Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-02 Bd Comm minutesi CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Commission: January 17 Item Number: 5.a. January 17, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES FINAL IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION JANUARY 17, 2019 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Warren Bishop, Minnetta Gardinier, Derek LaBrie, Christopher Lawrence, Robert Libby Members Absent: Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp Others Present: Matt Wolford, Carl Byers, Ron Roetzel, Jared Wingo, David Hughes, Doug Schindel, Carol Freeman, Mike Fagle, Matthew Wilke, David O'Loughlin, Melissa Underwood, Bob Cohrs, Shawn McMahon, Paul Anderson RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 6:09 P.M. 2019-2023 ENGINEERING RFQ INTERVIEWS: Tharp noted that this evening will consist of them interviewing the finalists for the engineering RFQ. This would be for the consultant who would be doing the engineering and design services for Airport projects, both State and federally -funded projects. Continuing, Tharp explained what the schedule is for each consultant to give their presentation. He added that they do have three firms participating in this process. AECOM: Presentations began with AECOM and David Hughes. He stated that AECOM has been with the Airport for 15 years and that they would really like to continue in this role. Hughes then introduced AECOM team members Doug Schindel, Carol Freeman, Mike Fagle, Matt Wilke, and David O'Loughlin, adding that this is the team that would be involved in the work at the Airport. In his presentation, Hughes stated that he will show why AECOM should remain in the engineering role, especially with their in-depth knowledge of the Airport and its facilities. Sharing some history about AECOM, Hughes noted that they are the second-largest engineering company, with 87,000 employees worldwide in 150 countries. The AECOM team has regional airport experience, as well as both national and international airport experience. Hughes stated that AECOM has had several name changes over the years, but that their experience has only grown stronger, developing such entities as the Aviation Design Center in Des Moines. Hughes then spoke to the various areas of expertise within their organization. He January 17, 2019 Page 2 also spoke to various projects in the Midwest that they have worked on, from O'Hare Airport to Des Moines. Speaking to airport design experience, Hughes noted the Waterloo Regional Airport and various projects they have worked on there. Along those same lines, he listed many of the projects that AECOM has been a part of over the past 15 years. AECOM's knowledge of both FAA and DOT requirements is a positive factor, as well. Hughes continued, stating that AECOM is committed to providing quality services. He then spoke further to some of the most important projects that have occurred at the Iowa City Airport — obstruction mitigation, runway rehabilitation, apron reconstruction and expansion, and taxiway improvements. Hughes wrapped up his presentation, reiterating that AECOM is committed to providing quality engineering services to the Iowa City Airport. Hughes then opened it up for questions from the Commission. Member Bishop asked for some clarification of AECOM's role in the Airport seeking FAA grants. Hughes explained how he works directly with Tharp on the various grants, using adopted plans, such as the master plan and the layout plan, for guidance. Libby then asked what type of vision AECOM has for the Airport. Hughes responded that projects like lengthening runways would give the Airport even more growth, for example, as would more hangars and paved areas. Gardinier then spoke, thanking AECOM for all of the work they have done for the Airport. She brought up how five years ago when they were doing these same type of interviews, she was the one who really questioned AECOM and the work they were doing. She asked Hughes what he feels they have done differently over the past five years in terms of improving AECOM's service to the Airport. She added that what she felt was problematic over this time were the pavement issues and the issue of a 5,000 -foot runway that came to light during the master plan process. She questioned why AECOM was not aware of this issue and why they did not bring it to the Commission's attention if they did know. Hughes responded by giving some background information on why the runway issues played out the way they did. He explained the battles they faced with the FAA in getting funding. He stated that at the time the Airport was a Category C airport and the runway extension became a safety improvement, thus allowing approval by the FAA. Hughes also addressed the issue surrounding the pavement problems and how this was resolved. Another question asked revolved around projects that have gone over budget or over the expected completion date, and how they can work together to prevent these things from happening in the future. Hughes addressed