grants Subcommittee June 2, 2010, Report. She said the first page is the same thing the committee received at the last meeting, and the back page is new. She said the Funding and Grants Subcommittee just started working on these items, so they are actually working off the April to July timeline. Rettig said this is a little confusing. She said the numbers are estimates, as of today, and are making assumptions on space, and not reutilizing some space and utilizing some other space. She said since she typed this, the numbers have probably already changed. Rettig said the County currently pays $1.2 million on rent for inmate housing outside of the County. She said it costs the County $100,000 a year to transport inmates, which adds up to a cost of $1.3 million. She said the estimated additional annual cost for the new justice center for Sheriffs staff costs are $1.2 million, additional Sheriff inmate food and etcetera costs are $100,000. She said the actual person who can give her those numbers is not here this week, so that number is a placeholder. She said the additional annual cost for the new justice center for annual building maintenance is $147,000 and that is on a 120,000 square feet new building. Elliott clarified that these are additional costs. Rettig agreed. She said they will subtract out the jail once they get down to the bottom. Rettig said if they build a 120,000 square feet facility, only about 90,000 of it is cleanable. She said that Kempf found national averages and they just multiplied them. Rettig said that for annual utilities costs, they did the same thing by taking the national average and multiplied that out by 120 and got to the number on the handout. She said this plan had a $47 million cost. She said the charts she handed out to the committee last month that County Treasurer Tom Kriz put together had options of $30 million, $40 million, $50 million, etcetera. Rettig said she went ahead and took the $50 million option, assuming that it would get to there. She said total principal and interest is $3.6 million, for a total annual new cost of a new justice center reaching $5.5 million. Rettig referred to the handout and came down to the next line, which subtracts transportation costs to move prisoners. She said they also subtracted the costs of the current jail building, including maintenance, custodial, and utilities. She said the minute they start making changes, everything will change. She said if they say they will reutilize space in the current Courthouse, that will subtract square footage and change everything. Rettig said the minute they say they will reutilize the Jail, that will change everything. She said the total new costs are $3.97 million per year. She said of that, $3.6 million would have been bonded. Rettig said that the numbers are already out of date, so no one should hang their hat on these exact numbers. She said as all the other subcommittees make decisions, there is now a formula to plug in how they got to this point. Harney said the problem of this is that it doesn't address the Courthouse, it is just talking about the Jail. Neuzil said this is for the new facility. He said his question has to do with the total principal and interest and asked if that is on a yearly basis of $3.6 million. He said that seems high. Rettig said not on $50 million over 20 years. Neuzil clarified that they would pay $3.6 million a year for interest. Rettig said for principal and interest. Rettig said that $50 million ends up costing $69.3 million in the end. She said that is based on the rates from May 7, 2010. Neuzil said this is a really good list, but it would be helpful to know the costs associated with the http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 16 of 21 bond money and the local budget. Rettig said it is $300,000. Neuzil said they would need to identify $300,000. Rettig said $328,000. She said they take the total new cost and subtract what was principal and interest. Harney asked what interest rate they plugged in. Rettig said the Bond Counsel plugged it in and it gets up at the last year's to 4.25%. Rettig said the average net interest costs 3.79%. Neuzil said he can't believe that they couldn't find some efficiencies in their ability to build a brand new facility, even adding the additional inmates. He said the design part of that should show some efficiency. Neuzil said he has a hard time thinking they couldn't. Rettig said they can only gather the data given to them. She said Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek says it will cost $1.2 million in additional operations. Harney said they could transport inmates for a long time at that rate. Neuzil said they need to share with Pulkrabek that $1.2 million is not acceptable. Elliott asked if technology is available that would allow equipment to replace some human eyes and human hands. Lyness said she thinks that's what the design is. Currently, the design takes people walking and looking in each cell block. Kempf said every 15 minutes. Lyness said the new design is set up with a central control center that can look out. Neuzil said if the Board is going to tell the community that it will be more expensive in the long run for every aspect of this, people will not vote for this. Rettig said that Pulkrabek does preface this by saying that without knowing the design and whether it is a pod system, it is hard to estimate the costs. She said they should recall that these are the exact same numbers they were given from the Durrant Group, who told them it would cost an additional $1 million. Rettig said a couple of years have passed, and now the numbers from Pulkrabek say it will cost $1.2 million. She reiterated that anytime a decision is made, all the numbers will change. Harney said when they talked about this with Durrant, Rettig was not yet on the Board. Harney said the pod design with the TV cameras was supposed to reduce the number of staff needed, but that has to be offset with the number bed spaces. Neuzil said he wants the Funding and Grants Subcommittee to get more details from Pulkrabek. Lyness said she thinks the size that Durrant had was for 250 beds. She said part of that would be rented to generate income for a period of time until they actually needed the beds. She said the same way Marshalltown is making money off of Johnson County, there are other counties Johnson County could rent the spaces to, since they don't need that many so far. She said that may be part of the cost of the staff. She wondered if there was a way of not opening all the pods at the same time. Lyness said the $1.2 million may be for 250 beds. If the jail has 250 beds, they should be able to generate money through renting those out. Neuzil said this is a really helpful list. Rettig said it shows the worst case scenario. She said if they decide to reutilize 30,000 square feet in the Courthouse, everything will change for the justice center costs. Neuzil asked if the current Jail custodial and utilities could also be deducted. Rettig said she already deducted that. Kempf said that is minus current costs. Rettig said, if it was deemed that they would not reutilize the Jail and they sold it, it could be deducted. She said if they decide to reutilize the Jail, all these numbers would be wrong anyway, because they wouldn't be building 120,000 square feet. Neuzil said there is the suggestion of keeping the storage, kitchen, and keep the Sheriff s department in the existing Jail. Kempf said the maintenance and utility costs will change, but they will still be there. Neuzil said they wouldn't need as much space. Kempf said the numbers would change on the other side, too, because they wouldn't be building as much space. Harney said the problem is the more people they have, the more cooking space, dining space, and laundry space is needed in the facility. Neuzil said he was referring to the suggestion of making the existing Jail into that function, where all the cooking is done. Whiston said this goes back to what Lyness said. She asked if these estimated annual costs are fora 250 bed jail, if that is right. Kempf said this number is based on a 120,000 square foot building, which includes a 250 bed jail. He said if they do http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 17 of 21 90,000 square feet, all the custodial and maintenance costs are different. He said these numbers are based on a dollar amount per square foot as a national average. Whiston said even if they build this size jail, they won't have 250 prisoners to put in it, so they will offset it with rent. Rettig said not necessarily. She said this report, given to them last time, is based on 336 persons. She read from the report "all general housing cells are double-bunked." Rettig said it has support services sized for a facility of 500 persons to accommodate future expansion. She said the common spaces and food spaces and all of that are large enough to get to 500, but the jail capacity built in this is for 336 persons. She said the report also goes through and lists how many courtrooms, etcetera and historic renovation of 25,000 square feet of the existing Courthouse. Whiston said that is more than twice what is needed. Rettig said the County is currently at 200 inmates, 97 are being housed out of the County. Lyness said they aren't at 200. Rettig said they are right at 200. Lyness said they aren't housing 97 inmates in the County. Rettig said there have been days when they have gone over 200. Whiston said they would still have 130 beds. Rettig said the capacity to make money has diminished dramatically, which is why the math on this no longer looks so positive. She said that is because they are getting a $45 a day rate. She said so many counties overbuilt their jails and are now begging Johnson County to bring their prisoners there, and keep lowering the rates. Rettig said she thinks Pulkrabek was just about to get another lower rate. She said that ten years ago the ability to make money on overbuilding a jail existed there, and that is one of the tasks that has been assigned to this committee and they will start looking into it more carefully. She said in talking to Pulkrabek, he said the ability to make money on housing other people's inmates has decreased dramatically, because so many places have overbuilt. Champion said that is true. She said she was just in northern Iowa where they had built a larger jail than they needed, because they were housing prisoners from Minnesota and now the Minnesota people have built their own jail. Harney said that Muscatine is adding to their jail, too. Rettig said one of the things they will begin to do is look into that more carefully. She said they will look into how much they could potentially make from 150 empty beds. She said they will also look into the increased costs for food, maintenance and cleaning. Kempf said, when they say 330 beds double-bunked, that doesn't mean they have to double-bunk all of those when the jail is built. He said it means they have the ability to come in and expand within that space. He said it also means that each potential prisoner has their allotted day room space and the square footage needed for the cell block and common space. He said they have to be able to accommodate that in the future. Unfortunately, that space still has to be cleaned and maintained. Whiston said this all has maintenance, custodial, and utilities fora 336 bed jail. Rettig said no. She said it has it for the square footage. Whiston said that square footage is determined on the basis of a 336 person jail. Kempf said a maximum of 330 beds. He said they wouldn't have to put in that many beds. Whiston said they would be crazy not to, if they had the space. Kempf said not necessarily. He said they could build the cell blocks but they wouldn't necessarily double-bunk all of them to start with. He said they would probably only double bunk half of the cell blocks. Harney said it would be the same space, just less people. Rettig said there is a new pod system that is prefabricated. She said if they weren't going to use a cell block and couldn't make money and it wasn't worth it now, they wouldn't go to that expense for ten years. Whiston said these numbers are assuming that they are utilizing this entire space. Kempf said yes. He said they have to have a number somewhere to start with. Elliot said they are saying there may be less maintenance costs, because they wouldn't have to maintain the excess space. Whiston said it seems to her that if they finish all the space http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 18 of 21 they will have some ability to rent some space and offset their costs. Wilson said there would be an additional option to shell the space. Rettig said the major costs won't change. She said those are Sheriffs staff costs, principal, and interest. She said, if they were going to save any money on maintenance, custodial, and utilities, it would be relatively low, maybe $25,000. Whiston asked if Rettig is saying that Sheriffs staff costs wouldn't vary between 200 beds and 336. Rettig said that the $1.2 million is for 200 beds. Whiston and Lyness asked if that was for 200 beds. Rettig said it is for the size it is at the current Jail. She doesn't think, if they go to double-bunk, that new Sheriffs staff costs would go up another 50%. She said they would be double bunking, so it would be monitoring the same square footage. Rettig said one way Sheriff s staff costs could go down, which she thinks Sullivan is getting at, is if they shelled out some of it and didn't put in pods. She said they might not have to get to $1.2 million right away. McCarragher said they are looking at $3.6 million. He said they are talking about a building that is probably going to last much longer than 20 years. He said after 20 years they are dropping $3.6 million. McCarragher said if they are going to take this to the public to vote, they have to talk about a building that's going to last 30 to 50 years. He said they can take that principal and interest and flatten it out for a long period of time. He said these are all good points, but they also need to point out that the County is getting a secure building, something that is more efficient and something that will last a long time and can easily be added on to in the future. This is a great framework. Rettig said it will change with every decision the CJCC makes, but now they kind of know how to do it. It won't take them as long to figure out, because they now have numbers they can plug back in. Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton asked for clarification. He asked if on the $50 million bond issue the interest costs would be $19 million over the period. Rettig said that as of May 7, 2010, if they were bonding that day, they would have paid $69,346,802 over 20 years. Stratton referred to the first page, which said that the sales tax would return $17.5 million per year. He asked if that was right. Rettig said they would have to go to the State Legislature and change the law, and then pass the sales tax. Stratton said that in four years they could more than pay off $50 million, if that was done. He said there would be no $19 million in interest then. Neuzil said yes, but they would have to get the Iowa Legislature and the Governor to allow them to go beyond. Stratton asked if that is because of the current flood tax. Rettig said that is a new number that County Auditor Tom Slockett told her about right before this meeting, and that he will help work on in the coming weeks. She said, if they passed the rural part of the flood sales tax that failed, she said that Slockett wants to figure out what that would generate for the County in revenue. She said they would also have to pass a bond referendum at the same time. She said they would be passing a sales tax and a bond referendum because the sales, on the rural end only, would never generate enough to pay for the justice center. Harney agreed. Neuzil said to get a sales tax for this project, every city, and the rural area, would need to agree to put their penny into this project. This would be after they got the Iowa Legislature to allow for this. He said they could wait until the other one expires and then be able to capture that extra penny, but again, every community would have to agree to do this. Neuzil said that would be a fairly monumental task and would hold them back a couple more years. Elliott said that the way it is now, additional sales tax is not a viable alternative. He said, if they combined it with a bond issue, he thinks they would be dead in the water. Harney said it is his thought that the Legislature needs to change, so the County can put it out to all the cities and then when this one expires, they would be right about ready and could jump on that penny sales tax. He said it would have to be voted on as a whole group and the Legislature would have to change their law and pass it. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 19 of 21 Elliott said they are talking about voting on continuing what they have now, as opposed to adding a new tax. Harney said they would revote it, because if the Legislature would change the way someone could do it, the County could put it on the ballot for the whole County rather than each city having to do it. Neuzil said he thinks that is absolutely unrealistic. He asked when the other one expires. Harney said in two years. Neuzil asked if everyone wants to wait two years. Harney said they are going to end up doing that anyway. Champion said it will be at least two more years. Neuzil asked why everyone thinks that. He said he thinks they can put something on the ballot next year. Harney said he doesn't think it will fly. Neuzil said he thinks they need to have that discussion soon, particularly before July 2011. Champion said the thing about it is they don't have architectural drawings yet or marketable drawings. Neuzil said according to this plan though, if they follow through with this plan, there will be architectural drawings by July 2011. Champion said if Neuzil is talking about 2011, then yes, they could be done by then. Neuzil said, if anyone thinks they can get the Iowa Legislature and the Governor to pass an additional local option possibility for local governments for a County system, and bypass the City system, best of luck to them, it is not going to happen. Champion also said it is not going to happen. Elliott asked Neuzil if they can pay down on a bond. If they have a $50 million bond, and then got a local option tax that would provide them with $17 million, could they dump that in. Rettig said it depends on how the bonds work. Neuzil said he doubts they would be able to do that because they probably wouldn't be able to get in-house for the borrowing. Elliott said most people that would sell the County that bond would want the $19 million in interest. Neuzil agreed. Harney said that at the JECC they can't do that, they can't prepay, they would have to pay the interest anyhow. Neuzil said it is an option that has to be explored and has to be studied a little bit. Harney asked if they could do what the Iowa Board of Regents does and sell investment bonds, that would be up to the Finance Committee. Rettig asked who did this. Harney said the Regents do it for stadiums and so forth. He asked if the County could sell bonds where people invest in it for a period of time. Rettig said they would be selling bonds. Harney said the County does it separately, through the taxation side. Neuzil said that is secured through the State, not through a separate investment. Rettig asked if Harney is talking about selling double tax exempt bonds. Neuzil said he wanted to bring up the potential option of having a city be a part of this discussion. He said the potential of being able to allow a police department to be built through this process needs to be explored. Rettig said she handed out Chapter 346 last time and she doesn't think Lyness was able to study it yet. She said everyone should have gotten this copy. She said it is a tool the Legislature created and whether or not it would apply in this case is unknown. Rettig said basically they would create some kind of bond authority who has authority over the bonds, not the facility. She said that because they do that, they would have to have a 50% majority to do it. Neuzil said what he is getting at there is, if they were able to identify the existing Jail and say as part of the remodeling of the existing Courthouse, they would remodel the existing Jail as a part of this package that would be turned into the new Iowa City Police Station. He said, if that is eligible, it would allow them to be able to create this bond authority, so they would need 50% approval instead of 60% approval. The history across the United States of getting 60% approval versus 50% approval is gigantic. He said it is very difficult to get 60% and a whole lot less difficult to get 50%. He said it should be in the equation. He said either a fire station or police station could be converted. Elliott said http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 20 of 21 he knows that the previous City Manager was very interested in the City having a part of this for the Police Department. Neuzil said he thinks that getting Iowa City involved in this process would be beneficial. Harney said that would be an investment made by the City. Neuzil said it would be a part of the bond referendum. Harney doesn't think it will work, because then there are three other police departments that the County is not furnishing space for. Neuzil said that would be up to them to understand what would be in the best interest for public safety. He said he thinks the City of Coralville would be interested. Rettig said that it says any joint building acquired, owned, erected, constructed, controlled or occupied in accordance with the authorization in this section. She said it doesn't say that that they have a building and the County has a building. Kempf said the County would just have to use part of the existing Jail. Rettig said it seems to her that they could only do that bonding for that building then. She said the building across the street would be another building. Neuzil said, not unless it is connected. Rettig said this is a question for Lyness. Neuzil said it just needs to be out there as a possibility. He said for the County to potentially get 50% versus 60%, bring public safety into the fold here, and Iowa City, Harney is right that there would be some negotiations among other communities to share with them why the value of this is important to Coralville and North Liberty in particular. Harney said, when he talked to the previous City Manager about the idea, it was to bring them into the facility with the Sheriff's Office where they can share records and other tasks. Whiston asked, if it would change a lot of their planning, if they want to move in this direction. Neuzil said there are plans for a justice center, but right now there are not plans for the existing Jail. They would have enough space to move the Sheriff's Office into the new facility. He said there would be costs associated with refurbishing the existing Jail into a fire station or police station. Neuzil said he is thinking that as far as a community need, where the County has a courthouse issue and a jail issue, the County seat is here, Iowa City, that has a space issue. Whiston said it seems if they are serious about this, it seems like something they should figure out sooner rather than later. Neuzil said that is why it is being brought up. He said they didn't even know about this option until last month. Elliott said the City does have a need. Neuzil said it has to be out there as an option, 50% is a whole lot better than 60%. Elliott thanked the Funding and Grants Subcommittee for all their hard work. Neuzil agreed. Rettig said they will just modify it every time the Committee makes a decision. Harney clarified that everyone is aware that July 7, 2010, is the meeting with GSA. Whiston said she is going to be out of town that day and requested that packets are put together for people who aren't present. She said she didn't know about things that have been handed out, otherwise she doesn't know how to find out what she needs to review before the next meeting. Harney said Johnson can provide whatever materials are available. SET NEXT MEETING DATE The next meeting is scheduled for July 7, 2010, at 4:30 p.m. Adjourned at 6:18 p.m. Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 21 of 21 By Cynthia Courter, Recording Secretary http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100602j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 1 of 15 MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE: uss-us-~u JULY 7, 2010 I P 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Report from Alternatives And Treatments Subcommittee Report from Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee Justice Center Plannin amend Obiectives Report from Facilities Subcommittee Meeting~with Representatives of General Services Administration Report from Funding/Grants Sub-Committee Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members Set Next Meeting Date Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building, Conference Rooms 203B and 203C, at 4:30 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan. Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members present were: County Attorney Janet Lyness, County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek, Judge Doug Russell, Iowa City City Council Member Connie Champion, Bar Association Representative James McCarragher, Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton, Citizen Representative Bob Elliott, Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden, MECCA Acting Director Ron Berg, and Department of Corrections Supervisor Jerri Allen. Staff present: Executive Assistant Andy Johnson and Auditor's Office Recording Secretary Nancy Tomkovicz. REPORT FROM ALTERNATIVES AND TREATMENTS SUBCOMMITTEE County Attorney Janet Lyness said the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee met July 6, 2010, and looked over what the Novak Design Group had designed. The subcommittee realized a weekend courtroom is not included in the proposal, although they could potentially use one of the other ones. No spaces are identified for any kind of Alternatives and Treatments. The Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee will have a recommendation in terms of increasing some additional conference room type space, and hopefully it could be divided up into multiple sizes. There is no meeting room space identified for meetings between attorneys and clients. Space was not identified for conducting substance abuse evaluations, Jail Alternatives meetings, and things like that. Part of the proposal from the Public Outreach Subcommittee is to look over the proposals, talk, and try to come up with a specific proposal for the needs of Alternatives and Treatments. The Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee will prepare a written document of what is missing from the Novak proposal and what they think needs to be included. Lyness said she also had a report from MECCA on the Substance Abuse Services that have been provided for June 2010. MECCA staff attended court appearances on 29 days. There was a furlough day during June 2010. Forty-two assessments were requested, and 42 were completed. Three people needed further assessments. Seventeen assessments were completed on weekends. No evaluations were completed with an interpreter. Four people were referred from the Public Defender's Office. Lyness said that is a very good report, 42 is a pretty high number for assessments, and she thinks that program is working very well. She is appreciative to MECCA for their efforts. Stutsman said she is on that subcommittee, but is not getting notifications of those meetings. Lyness http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 2 of 15 apologized. Stutsman said she knows there was one meeting she couldn't make and Lyness said that was the only one. County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said it was his understanding that the Novak Design Group was just looking at square footage and didn't lay out all the specifics. The square footage needed for the things the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee identified is in there. It is just that they didn't lay everything out specifically, because they weren't drawing up specific plans. Pulkrabek said his understanding is that Novak Design Group Architect Jim Novak said the square footage is in there. It is just not labeled specifically and cut out individually. Lyness said this may be included in what Novak refers to as housing. It just wasn't very clear what was in the layouts for housing or where that would go. The Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee was looking at the layout at the different things that are in the packet. They just didn't see anything in housing that would accommodate, for example, 12 to 15 people for Batterer's Education Program classes or substance abuse classes. It can't occur now, but later on religious groups, GED programming, or things like that might also need accommodations in the building in addition to some of the restorative justice and treatment alternatives they would like to have. If it is in there, it just isn't clear, and maybe they just need to check with Novak. Neuzil said it is identified as one of the goals laid out in the upcoming agenda item for Alternatives and Treatments. Over the next three months they will determine what the space needs are. The specifics are one thing that the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee will have to identify in the process. Facilities Manager David Kempf said he knows that Novak has square footage assigned for those types of things. He knows it is not called out specifically and at some point in time they are going to have to start identifying exactly what those things are. If there is a list he can certainly get that information to Novak to see if it is included. Kempf said he can see if that much space is included in there and if not, make sure that the programming is adjusted accordingly. Members of the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee just need to get that information to Kempf. Lyness said other things that were not specifically included in the packet included exercise areas and a library. Kempf said he knows those things are included in the square footage the Novak Design Group is calling out, but it is just not called out specifically. Kempf said when they are doing schematics like that they can't call out all of those things. He remembers specifically talking to Novak about it. Those are all accounted for. Lyness said when they looked through the proposal they could not find anything that seemed to identify those areas. Kempf said he can ask Novak where those spaces are identified, and whether it is adequate or enough. Lyness said as they looked at the square footage, and the money, too, that is not at all clear. The Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee just wanted to make sure that is not missing. If it is missing, it needs to be added in. Kempf said once again, what Novak did was a very preliminary study, a needs assessment. He added that Novak said, if there are things they need to change, the County just needs to let him know. Novak will do an updated version with a date on it, so it will be clear when the last revision was. This is the type of feedback they need to ultimately get back to Novak. Lyness said that is what they were trying to do. They were trying to figure out what needs to be included, and if it is not in there, to make sure it is. Kempf said they just need to get that information to him and he can funnel it to Novak. Citizen Representative Bob Elliott said to Kempf that would be a next step or at least a future step. If it were financed, they would be identified as line items, so they would know how much room there is for dining, how much for cooking, how much for exercise, and how much for meetings. Kempf said once they know where the facility is going to be, that is when they start actually naming the spaces. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 3 of 15 That is actually when they start naming rooms, figuring out the synergy, and how they lay out with one another. That is the next phase. Kempf said that what Elliott is talking about right now is the information Kempf needs to get back to Novak to make sure it is included in the initial report they are dealing with right now. Lyness said, so when they are looking at how much square footage they are going to need for different things, they know they are not missing square feet. Bar Association Representative James McCarragher asked Kempf if there is a component list that Novak prepared when he determined the square footage. He asked if Novak had an itemization of components and what square footage of those components would be. He asked if that is how Novak arrived at the total square footage and if that would be available for the Subcommittee to look at. Kempf said the information they have came from items called out in the Durrant Report, that they talked about it with the Sheriffs Office and with the Court Services in order to identify those things and to look at things that are required by law to meet the State Jail Standards. They have to assign so many square feet for each potential inmate, and each cell block has to have so much common space. That drives how big the kitchen has to be and the information is assembled from many sources. McCarragher asked how they arrived at the total square footage, if they didn't have specific components. Kempf said Novak does have specific components that they got from all the people they talked to and from the previous report. He said that Novak did go through the information and identify spaces for courtrooms, for beds, etcetera. Novak did identify all of those spaces. Kempf said, if McCarragher is asking if there is a master list that just calls out the name of each individual space, that isn't available. He asked if that makes sense. McCarragher said that makes sense; he is just pondering how Novak was able to arrive at a total without having the specific components identified. Kempf said Novak has an overall list of all the things that are needed which was arrived at through the interviews they did with the people at the Sheriff s Office, at the Courthouse, with the County Attorney, and also by utilizing information that was in the first study that was done. Novak has a very comprehensive list of what is required to build a justice center. McCarragher asked if Novak's report would, for example, identify Courtrooms at 20,000 square feet. Kempf said yes, but also that he hasn't told Novak they need four custodial closets. In this situation, there is a percentage of common space or of static space for a building that is 190,000 square feet and is expected to take up 3% for all the mechanical rooms and those types of things. Kempf said Novak said it is possible they didn't get everything and that is why he made the statement that as the Subcommittee looks at this and comes up with things that are not included, but should have been included, or aren't called out the way they should be, Novak should be made aware of those things, so he can make the revisions. The revisions will include a date, so that committee members will know which version they are working with. McCarragher asked if they don't know what was included, how can they tell Novak what was not included. McCarragher said that would be something they would work on as time progresses. He thinks that at some point a list from Novak identifying what was not included would be useful to have. Kempf said the list is there. Lyness said that when they were looking at that the design from Novak, there is nothing that identifies exercise space in there. There is something that says work release treatment, and it is marked as housing. She said that may be what they were thinking of with the conference room, but she is not clear on that. Kempf said he can get clarification. He knows that when Novak refers to inmate housing, that refers to everything that is required to house an inmate based on the Jail Standards. That includes dayroom space, exercise space, and everything they have to have in order to house an inmate. Lyness said the square footage may include that, but it just isn't specifically called out. Kempf said that is why he would like the Subcommittee to send him that information, so he can ask Novak if those are in there, and if so, where. If it is not, they need to add it. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 4 of 15 REPORT FROM PUBLIC INFORMATION/OUTREACH SUBCOMMITTEE Justice Center Planning and Objectives McCarragher said the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee met and revised the Planning and Objective Schedule, which they passed out at the last meeting. They sent it out for comments. He would like to see if there is anyone who has any comments on the specific areas that are delineated. If there are no comments he would like to seek approval of this Planning and Objectives Schedule so that they can move forward. He asked if anybody had any comments, suggestions, additions, subtractions, or modifications to the document. Neuzil said the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee did add a significant objective they thought was missing. If they notice the very last one listed, it was the encouragement of an outside organization or organizations coming together to create a community committee that would be in charge of advocating for this project. That was added to the process. That was probably the most significant change they have had, other than changing the dates to reflect the beginning of July 2010 through July 2011. Stutsman asked if there were any other changes. Elliott said there were no changes. He asked if there is still a unit or organization made up of representatives of all the civic organizations in this area. He doesn't belong to any of them, so he doesn't know. It seems to him there used to be. Neuzil said they have a fairly significant list. It is one of their responsibilities to identify all of the different organizations. Elliott asked if there is a central coordinating unit. Stutsman said there used to be something at the library years ago. Elliott said something like when the city councils of Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, and Johnson County get together. He asked if there is anything like that. Pulkrabek said the Joint Cities Meeting. Rettig said they just had it the week of June 28, 2010. Neuzil asked if Elliott is talking about for them individually as a government. Elliott said for his personal information he is just thinking something like that would be a place to start. Iowa City City Council Member Connie Champion said the service clubs have a joint meeting with each other. Neuzil said no. The Rotary Club has a breakfast that does bring together quite a few of those social organizations, but he doesn't think it would necessarily have an umbrella for all of them. Stutsman said there is a Joint Service Club meeting where University of Iowa President Sally Mason presents a State of the University talk. Neuzil said they do, and have, already started generating a list of all of the potential organizations. Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden said the library does maintain a list. Rettig said that on the Planning and Objectives document page dated May to July 2011, it indicates that all of the CJCC Subcommittees will join the speakers' corps. She is not sure, at least for the Funding and Grants Subcommittee's perspective, that she has the capacity to pledge that. She is not sure whether they will choose to be a part of the speakers' corps or not. The rest of it is providing data, information, and whatnot, and that goes to a different level. Rettig said she is not willing to commit to that on behalf of her Subcommittee. Neuzil said maybe what speaker's corps means is not spelled out correctly, but that would be similar to the CJCC holding some community forums. It would be similar to what they tried to do as a County in 2000 with education and outreach. The idea was that once things have gotten to a point where they are checked off, eventually everyone would just be a part of that final presentation. That is what a speakers' corps is. He just meant basically education and outreach by all CJCC members at that point. Rettig said again she would say she is not sure anyone on the Funding and Grants Subcommittee http://www. j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100707j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 5 of 15 would commit to being a part of that. Neuzil said it would be strange for all of them to work for an entire year for advocacy for this, and then not advocate for it. Rettig said she is not sure that that Subcommittee is doing any advocacy. It is doing research and outreach. She is not sure that anyone on that Subcommittee is willing to sign on the dotted line that they will be doing advocacy. Neuzil said all he is suggesting is that once they get to July 2011, it would be common sense that those who have served for the entire year providing information in regards to grants and funding would also be out there as a resource to advocate for the information. Rettig said it would be illegal for one member of the committee to advocate. The others would have freedom of speech on their own. She is not willing to sit here and commit them to that. McCarragher said he thinks they can work with that. Neuzil said he is not going to get into an argument over it. When he says advocate he means educate. Rettig said legally they are two totally different things. Neuzil said, if Rettig doesn't have someone on the Funding and Grants Subcommittee who wants to provide any information, then don't let them. McCarragher said he thinks maybe they could change the language from join to assist with speakers corps. The idea was, if they needed people from the various committees to actually be at a forum to present their particular aspect of this plan, it would be nice if they could ask. The CJCC is not saying they have to join, and maybe the word join is not what they are really saying. They are saying that by that time, they have had input from all of the committees and there may be a time where they have a presentation where they would like to have subcommittee members assist, whether it be to give additional data, or help present. They are not talking about people having to be there to present a presentation necessarily. He suggested changing the word to assist. Pulkrabek suggested the language could be to provide information to the speakers' corps. Stutsman suggested including the word resource. Champion said there is going to have to be somebody at every service club and maybe even Parent Teacher Association (PTA) meetings. They are going to have to get out there and tell people what this is all about. It is not going to happen through the newspaper. Stutsman said she thinks the key is to educate the public. Champion said the CJCC does need a speakers group, and there is no question about it. They need to gather information to use and let them say what they want to say. Pulkrabek said when the time gets closer, the CJCC will need to really expand the Information and Outreach Subcommittee. That is when they are going to look for lots of members and then spread out from there. He said he assumes this is in the document, but he just doesn't see where it is. Stutsman said it looks like it is item D under Information and Outreach. McCarragher said he thinks it is item C on the May to June 2011 page, which reads "expanding relationships with outside organizations." The intent of the subcommittee is to grow and to send tentacles out to any organization that would advocate on the CJCC's behalf, including the Iowa Bar Association. He is confident they can secure the services of plenty of people to advocate on the CJCC's behalf and speak at organizations. At the same time, when they, as committee members to the CJCC are out in the community, certainly people will be asking questions. They are joining in that respect in advocating this project. They are assisting with whatever information they can provide. McCarragher said it wasn't so much that they are going to assign speaking engagements, it is just at that point in time they see information and resources from many different directions in this committee, and it may be beneficial for them to call on those committees to at least ask for assistance, whether it be in the form of additional information at that time or their presence at a forum where they think there may be a lot of questions asked. Public Information/Outreach is the Subcommittee who is supposed to go out there and make the presentations and see that the presentations are being made. He doesn't expect the other subcommittees who have done their work to now undertake the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee's work. That wasn't the intent. Sullivan asked if on page three of the document, it should read November 2010 to January 2011, and if on page four, it should read February 2011. McCarragher said yes. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 6 of 15 Rettig said on the last page under Information and Outreach, this is the period from May to July 2011, item A is to develop potential ballot language, and then item F is make recommendation for date of election. If the intent is to put this before the voters sometime in 201 1, those dates would be too late. That would be her advice. For example, the last time they did acounty-wide ballot initiative the Campaign Committee had the language and were already campaigning on May 1st. If they are interested in voters at least having the option to vote on this in 2011, this timeline is not aggressive enough. Elliott said he agrees with that and he thinks that doesn't mean a time to start organizing. It seems to him by then they should have the plan all mapped out, so somebody is able to push the button and make it go by May 1, 2011. He asked if that was what Rettig is saying. Rettig said she is not exactly clear on that, but she believes if the intent is to vote on this in the fall of 2011, it should be out in front of the voters by May 2011. That would be her instinct. Neuzil suggested maybe move item A to February- April 2011. Rettig added and move item F to February-Apri12011. Elliot said it seems to him that a lot of thought has to go into who makes up the speakers unit. That is vitally important. Pulkrabek asked where the ballot language is on item F. Rettig said it is on the very last page entitled May-July 2011 under Information and Outreach, item A and item F. Pulkrabek asked if it is their opinion that they should move those two up to February 2011-April 2011. Rettig said that is her opinion. Sullivan said along similar lines, assuming they are going to the voters, they have typically had the ballot language determined by the bond counsel. He assumes they are bonding and asked if they have to hire somebody to write the ballot language. Lyness said right, they have usually used bond counsel to figure out the language, but it is not that difficult. Sullivan said they would have to hire counsel, and that would take some time. If they want it done by May 2011 they are talking about starting to communicate with bond counsel in February or March 2011. Lyness said right. Rettig said she found one more. CJCC Committee item C on the last page says, "determines date for election." She said that would have to be moved up. Stutsman said, following up on Sullivan's comment, she asked if Sullivan was suggesting moving hiring bond counsel to the November 2010 to January 2011 objectives. Sullivan said maybe in there somewhere. Lyness said it is not going to hurt to do it early. Rettig said that begs the question that none of that is budgeted for. Lyness said usually the bond counsel does the work and then gets paid a percentage if the bond is passed. Rettig said they don't pay them in advance. Lyness said she doesn't think they paid when they did the Conservation Bond. That was something that came out of the bond, and the person gets paid if it passes. It depends on how many questions there are, but she doesn't think the County was billed when the bond counsel drafted the language for the Conservation Bond issue. Neuzil asked where that item would fall, November to January, item A maybe. He asked if the bond counsel would fall under Funding and Grants. Lyness said it is probably under CJCC. Sullivan said it would technically be a contract with the Board. Rettig said it would have to fall under a subcommittee that's writing the bond language, because that is why they are working with the bond counsel, to get the concept of the bond language in such a way that the bond gets voted on in a way that allows them to do what they want. A subcommittee that is writing or working on the bond language is the one who would be most involved with the bond counsel. Pulkrabek said that would be the Information and Outreach Subcommittee. Stutsman said to go ahead and make that item E under November 2010 to January 2011 objectives. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 7 of 15 Champion said she loves this document and it's fabulous, but it's not going to happen unless the CJCC gets one person to coordinate everything. Neither the Board members nor the CJCC members have the time to get this all done this quickly. It's been her experience that things don't move very fast in the County. She is suggesting that the Board of Supervisors think again, whether it is Elliott, or hiring somebody who is willing to devote full time to coordinate all of this. She doesn't see this happening at any pace at the rate the CJCC is going now. Champion said she knows she sounds really terrible, but she has been on this committee for ten years and she doesn't see much progress in ten years. The CJCC still doesn't have a definite plan about where the justice center is going to be built. They don't have a building plan, they don't have a site plan. They don't have anything definite. She said she knows she is really out there sometimes and is very blunt, but if this is going to happen, she would thank heaven if it did, but it is not going to happen without somebody full time coordinating all these committees and seeing that things get spelled out. She said that otherwise she just has to go home, because she has other things to do. This is not going to happen at this rate. She said she knows she sounds really terrible. Sullivan said he thinks Champion's frustration is understandable because she has been doing this a long time. However, he said he would respectfully disagree and thinks it is just a matter of political will. There is very little here that can't be done by either a subcommittee or by hiring somebody to do individual pieces. He doesn't think it's a matter of hiring a person, but a matter of just political will. The CJCC just has to decide they are going to do it, and people have to hold their feet to the fire. Then it can happen. It is up to people up here to continue to make smaller decisions that move towards the goal. That has not happened up to this point. Champion said she hopes they are all willing to do that. Neuzil said he thinks having this document is really something to put their feet to the fire. Sullivan said it is a blueprint. Neuzil said this is the timeline of events they, collectively as the CJCC, need to adhere to in order to accomplish the things they have accomplished. There is a lot of pressure on the particular subcommittee chairs to see that the work is getting done. It is particularly important for the subcommittee chairs to say if there is something they don't agree with. This is the time to call it out, before it is voted on. Lyness said the Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee thinks that this is quite doable. McCarragher said he thinks they are ready to vote on it, with the changes that have been made at this meeting, if people are willing to do that. The idea of passing it out was to have people take a look at it to see if there were some comments, and there have been some great comments. It is a worksheet they put together, and they are looking to everyone to help assist. They are not trying to tell others what to do. Each of the subcommittees know what they are supposed to be doing, or have a better idea for what each of them wants to do. They are just trying to put it down on paper so that things move forward. Pulkrabek said he is curious about the process. The CJCC approves this, but he asked if it has to go to the Board on an informal or formal agenda. Stutsman said no. Pulkrabek asked if, because they are all here, when they approve it, will it move forward. Neuzil said he thinks they will probably have some sense of if there are some issues. If it seems to be that there isn't a majority of the Board, then some of that has to go in front of the Board of Supervisors for further discussion. Harney said with regards to the speakers' corps, it sounds to him like they have a core group that is going to go out and do all the talking. The language in the document just needs to be reworded to reflect that it is everybody getting in support of this, helping sell it to groups, or wherever they may go to talk. He asked if the CJCC is