this, noting that AECOM has the knowledge and expertise to work with the Commission in all of these important areas. Several other AECOM representatives also spoke to their in-depth knowledge of the Airport and their ongoing ability to help them grow and expand. Bolton & Menk, Inc.: Tharp introduced Ron Roetzel, Carl Byers, and Jared Wingo with the firm Bolton & Menk. The presentation began with Roetzel speaking to Bolton & Menk's history. Byers then spoke to his background, noting that he has attended several of the Airport Commission meetings. Wingo then introduced himself, noting that he would be the Planner for the Airport. Roetzel addressed Members again, speaking to their corporate philosophy of `client first, client focused, and for the long-term relationship.' Bolton & Menk has a strong presence in Iowa, serving 60 municipalities and 15 airports. Byers then spoke to pavement projects at the Airport, and he shared an inspection report, a pavement condition index, which shows that there are no serious problems detected. With the regular inspections that are done, he believes they can then use those FAA - funded projects when maintenance issues arise. Speaking to the ongoing obstruction mitigation project, Wingo gave a brief history of where Bolton & Menk come from. He spoke to the GIS. capabilities they have and how this web GIS could benefit the Airport greatly. Continuing, Byers then spoke to the goal of the Airport with the obstruction mitigation project — to get more runway January 17, 2019 Page 3 and better approaches. He pointed out ways to do this, speaking to the thresholds and how they could make changes there. Wingo then spoke to a key area — the ability to coordinate with `flight procedures.' He stated that Bolton & Menk would propose they utilize Wingo's experience as an instrument procedure specialist, as well as his FAA contacts, to get into that queue and start looking into the actual project that would be needed to achieve such a goal. He continued, giving further detail on how they would tackle such a project. Byers continued from here, noting how important the approaches are for the Airport and how they could possibly move forward in 2020 with such a project. He added that being pilots themselves, they completely understand the impacts such issues can have on an airport. Byers wrapped up by telling the Commission that Bolton & Menk would really like the opportunity to work with them and he thanked everyone for their time. Members then asked questions of the Bolton & Menk team, starting with their progress on the Le Mar's project. Wingo and Byers responded, detailing what was accomplished before the weather turned, adding that the government shutdown has also hampered progress here. The importance of `flight procedures' and a PAPI was reiterated, with Wingo and Byers answering Member questions. Both brought up the importance of communication with flight checks. Gardinier asked for some clarification on such a project and what type of costs might be associated with it. Byers spoke to the typical requirements when relocating an approach and where the costs usually lie. The Bolton & Menk team continued to speak to the importance of a PAPI being in use. Flexibility was another key element that the team touched on, speaking to the changes that will be coming in the future of aviation. They wrapped up by responding to questions on the web GIS system and the various uses of it. Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) Inc.: Tharp introduced Melissa Underwood and her team from SEH and they began their engineering presentation. Bob Cohrs began, giving a brief history of SEH and his career to date. He noted that he is also a pilot, with his expertise in planning and environmental issues. He introduced each team member, as well as Paul Anderson from MMS Consulting, who would be overseeing the surveying and construction inspection portions. Underwood then spoke to Members. She noted that she has 16 years' experience in the planning and aviation field. She noted that she was part of the team that worked on the Airport's master plan a few years ago. She too is a pilot and has worked on general aviation airports all over Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas. Shawn McMahon spoke next, noting that he has been with SEH 11 years now. He served as a pilot in the Air Force on a C-17 aircraft. Paul Anderson with MMS Consulting then introduced himself. He stated that they would be the local contact for the team, if they are chosen for the contract. Some history of SEH was then shared with the Commission. They work in six different markets — transportation being one of them, which includes aviation. SEH has served over 120 airports through the years. The SEH team continued, giving the Members a more in-depth history of their organization and the breadth of their organization's expertise and knowledge. Underwood then spoke to the master planning process and the various steps they worked through to come up with the completed product. Referring to the Airport's