going to try to bond for this or are there going to be some possible alternatives that might be available, like a partial sales tax. McCarragher said the Funding and Grants Subcommittee's would be the people to look for alternative funding methods, and then come up with the actual funding. Whether it is all done by bond, part of it done by sales tax, or whatever is going to be done, it is part of their objectives. Stutsman asked if McCarragher would make a motion. McCarragher http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 8 of 15 said he would move that the document presented on July 7, 2010, for discussion entitled CJCC Justice Center Planning and Objectives, as modified by comments of Rettig and others, be adopted, and that a new document be sent out to all members of the committee after it has been amended. Lyness seconded the motion. Stutsman said it has been moved and seconded to adopt the CJCC Justice Center Planning and Objectives with the changes that have been discussed. Champion asked if the CJCC is really going to wait until July 2011 before finishing the items listed on page one of the document. If they are going to sell this to the voters by fall 2011, they need a specific plan to show them. She is a little concerned when she reads the item stating to hire an architect to create options for the justice center. She asked if that could be explained that to her. McCarragher said they were just talking about what is going to be in the justice center, so when the architect draws up the plans, they are going to have to say exactly how it is going to be laid out. The first page is just a summary or overview of what is going to happen during that period of time, and then the time frame is broken down in the subsequent pages. Champion said alright, now she understands. Rettig said to Champion that some of that couldn't happen before July 2011. The reason is that they don't have anything budgeted other than money to purchase houses, if they are available for sale. Unless the CJCC could find it within their budget that just started a week ago, nothing else was budgeted. That is why she asked whether they have to pay the bond counsel up front, because hiring an architect wasn't budgeted either. Rettig said they can add the bond language and not what it's really going to look at. They could be moving forward and then get drawings and renderings at a later time. Champion said she is just asking because when she chaired the Shelter House Campaign they had at least preliminary drawings that showed basically what the structure was going to look like and what was going to be in it. The drawings did not show exact measurements but rooms and designations. People knew exactly what they were being educated about. She thinks a lot of that was really important because people didn't understand what was going to be in there. Her concern is that before they start speaking to groups and trying to advocate, that they have drawings. She will want to show the public that the building will have a place for alternatives, it is going to have a place for education, it's going to have an exercise room, and a place for lawyers to meet, it's going to have places for all those things people complained weren't in the Jail the last time. If the CJCC doesn't have that they can't start educating the public. Citizen Representative Professor Emeritus John Stratton asked if there is a hard reason to go for November 2011 rather than November 2012. McCarragher said he thinks they wanted to try to be as aggressive as they can. The good thing about the vote at this meeting, is that they all hope they can meet this deadline. He understands Champion's concern. They may hit bumps in the road, but unless a commitment is made to do it and there is energy among all the subcommittees and CJCC members to move forward here, they are never going to move forward, and the ten years of frustration are going to continue. What this document does is provide a working tool for the CJCC to try to achieve a goal within a stated period of time. Neuzil said as far as the potential dates, if they look at the responsibilities under Information and Outreach, it does say that they will look at potential dates in both 2011 and 2012 and bring that back to the CJCC. Stratton said he doesn't disagree with wanting to move forward. Certainly he does too. There are many issues that he thinks haven't been decided that may not be easily decided. Some examples are, how much to spend on the whole project and how to finance it. It will take some time to make decisions on those issues. The CJCC has to have that information before May 2011 if they are going to have something to sell. If the CJCC members can accomplish that in four or five months, that is great, but if they can't, they need to be flexible and ready to move that date. He doesn't want that to be a date where if they don't make it, everything comes to a halt. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD 0... Page 9 of 15 Neuzil said he thinks that as they look at some of the things that are identified on the timeline, it seems like they may look and amend this. In particular is how much money is going to be needed. That item is laid out for February 2011, but they may determine that three months earlier and it is ok to get ahead. They just need to make sure they don't get behind. Stutsman asked if they are ready to vote. She said all those in favor signify by saying aye. All members voted aye and Stutsman said motion carried. She thanked the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee for getting the CJCC to this point. She said they have their blueprint now, so they can move forward. REPORT FROM FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE Meeting with Representatives of General Services Administration Harney said the Facilities Subcommittee hadn't really met except for this morning, July 7, 2010. General Services Administration (GSA) Representative Kevin Rothmier and GSA Director of Regional Counsel Dennis O'Connell were at the meeting. They walked through all the sites with the Board, the Sheriff, and the County Attorney. He said that Rothmier and O'Connell were very upfront with what they can and cannot do. Harney said he was quite pleased with Rothmier and O'Connell's openness and willingness to work with the County, and he thinks most of the Board was as well. It appeared that GSA is very interested in allowing the County to build on the south half of that parking lot, and GSA would take the upper part of the parking lot, and the County could have some parking underneath. They would give the County a good amount of the lot to build in the future. That is a proposal Rothmier and O'Connell seemed interested in, but they didn't make any commitments. They viewed the five alternative sites the County has, and said they need six to eight weeks to review everything before responding with what they may be interested in. The County will work with them at that point. Neuzil said the meeting was very positive. In regards to the GSA lot and the Federal Post Office, Rothmier and O'Connell identified that they wanted to have parking no more than two to three blocks away from the Post Office, and they want to have the ability to possibly have future building on that site for themselves. They want to maintain the right to build. Additionally, the values have to be equal or whole for an exchange. If the County has anything to give up, it has to be of equal exchange. In this case, the potential of reshifting the existing parking lot that GSA owns would provide that. There is also the possibility that GSA would be interested in multiple parcels. Options 3 or 3A reconfigures the parking lot, GSA doesn't lose any parking spaces, and it allows the County to at least have a piece of property that would be closer to the Courthouse. Stutsman said that Rothmier and O'Connell said they were most interested in Option 3. Harney said GSA responds, the County won't know, but that would be a cost to the County. They would have to build a parking facility for GSA, and that would be part of the project. Stutsman said one of the other positive things out of the meeting is that Iowa City Planning and Community Development Director Jeff Davidson was there for part of the meeting. She thinks they were able to demonstrate that there was good cooperation between the County and the City in getting this project to move forward. That was very appealing to Rothmier and O'Connell, so the County appreciates the City's contribution. Champion said she doesn't have her minutes notes, but they discussed the 3A option the last time. She asked Harney if that was acceptable to the CJCC too. Sullivan said it was the CJCC's third choice, and that's how it became option 3. Harney said GSA was very clear that they wanted a space available for future building. GSA didn't mind the offers of space in the parking ramps, but they wanted space that they could eventually build upon. That is very difficult with a ramp, except for the one proposal where they had the underside and GSA would have the whole front side. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 10 of 15 Stutsman said Davidson was very clear that these decisions were the Iowa City City Council's decisions, but he was very willing to work with the Council and the Board. Champion said there is no doubt the Council will work with the County. Harney said Rothmier and O'Connell also said for any space, the values had to remain equal. The value of their property is the value of the property they would be willing to exchange. Neuzil said one of the requests they gave to Davidson, and he is going to forward it to everyone, is in regards to the requirements for public parking for a facility of this magnitude under the particular ordinances. That is information that the County will ask for fairly soon, so that they can at least plan for the minimum requirements for parking. That would have some influence on space. McCarragher said he had to leave early. He asked if GSA identified any time period for the next steps in this process. Rettig said eight weeks. Harney said eight weeks, and maybe GSA will get back within six, depending. Neuzil said they also had representatives from Senator Charles Grassley's office as well as from Congressman David Loebsack's office there to at least listen in on the conversation. At some point the County will likely need letters of support. He said he spoke with Senator Tom Harkin's staff in regards to the potential of getting letters of support to make this all happen. The regional folks would then have to forward that on to what the Washington, DC staff. That kind of cooperation would be really important. Stratton asked if they know what the valuation of that GSA property is or if it is going to be determined. Harney said they haven't had it appraised or anything like that. Neuzil said looking at the potential possibilities, Option 3 or 3A, would not be really taking away anything other than just exchanging property for property in the same block. Of course GSA would have a better parking facility than what they have now, so he thinks they recognize that it is a win situation. Elliott said it seemed to him that Rothmier and O'Connell seemed quite interested that the City was planning a major redevelopment in the area. GSA seemed interested in perhaps being a part of a redevelopment project. Neuzil said GSA knows the value of the Post Office is enhanced by the potential of growth and development in the southern part of Iowa City. He thinks they recognize that they have some space that is not rented, and he thinks they would like to see that rented. Harney said as a matter of fact, GSA needs about 3,000 more square feet for the Social Security office, and they don't have enough room in the Post Office right now to expand that for Social Security. He said GSA feels that any enhancement that happens around there is going to help the Post Office and the services they provide. Neuzil said as the Facilities Subcommittee puts together the potentials for identifying if it is Option 3 or 3A, they have a fairly significant visual of what kind of space is available. He thinks it would be helpful to utilize the existing back of the Courthouse to get that process moving forward. They now have significant space along Harrison Street, assuming that the reconfigured parking lot will take place. It seems like they are starting to get a better visual of what is potentially available for that block and will start working on some of those scenarios. Kempf said it has been brought up that the County doesn't have any money budgeted for the hiring of architectural and engineering services for this project. If the CJCC is actually looking to have something on the ballot late in 2011, he thinks they need to seriously start thinking about developing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the selection process of selecting that architect. Now that the CJCC is narrowing in on a site, it would be good to have somebody not too far off. The person can work on developing that site with a site plan and doing all the things Champion talked about needing to http://www.j ohnson-county.com/auditor/min/ 100707j -min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 11 of 15 have when CJCC goes out there and presents the plan to the public. Harney said they can do that, but they need to be cautious. They need to start thinking about the Request for Proposal (RFP), but they can't do any designing until they know if GSA is going to go along with the specific site. Kempf said exactly. It all takes time. That is why he suggested it is time for the CJCC to start developing what they want in that RFP or RFQ. Neuzil said he thinks there is little doubt that if they are going to follow through with this plan that the County is going to have to amend the existing budget. They have used Jail Alternatives Funding in the past, and that has paid for some of the additional reports. That is something they need to communicate with Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne and they need to think about where those funds would come. Stutsman asked who would begin the process of drafting the RFQ. She asked if that would be the Facility Subcommittee. Kempf said in the past that was drafted by the Executive Assistant of the Board of Supervisors. He thinks they could do some research and find a template. Sullivan said they have a template for the Health and Human Services (HHS) Building. Kempf said this was the first time the County actually used that process in selecting an architectural firm. He sees no reason why they couldn't use the same template. Neuzil said, as laid out in the plan for February 2011-April 2011 under the Facilities heading, he could see some of the things falling into place a lot sooner. Kempf said they should fall in place sooner. Stutsman said she doesn't think they would have to wait until February 2011 just because that is when the plan says it. Neuzil said they would have to find the funds in the existing budget. Kempf said it will be two months, which would be August or September 2010, before they know what the GSA's response is. He is assuming there is going to be more dialogue after that. It will be in October or November 2010 when they will begin the RFQ process. His hope would be that by the end of 2010 the CJCC is going through the process of interviewing people and will have somebody selected. That would put them at January or February 2011 for having that person selected and actually start giving them the type of information that they need for later in spring 2011. It is not that far off. Rettig said she would just say that they are a week into a budget and she is certainly not prepared to commit to amending the budget that is a week old. Kempf said no, and he is not recommending that they do that either. Stutsman said it is just things to think about, and they have to keep that in mind as they move forward. Kempf said there are things the CJCC can do right now that can save them time in the future and don't cost them any more money. Sullivan said in FY 2011 one of the things they did budget for was the purchase of those four houses. The assessed value of those four houses is $876,000. There is a little bit of debate. He said that Rettig and he thought they had set aside $1.2 million, and Claiborne said it was $1 million. Either way, it is enough money to purchase those houses. Now that they are in July 2010, Lyness can start negotiating and hopefully they can have those houses soon. Pulkrabek asked if Lyness can proceed because the budget has been approved. He asked if the Board is set to proceed, and how that works. Rettig said County Treasurer Tom Kriz isn't at the meeting, and they haven't let the bond. Lyness said, if she talks to them and they negotiate something, it will still have to be approved by the Board. Rettig said they approve the budget, they approve that they are willing to borrow the money to do it, but she doesn't know if they have cash in the bank because they didn't let the bond, because they don't know the full amount. Pulkrabek said, but negotiations can proceed. Rettig said definitely. Sullivan said they can come to an agreement and let the bond later. Lyness said part of the agreement can be that it doesn't happen until June 30, 2011 or something. Rettig said or 90 days or something that allows them to get the money. Lyness said the Board is going to have to approve it anyhow, and they will have to vote on it to decide how they are going to pay that. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 12 of 15 REPORT FROM FUNDING/GRANTS SUB-COMMITTEE Rettig said over the last couple of months the Funding/Grants Subcommittee has handed out a lot of documents. She hopes everyone still has them. If they don't, she would be happy to send them out again. Other than one topic they would pretty much be in a holding pattern of figuring out impacts based on the size of the projects. The Funding/Grants Subcommittee did present bonding information on bonding amounts of $20 million, $30 million, $40 million, $50 million, $60 million, and $70 million, and the tax implications of that. They did present information on Iowa Code Chapter 346 as it relates to Joint County/City Buildings and the requirements of that chapter. She would caution that she is not a lawyer and knows nothing about it other than it's interesting. The Funding/Grants Subcommittee reviewed the cost analysis of jail transportation versus housing inmates in the justice center. Those numbers will be updated as they get more information. Rettig said the only thing that's kind of new that she wants to talk about is that in the report the Funding/Grants Subcommittee said that a sales tax would require a change in Iowa Code. The estimated annual sales tax revenue fora $.01 sales tax countywide in Johnson County for FY 2010 is $17.5 million. She talked to Senator Joe Bolkcom, the Senate Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, about any likelihood of a sales tax change and how that relates to the current local government sales tax option. The Ways and Means Committee is the State's tax writing body. She said that Bolkcom said he would be happy to come before the CJCC at their next meeting or whenever he can fit it into his schedule, but he is currently in Washington, DC. She said that Bolkcom said, as long as the local government sales tax option tool was there and has not been adopted by the County, it would not be looked upon favorably by the legislature or any changes in sales tax. She said that Bolkcom did say that it would be an amazingly uphill battle to increase the local government option of raising revenue through sales tax. She said that in Bolkcom's opinion, it would be quite unlikely to ever pass. She said that Bolkcom gave an example of the franchise tax increase in 2010, and they couldn't even get it out of committee. They put it in Standings, and it was an omnibus bill. It is not good public policy to do that, and it was even problematic at that. Rettig said that as long as there is a local government tool of sales tax, and in this current climate, Bolkcom does not believe that there would be a possibility to change State sales tax law. She said that Bolkcom thinks that allowing a County across the State, not just Johnson County, to raise sales tax to pay for a facility would be extremely unlikely to ever happen. It is not that they can't pursue that, but these changes take years. She said that Bolkcom said to Rettig that there is an election, there will be a change, and it is not a given that he would be chair of that committee. It is not that Bolkcom is unwilling to entertain the bill, but he doesn't think he can get it through. She said that Bolkcom would be happy to talk to the CJCC at some time to give his political opinion about it. Harney said he would agree. It would be very difficult to raise the sales tax. If the County could get it changed so they could put it on a ballot and pick up the sales tax that is in existence now when it expires, they could pick that up and go forward. It wouldn't be adding, but just extending what is there. Rettig said she thinks that would require a Code change and would require the Cities giving up their right to that share of sales tax through their own ballot referendum. Harney said it could be designed so it would be a shared tax as well. Sullivan said coming back to Champion's comments and moving forward, he thinks the CJCC can tilt at windmills and talk about something that really is not going to happen, or they can talk about doing what they have the ability to do, which is put it on with a bond. For what it is worth, he would make a motion right now that the CJCC just pursues that method. Stutsman asked if there is a second to that motion. Champion seconded the motion. http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 13 of 15 Neuzil said he would rather have the Funding/Grants Subcommittee make that recommendation to the CJCC before throwing out motions. He thinks that would be a better process to go through in regards to all of these kinds of decisions. So that people understand, even if the CJCC moves forward with a bond initiative and ballot language and they have voters support that, once the sales tax does come off, it is something that could be applied to pay off the rest of the bond once the sales tax is done. That is something the CJCC could have a conversation about with all the area communities and with those in the County. If there would be some interest communitywide to help pay off the bond that the voters had voted for to relieve property taxes, that is something that could happen down the road. Maybe that is a bit of a compromise. To wait for the potential of the legislature to make changes is fairly unrealistic, and to get the communities to allow the County to supersede them is fairly unrealistic. He thinks there could be a cause to ask voters if they would be interested in extending that sales tax two years down the road when this does come off the tax rolls, and they could then pay off some of these bond proceedings. It is possible. Stutsman said all the cities did not vote for it. Sullivan said the County did not pass it. She asked if there is any more discussion about the motion. Elliott said he would rather not vote on that at this time. He would abstain. Champion said she thinks Neuzil makes a good point. If there's any way of using sales tax, it's a much more rapid way to pay off the kind of debt they are going to need. Sullivan said the reason he made this motion is that the CJCC can take their eye off the ball like they did with the Iowa City Press-Citizen and waste nine months, or they can move forward with what they know is viable versus something that is convoluted and nonviable. Champion asked what the Funding/Grants Subcommittee thinks. They didn't make a recommendation. Rettig said the Funding/Grants Subcommittee hasn't talked about this. What she just read is what they have talked about. It would require a change in Iowa Code. She just had a conversation with Bolkcom about what the likelihood is in changing Iowa Code. Champion asked if Rettig thought the Funding/Grants Subcommittee would be ready to make a recommendation to the CJCC at the next meeting. Rettig said all she can say is that she will never vote for a sales tax and she would not even consider putting a sales tax on the ballot. Champion asked if the Funding/Grants Subcommittee would be willing to make a recommendation. Rettig said she had no idea. Champion asked isn't that Rettig's role as chair of the subcommittee. Rettig said there are three elected officials on the committee, a budget director who never attends these meetings, and Kempf. She can't force the two other elected officials who aren't attending to attend a meeting. She has only been able to get one meeting together. Neuzil said it is laid out some time over the next three months that the Funding/Grants Subcommittee would bring that to the CJCC with a recommendation. Sullivan said he just thinks they should save 90 days. Stutsman said they have a motion on the table and she would like to call the question, so they can move along. Rettig asked if Stutsman could restate the motion. Stutsman said it is basically to use bonding as a source of funding and asked Sullivan if that was correct. Sullivan agreed. Stratton asked if that would preclude what Neuzil suggested. Stutsman said to her, it would. It is saying that the only thing the CJCC would consider for this project would be bonding. Rettig said that is why she asked to restate the motion. Sullivan said he doesn't think it does, but to him that isn't happening either. Iowa City is not going to say, go ahead and take the money. That's not going to happen, and he doesn't expect it to. Stutsman said they don't know until they ask, and she will be voting against this motion, because she wants to keep all the options open. She thinks it is too early to eliminate this. McCarragher asked why don't they withdraw the motion and let the Funding/Grants Subcommittee look at this. Sullivan said he wants to make the point here that this is exactly the kind of thing that delays this http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 14 of 15 process. If people want to sit here and complain about why it takes so long to do this, this is why. He would vote for the fairy to come, wave a wand and build the jail, but that isn't happening either. The CJCC can spend a lot of time on stuff that is not going to happen or they can talk about what is reality, political and financial reality. He is as tired as anybody about this, and he hasn't been here as long as a lot of people. It is a waste of their time. Harney said they have aFunding/Grants Subcommittee in place. Let them make the recommendation and move forward. Sullivan said why let them waste another 90 days, let's just do it. Champion said they are only making a recommendation. The Board of Supervisors are the ones who really vote on it. Sullivan said he is willing to vote now. Pulkrabek said that is what he would ask for, that the motion they are going to vote on be amended so that it does give the CJCC that flexibility. Sullivan said he has no problem with that. Rettig said they voted on a timeline to move forward to present this to the voters. If the CJCC is going to pursue a legislative change, that timeline has no meaning now. The earliest it could possibly pass would be April of 2011. They had just decided they would already have the ballot language and picked a ballot date. If the CJCC is going to pursue a legislative change, the schedule they just voted on is now null and void. Sullivan said frankly, he doesn't want to hear anybody else complain about how long this takes when people aren't willing to just move forward with realistic options. Harney said all he is saying is to keep their options open. Sullivan said all Harney is saying is to delay it again and again and again. Harney said he is not asking to delay it, he is asking to keep their options open. Sullivan said that is code for delaying the damn thing. It is just like the Press-Citizen. Logsden suggested amending what Sullivan said to say that the CJCC is going to put an emphasis on bonding, but look at alternatives if they come up. Stutsman asked if Sullivan would be willing to consider that. Sullivan said no. Stutsman said she would like to call the question and vote on the motion so they can move on. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Aye: Champion, McCarragher, Allen, Lyness, Pulkrabek, Sullivan, Rettig, Russell, Logsden; Nay: Harney, Neuzil, Stutsman, Elliott, Berg, Stratton. Stutsman said the motion carried and the CJCC is only going to consider bonding for the project. Elliott clarified that this is the CJCC vote, not the Board vote. Stutsman agreed. Rettig said she needs to know if the CJCC would like Bolkcom to come. They just made a vote, so she assumes that means they are not interested. Rettig said Bolkcom doesn't need to come at this point. Stutsman said no, he doesn't. Pulkrabek said he thinks they can dismiss the legislative change anyway. What he thinks they can't dismiss, or what they say they are hoping for is Neuzil's idea that if all of a sudden the sales tax is coming to an end and the City is willing to allow it to be continued and then diverted to pay off the bond, the CJCC is open to that. Harney said no. That wasn't what the vote was. Neuzil said no, it just allows for that discussion. Sullivan said the Board of Supervisors in three years can make that decision. They should just move forward for God's sake. Rettig said she thinks the full CJCC needs to at least discuss and decide whether the Joint County/City Building Chapter 346 is anything they want to consider. If that was something to consider because of the bonding percentages they have to pass a referendum. That would drop from 60% to 50% to a majority, and that decision would need to be made relatively quickly. There has been no talk to the cities of Iowa City, Coralville, or University Heights, or any talk in designing architecture or anything like that. Logsden asked if it would be a role of the Facilities Committee to have a conversation with the cities or somebody else to see if there is any interest. Judge Doug Russell said he would suggest that the http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD... Page 15 of 15 County ask Lyness to answer that question and for the City of Iowa City Attorney to discuss that with the County Attorney and then come back with a legal opinion about the issue. That way the non- lawyers don't have to discuss it without advisement. Neuzil said he will point out that the City of Cedar Rapids and Linn County are currently in the process of identifying an authority that would have a shared use or reason to put something on the ballot. That is being explored, at least for some flood related buildings in Linn County. It is not something that is out of the realm. Stratton said that would increase the amount of space necessary by 10% or 20%. Neuzil said yes, the gist of it is the existing Jail and if Iowa City would have some need for a police station. Stutsman asked if Lyness could have a report for the CJCC by the next meeting. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS Pulkrabek said he just wanted to point out that recently he gave an update to Neuzil, because Neuzil was going to the Joint Cities Meeting. Johnson County has had a huge influx in the Jail. They are housing well over 100 people out of county now. Marshall County has filled up, and Johnson County is going elsewhere now with different inmates. They had a little trickle going to different jails, but if he had taken a snapshot of how much they were paying out of county even at the lower rates on the day he talked to Neuzil, they were on pace to spend over $1.7 million in FY 2010 and $1.3 million is what is budgeted. Sullivan said just the housing. Pulkrabek said just the housing, that doesn't include any transportation. Rettig said her numbers say that it is $1.2 million for housing, $100,000 for transportation, for a total of $1.3 million. She asked if Pulkrabek had taken a snapshot on that day, would it have been $1.7 million for the year to house them and another $100,000 to transport them. Pulkrabek said he is not sure. He said that Rettig's numbers should be $1.3 million for housing for FY 2010 and the transportation expenses are just absorbed out of the budget. That would be an additional $100,000- $125,000 depending on how it goes. In FY 2009, the County's transportation expenses were about $100,000. The line item that they budget for at $1.3 million is just inmate space rent. Now that snapshot is $1.7 million, if everything would remain the same for 365 days, which it won't. He is assuming it will go back down. SET NEXT MEETING DATE Stutsman asked if August 4, 2010, at 4:30 p.m. is OK for the next meeting date for everybody. Neuzil said it seems like now that this list is official, everyone can expect to be working more and meeting certainly every month with their subcommittees. Adjourned at 5:48 p.m. Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary http://www.johnson-county.com/auditor/min/100707j-min.htm 8/4/2010 Airport Commission July 15, 2010 Page 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION JULY 15, 2010 - 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING IP12 DRAFT Members Present: Howard Horan, Minnetta Gardinier, Steve Crane, Jose Assouline, Greg Farris Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: Harrel Timmons, John Yoemans, David Hughes RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL• (to become effective only after separate Council action CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Horan called the meeting to order at 6:03 P.M. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Minutes from both the June 17 and July 1, 2010, meetings were reviewed. Farris moved to approve the minutes of the June 17, 2010, meeting as submitted; seconded by Crane. Motion carried 5-0. Crane then moved to accept the minutes of the July 1, 2010, meeting as submitted; seconded by Farris. Motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: John Yoemans introduced himself to the new Commission Members. He briefly explained what he does as 'farm manager' at the Airport. He added that everything is looking good, and then he briefly discussed Merschman Seeds' show plots and upcoming summer tours. Tharp noted that with this year's weather they are seeing an increase in the thistle in the fields. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. Aviation Commerce Park -Tharp noted that Members received a monthly report in their packets. They are still awaiting an air space study before moving forward on Lot 10. He added that the realtor believes Van Meter is just about done with this. Dulek also noted some activity between the Planning Department and another interested party. b. Consider a Resolution Approving Lease for Office Space in Hangar G with John Ockenfels d/b/a/ Wingnuts LLC -Tharp briefly explained Ockenfels' business venture. The rent will be $110 per month. Farris moved to consider Resolution #A10-06 approving lease for office space in Hangar G; seconded by Gardinier. Motion carried 5-0. c. FAA/IDOT Projects - AECOM -David Hughes - i. Runway 7/25 & 12/30 -David Hughes addressed the Commission Members. He stated that he had hoped to be done with this project, but that they still have some items on the punch list, and therefore are not ready to move acceptance of Airport Commission July 15, 2010 Page 2 that project. However, Hughes noted that they are recommending early release on some of the retainage. Dulek gave some clarification about the resolution being considered on releasing some of the retainage. 