CIP, Underwood spoke to how they would suggest moving through these important projects. McMahon also spoke to the CIP projects, again noting how SEH would move through these to completion. Underwood wrapped up her presentation by stating that SEH is very dedicated to being the consultant for the Iowa City Airport. Members then asked questions of the team, with the first centering around the minimization, or elimination, of downtime on runway 2-5 with respect to approaches with the PAPIs being moved, etc. The SEH team responded, briefly outlining how such a project would proceed. January 17, 2019 Page 4 They also spoke to similar projects that they have been a part of, noting that weather-related delays tend to be the biggest concern. Gardinier asked how they navigate using drones to check for cracks in pavement without causing flight disruptions. The SEH team responded and further explained how they use the GIS system to keep this type of information up-to-date. Tharp stated that the Commission can make the decision tonight if they wish, or they can defer to the next meeting. Gardinier stated that she is open to making the decision this evening and others agreed. Members began their discussion, with Lawrence asking for some history on the projects that AECOM has overseen in the past. Gardinier responded, stating that she did like tonight's presentation by AECOM; however, in remembering the last time they went through this process, she again questions using their services. Giving some history to the newer Members, she stated that the negatives for her are that AECOM is almost too large of a firm and that the Airport is often `not in their sights.' She believes there have been some gaffs in certain projects, oversights on what was done or not done. Gardinier also spoke to the runway issue, where the master planning process showed how the runway could be extended. Other Members agreed that fresh eyes might be just what they need. After further discussion, Members agreed that the preferred consultant is Bolton & Menk, Inc. Goers reminded Members that they have not yet addressed the financial side of such an agreement, He therefore recommended that the motion not reflect certainty in who gets the contract, but rather who they are choosing as their preferred consultant. LaBrie moved to have staff move forward in negotiating a master agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc., as their preferred consultant. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the December 20, 2018, meeting were reviewed by Members. Bishop moved to accept the minutes of the December 20, 2018, meeting, as presented. Gardinier seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM / David Hughes I. Obstruction Mitigation — Hughes stated that the revisions have been made in the contract and that it was signed about a week ago. ii. Terminal Apron Rehab — Tharp noted that they need to set the public hearing now on this, another DOT -funded project. 1. Consider Resolution #A19-01, setting a public hearing on plans, specifications, and form of contract — Lawrence moved to consider Resolution #A19-01 to set a public hearing. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5=0. b. FBO / Flight Training Reports L Jet Air — Matt Wolford began with the monthly maintenance reports. Gardinier asked about the light bulbs needing to be replaced after crews have cleared snow on the runway. Wolford responded to questions and concerns, noting that most of the tasks have been routine this past month. January 17, 2019 Page 5 Wolford stated that with a slowdown in business this time of year, they have been sprucing things up and doing some cleaning. C. Airport Operations i. Management — Tharp stated that he will be out of the office on January 31 It for the Transportation/Aviation/Rail/Transit Day on the Hill in Des Moines. He also spoke to the City budget process, noting that he went through the operations budget on January 5th and then through the CIP earlier this week with the City Council. He felt his presentations went well. Speaking to a recent request that he received, Tharp noted that there is a corporate hangar coming open soon that Tom Snell would like to obtain. Tharp explained how he would like to handle such requests. ii. Events — Tharp stated that there are currently no events planned at the Airport. In regards to events this summer — the Young Eagles will be sometime in June. Tharp added that he is working with other City departments regarding the possibility of having the Monarch (butterfly) Festival at the Airport this summer. In previous years, it was held at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. d. Commission Members' Reports — None. e. Staff Report — None. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, February 21, 2019, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. Tharp reminded Members of the public hearing at this meeting and therefore they will need to be present. ADJOURN: Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. Q 03/26/2019 CHAIRPERSON DATE January 17, 2019 Page 6 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o '44 0 0 0 00 0 co 3 O 3 3 3 0 a NAME EXP. N to N 3 3 m i 0)0 N a c° a 5 u, N o-4 i 3 co 00 00 .-a co co 0 00 0 Warren 06/30/22 N N O/ Bishop M NM NM NM M E X X X Minnetta 07/01/19 01 Gardinier X O/E X X X X X E X Robert 07/01/20 O/ O/ Libby X X X X E E X X X Christopher 07/01/21 Lawrence X X X X X X X X X Derek 07/01/22 N O/ LaBrie M NM X X X X X E X Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Commission: February 21 Item Number: 5.b. February 21, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES FINAL IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21, 2019 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Warren Bishop, Minnetta Gardinier, Derek LaBrie, Christopher Lawrence, Robert Libby Members Absent: Staff Present: Sue Dulek, Michael Tharp Others Present: Matt Wolford, Carl Byers RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 6:02 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the January 17, 2019, meeting were reviewed by Members. LaBrie moved to accept the minutes of the January 17, 2019, meeting as presented. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0, Bishop absent. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects L Obstruction Mitigation — Tharp spoke to this project, stating that Members received a preliminary schedule of how this should play out. He then briefly touched on some of the items that will have to be completed as they move through the obstruction mitigation project. ii. Terminal Apron Rehab — Tharp briefly spoke to this project, giving Members a quick run-down of what will be involved in it and what to expect once it begins. This is a 75 -calendar day project, according to Tharp, with an expected start date of April 15. He then responded to Member questions regarding closures, etc., during the project. 1. Public Hearing — The Chair opened the public hearing at 6:08 P.M. Public hearing was closed at 6:12 P.M. (discussion above) 2. Consider Resolution #A19-02 approving plans, specifications, and form of contract and publishing bids — Lawrence moved February 21, 2019 Page 2 Resolution #A19-02 as discussed. Gardinier seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. b. Engineering Consultant — Tharp noted that Members have a copy of this master agreement in their meeting packet. He briefly explained what this agreement does over the next five years and then responded to Member questions and concerns. i. Consider Resolution #A19-03 approving master agreement with Bolton & Menk - LaBrie moved Resolution #A19-03 as discussed. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. C. FY20 Iowa DOT Grant Application — Tharp then spoke to the increase in fuel sales at the Airport over the last few years, due in part to the various projects that have allowed more traffic to come to the Airport. In 2018, he noted that they sold approximately 340,000 gallons of jet A, which is approximately 43 tank loads of fuel. With this increase in fuel sales, Tharp stated that he would like to add another storage tank to the system. Another project for the DOT grant program would be the credit card kiosks, a project that was applied for previously but not granted. Tharp added that another project to apply for under this program would be extension of the parking lot and driveway area. Members briefly reviewed this possible project and how the funding might come together for it to be completed. d. FBO / Flight Training Reports i. Jet Air — Tharp gave kudos to Jet Air for their help during this difficult winter. Matt Wolford then began with the monthly maintenance reports. In addition to the continuous snow and ice removal, he noted that Jet Air has now hired a comptroller who will be based here in Iowa City. As they needed to get an office area ready, staff has been cleaning and painting around the Jet Air offices. Business has remained steady, according to Wolford, with winter conditions causing them to keep some of their jets at the Cedar Rapids Airport. Flight training has, of course, been very slow due to the winter weather. e. Airport Operations i. Management — Tharp stated that they are at the half -way mark in the budget year. Road repairs for the University hangar put somewhat of a dent in the budget. Otherwise, Tharp stated that things are moving forward as expected. ii. Events — Tharp noted that he gave a tour recently to the University Women's Culture Club, with approximately 30 people in attendance. Gardinier asked if they have ever contacted the schools to see if there is an interest in aviation. Members spoke briefly to this topic, noting things like aviation camps and STEM programs where the Airport could collaborate with schools. Commission Members' Reports — Gardinier stated that she and Tharp talked with the Library recently about having a naming contest of some sort for the viewing area. She needs to follow up on this. February 21, 2019 Page 3 g. Staff Report — Tharp noted that he will be out of the office on the 28th, when he goes to Des Moines with