1. Consider a resolution accepting improvements to Runway 7-25 and Runway 12-30 -Assouline moved to defer this item to the August 19, 2010, meeting; seconded by Farris. Motion carried 5- 0. 2. Consider a resolution approving the early release of retainage - Farris moved to consider Resolution #A10-07 approving early release of retainage; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 5-0. ii. Obstruction Mitigation -Hughes noted that last time they spoke they were still awaiting paperwork from the subcontractor. Once he reviews this paperwork, this project should then be ready to close out. iii. 2010 Pavement Rehab - 1. Public Hearing -Horan opened the public hearing. Hughes briefly clarified what this project will entail, noting that they have worked this project out to fit in with the dollars that will be available. This is estimated to be a 45-day project on the pavement rehab, with four phases to the project, according to Hughes. Hughes then responded to Members' questions regarding access issues that they might encounter during this construction project. Horan closed the public hearing closed. 2. Consider a resolution approving the Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract, and Estimate on Cost for the Construction of FY2010 Pavement Rehabilitation Project -Gardinier moved to consider Resolution # A10-08 approving plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for the construction of FY2010 pavement rehabilitation project; seconded by Farris. Motion carried 5-0. iv. Hangar ADrainage - Dulek noted that Members need to set a special meeting between now and August 8 to hold this public hearing. Horan suggested Thursday, July 29, 2010 for this meeting; however, several Members are unable to meet that day. Monday, July 26, 2010, at 7:30 A.M. was then chosen for this special meeting. 1. Consider a resolution Setting a Public Hearing the Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract, and Estimate on Cost for the Construction of Hangar A Drainage Project -Farris moved to consider Resolution # A10-09 setting public hearing for the plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for the construction of Hangar A drainage project; seconded by Assouline. Motion carried 5-0. d. 2011 Air Race Classic -Gardinier stated that she now knows the route for the 2011 race, and she shared this with Members. e. Corporate Hangar "L" -Tharp gave Members an update, noting that state grants have now been announced. This funding, along with the pending land sale, will allow them to proceed with the hangar project. Members then briefly discussed where they are with the pending land sale and other issues related to this project. f. Airport "Operations": Strategic Plan Implementation; Budget; Management - Tharp noted that they are now in the new fiscal year. Last year's numbers were better than anticipated, according to Tharp. Tharp gave Members a brief rundown on the Airport Commission July 15, 2010 Page 3 numbers, noting a decrease in fuel sales. They had projected $21,000 and actual were $14,000. i. Terminal Building Flooring Project -Tharp stated that this project would be done this year. He also reviewed some of the other summer projects with Members. Tharp then shared that they now have hot water in the terminal building. The discussion then turned back to the types of flooring being considered for the terminal flooring project. Tharp noted that he expects bids to come in yet this week. Horan asked if Members were interested in forming a subcommittee to help review the bids. Gardinier and Assouline agreed to this. Tharp noted that next month they will start discussing T-hangar rates. He is not anticipating any changes at this point. g. FBO /Iowa Flight Training /Whirlybird Reports -Harrel Timmons spoke briefly, sharing the maintenance report for the month. He added that with all of the rain, they have been mowing non-stop recently. He added that this summer they are finally seeing the benefit of the improved runways, and that traffic is finally increasing. Timmons shared that they have sold seventeen airplanes since the first of the year. h. Subcommittees' Reports -none i. Commission Members' Reports -Horan asked that Members email to him "10 reasons the Iowa City Airport is important..." for him to create a proposal with. Gardinier noted that CarolAnn Garratt will be speaking in the area, and she will send an email with the details. j. Staff Report -Tharp shared that the FAA Regional conference is in September. He responded to Members' questions regarding this conference. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting will be Thursday, August 19, 2010 at 6:00 P.M. at the Airport Terminal building. The next special meeting will be Monday, July 26, 2010, at 7:30 A.M. for a public hearing. ADJOURN: The meeting adjourned at 7:25 P.M. Gardinier made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 P.M.; seconded by Crane. Motion carried 5-0. CHAIRPERSON DATE c 0 N _N Eo o° UN ~av n >. Q~tl O NV ~~o O V N UZQ W ~ Z ~ a~ ~_ aQ ~ i T ~ I N ti ~ I ~ X X X X X ti ~I X X X X X ti ~ X ~ X X I t0 o f N O X X X X i i ~ W ~ I N X X X ~ ~ X ` i ~ rl `O O X i X X i ~ I X X X ~ ~ X i M ~ I X X X ~ ~ X X N rl N X X X ; ; X X r ~ M ~ ~ N ~f N O a ~ ~ _ H W M M M M M M M . ~ N N ~ ~ ` ~ ~ m m . ~ ~ Q IL ~- c ~ ~ ' ~ U ~ c~ ~~ Z rn c~ 3 a~ o ~ a~ c 2 2 o ~ o U ~ (~ - i Q (n - i - i d N ~ ~ tv V ~~ ~ _ ~+ W :+ y d C ~ C~1 L~~ Qa+ aaaZZ° II ~~ II II II XO~Z YI Airport Commission ~ - July 27, 20~o IP13 Page 1 MINUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION JULY 27, 2010 - 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Howard Horan, Minnetta Gardinier, Greg Farris (Via telephone conference/speaker phone) Members Absent: Steve Crane, Jose Assouline Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: David Hughes (via telephone conference/speaker phone) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL• (to become effective only after separate Council action): None CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Horan called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: i. Hangar ADrainage - 1. Public Hearing -Horan opened the public hearing. Horan asked for any questions regarding the project. No questions were asked. Horan closed the public hearing 2. Consider a resolution approving the Plans, Specifications, Form of Contract, and Estimate on Cost for the Construction of Hangar A Drainage Project -Farris moved to consider Resolution # A10- 10 approving plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate on cost for the construction of Hangar A Drainage project; seconded by Gardinier. Motion carried 3-0 (Crane, Assouline absent). ADJOURN: Gardinier moved to adjourn; seconded by Farris. Motion carried 3-0. (Crane, Assouline absent). The meeting adjourned at 6:02 P.M. CHAIRPERSON DATE c 0 .~ ~_ Eo o° UN ~ I ~ N O N ~ Q T ~ f0 Q-~i~ O~ N U ~~o O ~ N V Z Q W OZ~ aw ~_~ QQ ~ i N X X 0 X i i ti X ~I X X X X X ~ ~ f` ~I ti X X X X X r`I X w O X X w O ' cc NI 0 X X X X rnl N X X X ~ X ~ ; ~I ~ ~ X ~ X X ~ I X X X X M ~I X X X X X N ~I N X X X X X r ~ ~ a M ~ ~ N ~ N O w w ~- M M M M M M M ~ •~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ N Q ~ ~ m ~ c ~ ~ c ~ c ~~ U ~ ~ Z rn c ~a co 3 0 0 ~ a~ o c o U' ~ U' 2 2 ~ Q (n - i - i m N ~ 7 d V ~ ~ K c ~ m yc=a~i~ ~~~ ~~+ aaaZz II II II II II XOOZ } W Y IP14 MINUTES PRELIMINARY IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT JULY 14, 2010 - 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Anderson, Caroline Sheerin, Le Ann Tyson MEMBERS EXCUSED STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Eckstein, Will Jennings Karen Howard, Sara Greenwood Hektoen, Tom Walz, Del Stevens RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Caroline Sheerin at 5:15 p.m. ROLL CALL: Anderson, Sheerin, Tyson An opening statement was read by the Chair outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures governing the proceedings. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FOR JUNE 10T" 2010: Tyson motioned to approve the minutes. Anderson seconded. The motion carried 3-0 (Eckstein and Jennings excused). SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 2 of 9 EXC10-00005: Discussion of an application submitted by the Extend the Dream Foundation for a special exception to a General Community Service Use in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone and a Reduction in Parking for Unique Circumstances for the property located at 730 South Dubuque Street. Howard noted that this property is right along the railroad lines south of downtown and west of Gilbert Street. Howard shared photographs of the site to show its configuration. Howard said that both the Public Access Television (PATV) office and the Extend the Dream Foundation would share the parking facilities. Howard stated that the requested exception was for a Community Service Use in an Intensive Commercial zone. She explained that Community Service Uses can include anything from social service providers to community centers, and have a range of impacts on the area in which they are located. Howard said this range of impact is one of the reasons that a special exception is required; because so many different activities fall under this category, the impact of a Community Service use varies from case to case. Howard explained that this building had most recently housed a Community Service use as its upstairs tenant, so the use will not actually be changing for the property. However, at the time that the previous use was established, there was no special exception required for a Community Service Use in the CI-1 zone. Howard said that it is a somewhat unusual case, but the Extend the Dream Foundation does need a special exception to locate in that building, despite the fact that the use is not changing. Howard stated that the Extend the Dream Foundation is an organization that assists people with disabilities in the creation and operation of small businesses, and in providing safe, sane and sober places for people to socialize. Howard said that the use will be multi-faceted and the applicant would address that more specifically. Howard explained that there are a few specific criteria for a Community Service Use in a CI-1 zone. The CI-1 zone is a zone of mixed uses which allows quasi-industrial operations with outdoor storage and work activities, as well as uses such as daycare, offices, and other businesses. Howard said that some CI-1 zones are quite industrial looking, whereas the character of others can be more office commercial. Howard said this particular area has quite a mix of uses including quasi-industrial, commercial and even non-conforming residential. She noted that this is a part of town that has been targeted as an area for future redevelopment. Howard said that the property in question is right in the middle of the area the City calls Riverfront Crossings, which is the subject of redevelopment planning. Howard said that this neighborhood is in transition and that this area may feel pressure to develop into housing and mixed use commercial as the downtown continues to grow southward. Howard said that staff finds that the proposed use will not alter the overall character of the zone and will not inhibit future development in the zone. Howard said that this particular CI-1 neighborhood is not a typical CI-1 zone in that there is not a lot of truck traffic or outdoor storage and activities, and it is slowly transitioning to a more urban neighborhood. Further, the building in which the use will be located was previously used for a Community Service use without any adverse effect on the overall character or uses located in the zone. There are many similar public and private office uses in the immediate area that provide employment and general services to the public. It should also be noted that the commercial uses in the vicinity are lower intensity, with little of the outdoor display or truck traffic that characterizes some CI-1 zones. Howard noted that the area is characterized by the traditional gridded street pattern with Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 3 of 9 sidewalks and good pedestrian and transit access. It seems ideally suited to serve clientele of a community service use, where most clients arrive by public transit, walking or biking. Howard stated that the applicant has requested a second specia- exception; one which would reduce the number of required parking spaces for this particular use. Howard said that based on the size of this particular building the two uses combined would typically be required to provide 16 spaces. Howard said that there are currently 15 spaces on site; however, the parking lots which provide those spaces do not really meet current City standards. Howard said that in staff's view it might be a good idea to improve the site to make the driveway more defined, provide separation from the street, and separation between the sidewalk and the driveway. Howard said that the current parking configuration requires drivers to back out over the sidewalk and onto Dubuque Street, which is not ideal. The configuration proposed by the applicant reduces the total number of parking spaces by three; however, it provides a much greater level of safety, aesthetics, and compliance with current code. In order to get a reduction in the number of spaces required by the zoning code, the applicant must demonstrate that there is something unique to the use such that that particular use would not generate the level of parking required by the zone. Howard said that the applicant has indicated that most of the clientele and employees for the building would be arriving via bus, bike, or on-foot. She said that Extend the Dream Foundation felt strongly that reducing the number of parking spaces would not be a problem. She noted that the applicant has arranged with the University of Iowa to have permission to allow clients to park in a nearby University parking lot on those occasions where a larger event is being held at the site. Howard said that staff feels the applicant has met the criteria in the code that requires the applicant to demonstrate that their use is fairly unique and may not require the level of parking required by code. She said that the small enterprises within the Community Service use typically do not draw clients from the outside community, and PATV has indicated that they rarely make use of all of their parking spaces. Howard next addressed the General Standards. She said that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. She said that in terms of the parking requirements, staff feels the current configuration is not particularly safe and that the reconfiguration, though reducing the number of parking spaces, will actually improve the safety of the site. Howard stated that the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. She said that there is nothing about the characteristics of this particular zone that would be affected by this particular use, and it does feel like this use fits in well with the existing neighborhood. Howard said that the ingress and egress of the site will actually be improved by the proposed changes. She stated that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception being considered, the specific proposed exception in all other respects conforms to the applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is located. Howard said that when the final site plan is submitted and reviewed, the applicant will have to demonstrate that all other applicable zoning requirements are met. Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 4 of 9 Howard said that the proposed use will be consistent with eth Comprehensive Plan as amended because the Central District Plan shows this area as a future mixed-use zone - a mix of commercial and high-density residential uses that are pedestrian oriented design. Staff recommends that EXC10-00005, an application for a special exception to allow a General Community Service Use in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone at 730 South Gilbert Street and to reduce the parking requirement from eight spaces to six spaces for the proposed use, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted, including a concrete pad for a bicycle rack the location of which will be determined by the City; 2) The special exception for a community service use in the CI-1 Zone at 730 South Gilbert Street is limited to the Extend the Dream Foundation; 3) The special exception for a reduction in the parking requirement from 8 spaces to 6 spaces is limited to the Extend the Dream Foundation. Because there is no change of use, the entire property will remain grandfathered at 15 required spaces, but this requirement will be reduced to 13 while extend the Dream Foundation is occupying the building. Howard asked the Board if they had any questions. Sheerin asked if Howard could clarify how six parking spaces was determined to be sufficient for a use which requires 16 by code. Howard explained that the zoning code requires a certain number of parking spaces per square foot of floor area. Howard said that according to that formula, each floor of the subject property would require eight parking spaces. She explained that there are 16 total spaces required for the entire property. PATV has their eight spaces already. Extend the Dream has requested a reduction in their parking requirement form eight spaces to six spaces. Anderson asked if staff wished to be more specific in its requirements rather than leaving the broad phrase "substantial compliance with the site plan" open to possible interpretation. Howard said that most of the details have been worked through already. She said that the curb cut would remain at 42 feet, with the drive at 24 feet. Howard explained that there are standard parking space sizes so there is really nothing too complicated about that aspect of the plan. She said that landscaping is also agreed on at this point. Anderson asked if there were limitations on the availability of potential on-street parking in the area. Howard said she did not believe that the parking was metered in that area. Sheerin said that if the area is in transition, on-street parking may become less available in the coming years. Howard said that as new buildings are built, parking needs are accounted for. Howard noted that the previous location for this organization had no off-street parking at all. Sheerin opened the public hearing. Tom Walz, Extend the Dream Foundation, said that he has been with the organization from its inception. He said that they had enjoyed their location on Gilbert Street, but had been virtually driven out of the location because of the ever-increasing rents. He said they had intended to purchase a building, but the deal had fallen through. Walz said that it was the organization's good fortune to be able to find a building that they could lease. The owner of the building is Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page5of9 another local non-profit, which, Walz said, really needs another non-profit as its lessee. Walz said that the Everett Connor Center, an agency serving the needs of the disabled in our community just as Extend the Dream does, had been the previous tenant. Because this was the previous tenant, the building is already ADA compliant, Walz said. He said that the move to the new location could not be more ideal for Extend the Dream. He said the location is between MECCA and the new Shelter House and downtown. He said that the location is near Capitol House, and in aloes-income zone. He said that most of their clients and customers are people who do not own cars. He said that the clientele normally comes via SEATS, feet, or bus. Walz said the location is ideal. Walz said that PATV and Extend the Dream realized that their programs could be mutually beneficial in a relationship that was more than landlord/tenant. Walz said that while the two programs will not officially merge, they do wish to join together to become a neighborhood arts center that will bring the arts to the community in a safe, sane and sober environment. He said there will be a lot of focus on music, reading and book clubs. He said that he really felt their vision fit in with the community understanding for the way that the south side of downtown Iowa City should be redeveloped. Walz said that Extend the Dream is working with the University to create the nicest music venue in Iowa City, and to include those students under the age of 21 in their plans for the site. Walz said that the lack of two additional parking spaces will not be a problem for Extend the Dream. He said that that area of Iowa City is the most under-utilized, in terms of parking, in the whole town. He said that the organization has made agreements with the University and the County to utilize their nearby parking facilities during special events and times where overflow parking is needed. Walz said that they feel very comfortable with the site and the amount of parking available there. He said they are also very excited about the make-over the current parking lot will receive and the additional green space that will result. He said that will make a positive statement about the direction of redevelopment in the south downtown area. He said that he thought the building would be beautiful as well as functional. Del Stevens, architect for Extend the Dream, thanked Walz for the service Extend the Dream provided to the community. He said there was no greater service than trying to improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. He said the plans follow Iowa City's requirements and improve the overall look and function of the area. He offered to answer any questions from the Board. Sheerin asked if one handicapped parking space was really going to be sufficient. Stevens said it is, particularly because the present site offers no off-street parking. Tyson noted that they are actually gaining parking. He noted that the parking space will actually be large enough to accommodate a full sized van, not just a car. Walz said that trying to watch a SEATS van unload off of a busy street is very frightening, and that this space will protect riders from those kinds of dangers. Sheerin asked if it was correct that the University parking spaces would only be available to Extend the Dream during some sort of special event. Walz said that was correct. Walz explained that Extend the Dream provides space for a lot of the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings in the downtown community. He said that noon AA meetings may need up to 15 parking spaces, but that PATV does not open until after that time, so their spaces will be open and available at that peak time. Walz said there is an entirely unused University parking lot nearby that Extend the Dream is negotiating for overflow parking. He noted that that lot becomes a public lot after five, so there will never be night-time parking issues. Anderson asked Howard to point that lot out on the map. She did so, adding that the County parking facility may also be a possibility for public parking in the evenings. Walz said there are no real reserved parking spaces in that ramp, and that while they have not specifically negotiated using Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 6 of 9 the parking space for anything except for one large, annual event, he did believe that it would be a possibility. He said those ramps were currently underutilized. There were no further questions from the Board. Sheerin invited members of the public to speak. No one wished to speak to the issue. Sheerin invited a motion. Tyson motioned to approve EXC10-00005, an application for a special exception to allow a General Community Service Use in the Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zone at 730 South Gilbert Street and to reduce the parking requirement from eight spaces to six spaces for the proposed use, subject to the following conditions: 1) Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted, including a concrete pad for a bicycle rack, the location of which will be determined by the City; 2) The special exception for a community service use in the CI-1 Zone at 730 South Gilbert Street is limited to the Extend the Dream Foundation; 3) The special exception for a reduction in the parking requirement from 8 spaces to 6 spaces is limited to the Extend the Dream Foundation. Because there is no change of use, the entire property will remain grandfathered at 15 required spaces, but this requirement will be reduced to 13 while extend the Dream Foundation is occupying the building. Anderson seconded. Sheerin invited discussion from the Board. Anderson said he was quite comfortable with the plan, and he thinks it is a great addition to the site. He applauded the efforts of Extend the Dream. Tyson said she too appreciated all of the efforts the Extend the Dream Foundation has made in the community over the years, and is glad to see them moving forward. Sheerin said she felt the same way, and was glad that the organization was moving farther from the area of downtown that was saturated with alcohol. She said this seemed like a better location for them. Anderson presented the findings of fact. He said that the use would not significantly alter the overall character of the zone. He said the size and scale of the development and projected traffic generated to and from the site are appropriate to support the proposed use without negatively impacting nearby properties. Anderson said that this specific use has unique characteristic such that the number of parking spaces required by the zone are not really needed. He said the reduction in parking requirement is justified. Anderson said that the reconfiguration of the parking on-site is going to benefit the overall traffic flow. Greenwood Hektoen asked Anderson to expand a bit on what the unique characteristics are that make the parking reduction appropriate. Anderson said that he thinks the population served by the facilities and the modes of transportation generally used by the clientele (according to Walz) makes the parking reduction reasonable. Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 7 of 9 Anderson said that the specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. He said the reconfiguration of the parking spaces is going o be a very good thing for the site. He said the added green space will also be beneficial. Anderson said that the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair property values in the neighborhood. Anderson said that this was a very compatible use. He said the previous occupant was an organization that was similar in nature. He said that he did not anticipate any change at all in the surrounding neighborhood, and that he believed the location and the agency are a very good fit. Anderson said that utilities, access roads, and drainage are already in place and are adequate. The establishment of this exception will not impede the normal and orderly development of the area. Anderson said that adequate measures have been designed to provide for safe ingress and egress. He said that he is glad to see that arrangements are being made in case the need for additional parking should arise. The specific proposed exception in all other respects complies with the applicable standards of the zone. Anderson said that the final site plan will provide a better indication of this. Anderson said the proposed use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as amended. He said the fact that this area is under redevelopment is a good thing. He said that if the area is to be made more pedestrian friendly, then the reduction in parking is a good thing. Tyson said that she agreed with Anderson that this is a fine use of the space and a good addition to the neighborhood. Sheerin said she too agrees with the comments of her colleagues. She said that the organization is sure to be a good addition to the area. She said that it appears that the nature of the clientele will be such that there are not a lot of heavy car users, so the full amount of parking may not be as necessary as it might be for another business. She said that the fact that the other occupant of the building, PAN, does not need all of its spaces all of the time is a contributing factor in her decision. She said this is a really good social service. Sheerin closed the public hearing. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0 (Eckstein and Jennings excused). The motion was declared approved. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Howard noted that the next Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for August 11, 2010. Iowa City Board of Adjustment July 14, 2010 Page 8 of 9 ADJOURNMENT: Tyson motioned to adjourn. Anderson seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 3-0 (Eckstein and Jennings excused). The meeting adjourned at 6:01 p.m. O 0 N >, c E Q O -~ c~ o ~ m ~ o U ~ ~~ o~ C a~ ~_ Q 0 L M0 W n ~~~ N .a L AV W a~ ^u^ i~ ~^^ i~ Q L s O N O M O O O~ ~ W W X 'o 'o X x ~ x X x x X N W ~, x x x 'o x ~' x X x X x M x x x x x C W r X X X O x M W X 'o x x X to N ~' V1 M i s. 'a o 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ F W O O O O O ~ ~ ~ 'i ~ Y b ~ O ~ 0 t u C ~ u+ ~ Q ~ ~ a~ F ~ °~ c ~ ~ ,p • O c z u ~ m 3 N v ti~ a~ N N y N a a d ~+ C_ O a a td C N N d ~+ O C -v t u L O L fd d d s ~L C b4 ~N L u L t .~ L L a~ .~ C_ ~ a.+ a~ CN G ~ O O z z x o o z IP15 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 8, 2010 EMMA J. HARVAT HALL Preliminary MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Esther Baker, Thomas Baldridge, Andrew Litton, Pam Michaud, Ginalie Swaim, Alicia Trimble, Frank Wagner MEMBERS ABSENT: William Downing, David McMahon, Dana Thomann STAFF PRESENT: Christina Kuecker OTHERS PRESENT: Dave Pasley, Helen Roushar, Kris Sweat, Tammy Sweat, Richard Wayne RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) None CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Trimble called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CONSENT AGENDA: 422 Brown Street Kuecker said that 422 Brown Street concerns an application to demolish an outbuilding that was likely built sometime after 1948 and is essentially just a shed. She said staff does not see a historic reason to restore the shed and said that it is in a state of decay. Kuecker said staff therefore recommends approval as presented. 503 North Van Buren Kuecker said this application contains a couple of projects, including a chimney removal, reroofing the house, and installing an air conditioning unit. She said the only portions of the application under Commission purview are the chimney removal and the location of the air conditioning condenser. Kuecker said staff feels that both of these items, as proposed in the application, meet the guidelines and recommends approval. 734 Oakland Avenue Kuecker said this application is a proposal to build an eight foot by about a 13 '/z foot deck off the rear of the house. She said the deck will be set in at least eight inches from both sidewalls and will not be visible from the street. Kuecker said staff feels this meets the guidelines and recommends approval. Sweat, one of the owners of 503 North Van Buren Street, said that the chimney is falling apart, with bricks sometimes falling off. MOTION: Baker moved to approve the consent agenda as presented. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Downing McMahon and Thomann absent). Historic Preservation Commission July 8, 2010 Page 2 CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1107 Burlington Street Kuecker stated that this is a contributing property in the College Hill Conservation District. She said the project consists of removing an existing chimney on the rear of the house; replacement of the asphalt roof with a standing seam, metal roof; repairs to the foundation; and the addition of a new chimney. Kuecker said that in general, the guidelines recommend not removing historic chimneys, especially if they are character defining or integrated into the architecture. She said staff does not believe this chimney is character- defining or integrated into the architecture and believes removal will have minimal impact on the house. Kuecker said that the applicant would like to replace the asphalt shingles with a standing seam metal roof. She said the guidelines do not specifically address this but in general recommend the use of historic materials. Kuecker said it is likely that the roof had a standing seam metal roof at some point in its history. Regarding the foundation, Kuecker said the applicant would like to make repairs, including tuck pointing and foundation bracing. She said the guidelines do recommend making repairs to historic foundations rather than replacing them. Kuecker said the larger part of this project is a new, exterior chimney. She showed the elevation where the applicant proposes to build a brick chimney. Kuecker showed a drawing demonstrating what the applicant would like to build. She said this would require the rearrangement of some of the windows with the elimination of two of the windows on that elevation and changing the sizes of the windows. Kuecker said the guidelines recommend that when building a new full-height chimney, it be masonry consistent with the architectural style of the building. She said the guidelines also recommend that new windows be wood or metal- clad wood and match the type, sash, width, trim, divided lights, and overall appearance of the historic windows and that any new window arrangement be consistent with the historic building or buildings of a similar architectural style. Kuecker said that in staff's opinion, the proposed chimney and the window arrangement are consistent with the Queen Anne type of style of the house. She said the house also has elements of the period revival style making it an eclectic style of house, and both of those styles could have had exterior chimneys on them. Kuecker said the exterior chimneys were not necessarily common but were not uncommon either. She said staff also believes the window pattern is consistent with both styles of houses. Kuecker said that staff recommends approval of this certificate with the condition that the new windows are solid wood or metal clad solid wood double hung windows that match the sash, width, trim, use of divided-lites, and overall appearance of the historic windows. She said that any divided-lites may be either true divided-lites or created with muntin bars adhered to both sides of the glass but not with snap-in muntin bars. Pasley, one of the owners of the house, said one question he had while reviewing the staff report concerned the statement that the residence has been impaired by the application of modern, replacement siding. He said it has always been his intention to remove that and asked if he needs the Commission's approval to do so. Pasley said he doesn't want to replace the siding with anything but wants to bring it back to the original wood, clapboard siding that he knows is underneath there. Pasley said that he has had the siding tested by a lab to determine how much asbestos is in it and knows how to dispose of it properly. Kuecker said that the removal of non-historic siding does not need approval by the Commission. She said however, that if one takes it off and finds that the wood siding is beyond repair, then that replacement would need Commission approval. Pasley said he did not believe the replacement siding was installed to cover up a problem but was installed to upgrade the house and make it maintenance free. He said he does not like it and would like to get rid of it. Michaud suggested using hardi-plank if the wood siding is deteriorated and needs replacement. Kuecker stated that could be added to the motion. Historic Preservation Commission July 8, 2010 Page 3 Swaim asked about how the drawings matched up with the photos. Pasley said the area would be right behind the tree in the photograph. He said there are three windows on the lower floor. Pasley said he proposes the removal of the middle window; which is where the main part of the fireplace will be; separating the other two windows; and then running the chimney up the side of the house. He said it would have to go through one of the two windows in the upper, small bedroom to make it to the roofline. Pasley said he didn't include the whole house when he made the drawing but wanted to mostly depict the center section that would be most affected. He said the chimney would almost run right along the tree. Pasley stated that it is on the alley side of the house. Swaim asked if, for the bottom windows, Pasley would use the same windows that flank the center one but move them over. Pasley confirmed this, saying he would slightly separate them on the wall to add room for the fireplace. Swaim asked about the top. Pasley said he would probably remove one of the windows so they could go up and meet the peak at the center line. He referred to some images he had provided of some outdoor chimneys that are similar and in the same neighborhood to show what the concept is. Wagner suggested that the way the windows are being split on both sides, perhaps that could be done on the windows above and just have it go straight up the middle and just have windows on either side, top and bottom. Pasley said he could certainly look at that. He said the issue on the second floor is that this house is one and three- quarters stories so that the roofline cuts into the interior of the room. Pasley said there is not a lot of the wall left there to really separate the windows. He said he could probably make them a lot smaller and get two. Kuecker said the roof is actually lower than shown. Pasley agreed the drawing is not to scale but is to give the Commission an idea of the concept to see if it is acceptable. Wagner asked if the chimney itself would actually go above the top gable or the peak of the roof. Pasley said it would be awood-burning stove, and he knows it will have to be appropriately sized so that it vents properly. Kuecker said that it maybe be possible, if the Commission is okay with the chimney, to have the final approval for the windows be reviewed by chair and staff. Baldridge asked Pasley if he planned to reuse or retain as many windows as possible or if he plans to replace them. Pasley said he would like to reuse the windows, although some of them might have to be rebuilt slightly. Baldridge said that the chimney would run up the outside but would pierce the roof basically right at the peak. Michaud asked if a wood fireplace always has•to have a chimney going all the way up or if it could ever be vented from the side. She said this is a major change and that it is visible from the street. Wagner said that with a wood burning chimney, it has to be higher than the house or it conducts wrong and pushes all the smoke back in and doesn't vent out. He said he thinks that is fine and appreciates the examples of having the chimney go above the roofline. Michaud suggested using a brick that is contemporaneous with the house. Pasley asked for recommendations. Kuecker suggested that Pasley consult with her and she would help select something appropriate. MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 1107 Burlington Street for the removal of the chimney, the replacement of the asphalt shingled roof with the standing seam metal roof, the repair of the foundation and tuck pointing, and a new chimney with the conditions that: the final design, layout, brick color of the new chimney and also the window arrangement be approved by staff and the chair and that if the removal of siding shows deteriorating siding, that it be repaired or replaced with wood and/or fiber cement board siding to match the original siding. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Downing McMahon and Thomann absent). 304 South Summit Street. Kuecker said this application is a request to demolish afour-car garage on the southeast corner of the property. She said the building is quite deteriorated and is being essentially held up by cables. Kuecker said the building was constructed between 1933 and 1948, according to the Sanborn maps. Historic Preservation Commission July 8, 2010 Page 4 Kuecker said staff that since the garage is in poor condition; that it barely meets the 50-year cutoff for the historic era; and in the site inventory form, the garage was listed specifically as being non-contributing staff believes the demolition of this garage would have no historic impact on the property or the neighborhood. She said staff recommends approval. Baldridge asked what is behind the garage. Kuecker said there is another garage for the neighboring property. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 304 South Summit Street as proposed. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Wagner abstaining; Downing, McMahon, and Thomann absent). 617 North Johnson Street. Kuecker said this application is for several projects, and the Commission has reviewed this property before. She said the current owner is undertaking several projects in order to rehabilitate the house. Kuecker said the Commission previously approved siding replacement with fiber cement board, reconstruction of the front porch, and reconstruction of the retaining wall. Kuecker said this application is for the roof and the side porch. She said the applicant would like to remove the standing seam metal roof and replace it with an asphalt roof, covering the built-in gutters and installing external gutters in the process. Kuecker said the applicant has indicated that the roof pitch will not change at the built-in gutter, and if it does change, it would only be a slight change, essentially just covering the gutters with plywood and shingling over them. Kuecker said the guidelines recommend for the repair and preservation of original materials whenever possible. She said the Commission has approved the conversion of metal roofs to asphalt shingles in the past. Kuecker said the Preucil School received such approval, with the condition that the roof be replaced with a high quality asphalt shingle that had the appearance of a wood shake, so she would recommend the same stipulation on this house. Regarding the built-in gutters, Kuecker said the guidelines allow covering the built-in gutters only if the roof slope is not altered at the gutter. She said in staff's opinion, the covering of the deteriorated built-in gutters does meet the standards and will have minimal impact on the historic integrity of the house. Kuecker showed photographs of one of the failing built-in gutters on the side window as well as damage from one of the built-in gutters of ice running down the siding. She showed photographs of a gutter with a hole developing in it and wood falling off the gutter area. Kuecker said that patch jobs done on the gutter last year are already failing this year. Kuecker said the owners would like to rebuild the side porch, showing an elevation of it, and would essentially keep the shorter porch, allowing access to the basement unit and the second-story unit. She said the major change would involve the separation of the side porch and the bay window where they are attached at the roof. Kuecker said the owners would like to separate them in order to have better drainage. She said they would be separated by about six inches. Kuecker showed the handrail the owners propose on the side porch, which would be similar to the front porch with square spindles and turned posts for the columns. She showed examples of the style of doors the owner would like to use for the doors on the alley side and the front door so that all the doors would end up matching. Kuecker said that the guidelines recommend repairing historic porches rather than replacing them but also recommend replacing badly deteriorated components with new ones that match the historic components in design and material. She said that in staff's opinion, the existing side porch and many other features of the house are in bad condition. Kuecker said that the proposed porch replacement would be more similar to the original house than the previous porch was and will still provide access to all the units in the house. She said that because this side porch is being reconstructed to mimic what will happen on the front porch, the alterations will be compatible with the house. Kuecker said staff recommends approval as presented, with the roofing material, color and profile, and the porch columns and porch piers to be approved by staff. Historic Preservation Commission July 8, 2010 Page 5 Swaim asked about the very top of the house and if there is a membrane. Kuecker said that at the very top, it goes up and then has a little hip at the top with a very shallow pitch. She said it is like a hip on top of a hip. Kuecker said the owners want to change all the metal to asphalt. She said there is a slope there. Ackerson asked if there is any egress for moisture at the top. Kuecker did not know. Wagner said that if the pitch isn't steep enough, they cannot use asphalt. Ackerson said the first question is about the trim around the edge. Michaud asked if the upper edge would stay, and Kuecker confirmed this. Michaud said that would hold moisture or let water puddle. Swaim said given that the owners are really concerned about the water, she would assume they have that, that lip, under control. Wagner said the fact that there is water up there is because it is not probably insulated. He said it is melting and runs down; whether it is built-in interior gutters or exterior gutters, they are still going to have those ice problems. Wagner said the problem is insulation or lack of insulation. Michaud said that where the two roofs intersect over that backside door roof, the owners could put one of those metal heat tapes in that gutter and then go down the downspout, it will work there. She said it just needs to have an exterior plug to be plugged in when it starts thawing. Michaud said she does not have a problem with exterior gutters, because the Commission has approved them numerous times. She said, however, that to keep that tray or rebuild the tray at the top is the most significant architectural feature. Baker said the motion could require that the owner keep the pitch of the roof but also the detail. Michaud asked if the crown-molding piece could be replaced with metal so there would not be further deterioration. Kuecker said that in general the Commission recommends that similar material be used. She said that the Commission has approved the use of fiber cement board as a replacement for wood as well as a plastic, polystyrene material for railings. Kuecker said the owner has been receptive to all of her recommendations. Michaud said she thinks it is only fair to have an alternative material instead of wood if the details need replaced. Kuecker did not know what the material currently is. Baker suggested the Commission could require the retention of the tray structure, and if it needs replacing, require the same material or something approved by staff. Kuecker said she has made it clear to the owner that he is not allowed to remove the interior gutters but is just allowed to cover them. Wagner said that it probably has a hip across the middle of it going the length of the house. He said it is probably metal, and the trim that one sees around it is wood. Wagner said he is not quite sure what is underneath it, but it is probably just the tin that is on that cap. He said he did not know how the pitch of the roof could be kept. Kuecker said that what has been done before is where there is the pitch and the gutter, they have been able to put just a little bit of slope at the edge, and she told the owner that has been approved in the past. She said it will often overhang just a little bit so the water goes off the roof. MOTION: Michaud moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for 617 North Johnson Street with the conditions that the roofing material (brand, color, and profile), porch columns, and porch piers be approved by staff and that all materials and trim, particularly at the crown level of the roof, be replicated with materials to be approved by staff and the chair. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Downine McMahon and Thomann absent). RECONSIDERATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 1207 MUSCATINE AVENUE. Kuecker said that the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership would like the Commission to reconsider the alteration to the side door of this house. She said that at the May 13 meeting, the Commission denied the alteration to the side door. She said it is currently approximately six feet tall. Kuecker said that the door itself is in need of replacement. She said that it is proving to be difficult to find a compatible door that is the correct size without spending thousands of dollars. Historic Preservation Commission July 8, 2010 Page 6 Kuecker said the UniverCity staff has found several examples of nearby foursquare houses with taller side doors. She said that a six foot eight door is a standard size door. She showed an image of the interior of the house to show how much clearance is available there, because that was a previous concern. Kuecker said staff feels the change to the door is compatible with the historic nature of the house, provided the door is replaced with one that matches the foursquare/craftsman nature of the house and that all the trim along the new door or opening matches the existing trim. She said the plan is to move the header up and just fill in the amount of trim that is needed. Kuecker showed photographs of some of the other houses with taller side doors. She said there was only one she was able to measure, and it was a six foot eight inch door. Kuecker said staff recommends approval of this, provided that the door be approved by staff and all trim around the new door opening match the existing trim. MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the application for the new side door at 1207 Muscatine Avenue, provided that the door be approved by staff and all trim around the new door opening match the existing trim. Swaim seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Downing McMahon and Thomann absent). CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 10 2010 AND MAY 27 2010. Kuecker said the date for the May meeting needs to be corrected from May 13ei to the 27`f'. MOTION: Swaim moved to approve the minutes of the June 10, 2010 and May 27, 2010 Historic Preservation Commission meetings, as amended. Baker seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Downin¢, McMahon and Thomann absent). OTHER: Kuecker stated that the Commission needs to create a work plan. She asked the Commission members to look through the Historic Preservation Plan before the next meeting and see what they would want their goals for the next twelve months to be. Kuecker said that the City Council generally requests the plans around the beginning of August. Michaud mentioned information she came across about a driving tour of Chicago. Kuecker said one of the goals of the Historic Preservation Plan is to develop tours of the City. She said that there are usually six or seven goals on the work plan so that Commission members would want to look through the Historic Preservation Plan and decide which ones are most important. Kuecker showed a series of dates at which historic preservation will be discussed. She said Commission members are welcome to attend, and there should be at least one commissioner at each meeting to answer any questions. Kuecker said that usually falls to the chair, unless she is unable to attend. Kuecker said that the denial of the application for the vinyl siding for the house on Maggard Street has been appealed and will come before the Board of Adjustment on August 11~'. She said the homeowner would have to prove that the Commission was arbitrary and capricious in its decision in order to have it overturned. Kuecker said that next week the Planning and Zoning Commission will be reviewing the zoning code amendments that are needed in order to implement the handbook changes. She said that will then go to the City Council, likely at its August 17~' meeting. Kuecker said the City Council has to have three readings and three votes, which can be collapsed into two. She said that the new guidelines will probably be adopted by the end of August or mid- September. Baldridge asked if the replacement of the house that burned on Davenport Street would come before the Commission. Kuecker confirmed this. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte Z 0 V Z ~`_ r Q W W a 0 N 2 NWN I.f~ W U Z Q D Z W F- a N ~ ' r r r ~ r j ~ i i r ~ O ~ ~ i ~ r i ~ ~ i N ' i ~ i ' X X X ~ ~ X ~ X ~ X W ~ X X ~ X X ~ i ~ X X X X X ~D N X X X X i i ~ X ~ O ~ X X ~ X X X X ~ ~ X X ~ X ~ X X X X X X X X X ~ X X X ~ ~ c! ; ~ ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ; ' ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z o X o X o x x x o o X N 0 X X X ~ X ~ X X X X X r X W ~ ~ W M ~ rn N M ~ ~- rn N M N ~ rn N M M ~ rn N M ~- ~ rn N M •'- ~ rn N M ~ r- rn N M N .- rn N M O ~- rn N M N rn N M ~ rn N M M rn N M N rn N M F- W z W Y z O W Q = F- ui ~ ~ m W ~ W W m J_ ~ C7 Z o ~ Z ~ N Q w W ~ Z Q O ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a D 2 V ~ N W ~ '~ Z a J z C7 Q can Z Q ~ Z O ~ V Q W ~ ~ Z ~ ~ U' Q 3 0 r 0 N E O ~ O ~ O U Z N X ~~ C c ~ ~ .. ~ d ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~QZ o a Q u u Z uuw~~~ XOOZ ;