others to speak to the Infrastructure Committee about funding. Tharp added that Dulek is back with them for now, as there are some changes being made in the City Attorney's office. The Iowa Aviation Conference is being held April 16th through the 18th in Sioux City this year, according to Tharp. Anyone interested in attending can contact him. Consider a motion to go into Executive Session under Section 21.5(1)(i) of the Iowa Code to evaluate the professional competency of individuals whose appointment, hiring, performance or discharge is being considered when necessary to prevent needless and irreparable injury to that individual's reputation and that individual requests a closed session — Lawrence moved to go into Executive Session at 6:53 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. Lawrence moved to leave Executive Session at 7:34 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, March 21, 2019, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. ADJOURN: Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:36 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. 1,14 " Y- - "! �) x � CHAIRPERSON 03/26/2019 DATE February 21, 2019 Page 4 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 KM. X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o 0 0 4 0 00 0 0 -y CD o 0 NAME EXP. 0 v j Warren 06/30/22 N N O/ Bishop M NM NM NM M E X X X X Minnetta 07/01/19 1 0 Gardinier X O/E X X X X X E X X Robert 07/01/20 O/ O/ Libby X X X X E E X X X X Christopher 07/01/21 Lawrence X X X X X X X X X X Derek 07/01/22 N O/ LaBrie M NM X X X X X E X X KM. X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Board of Adjustment: December 12 Item Number: 5.c. MINUTES APPROVED BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DECEMBER 12, 2018 — 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Ryan Hall, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT! CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM ROLL CALL: Walz announced the member Bryce Parker was deployed to Germany and therefore has resigned his position on the Board. The City Council has selected one new member (to replace Chrischilles), Amy Pretorius, and they will now have to select another member to replace Parker. Walz noted in January they will do some Board training since there will be two new members. At the January meeting they will also nominate a new Chair and Vice Chair, traditionally they have gone with seniority which would make Goeb the new Chair and Weitzel the Vice Chair but that can be changed and it will be discussed next month. A brief opening statement was read by Chrischilles outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. CONSIDER THE AUGUST 18, 2018 MINUTES: Goeb moved to approve the minutes of August 18, 2018. Weitzel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0 REVIEW BOARD PROCEDURES: Walz explained that every year they review the Board procedures and noted there were some updates that were made in 2018 like language changes (i.e. the name of the Neighborhood Services Office). Walz handed out current Board procedures and asked the Board to review and noted Staff are not requesting any updates or changes at this time. Walz said another recent update had been to clarify the recusal process and how that works as well as if somebody wanted to abstain from a vote. Chrischilles said he reviewed the document and doesn't see anything that needs updating. Board of Adjustment December 12, 2018 Page 2 of 3 Weitzel agreed. Hall noted he doesn't think the document online is the updated version as it is dated 2012 and Walz said that would be corrected. Hall said the information regarding the temporary alternate for the Board is not in the document online. Dulek said that is not in the Rules of the Board but rather in the City Code and was codified by ordinance. Chrischilles noted that when his term is done he is willing to be on the alternate list when needed. Dulek stated the language regarding the alternate that is in the City Code could be added to the end of the Board Procedures document as well. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: Walz said they have one application they are working on they believe will be ready for the January meeting. Dulek noted the application will have a conflict with their office so the Board will be represented by Ryan Moss who is an Assistant County attorney. Dulek stated in the past when there was a conflict with the City Attorney's office they would hire outside council but the decision has been made to now use the City of North Liberty attorney or Johnson County Attorney's office. Walz thanked Chrischilles for his service on the Board and presented him with a certificate. Walz introduced Jessica Lile who will be the staff contact for the Board moving forward. ADJOURNMENT: Goeb moved to adjourn this meeting. Weitzel seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0 Board of Adjustment December 12, 2018 Page 3 of 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017-2018 NAME TERM EXP. 10/11 12/11 2/14 5/09 6/13 8/18 12/12 CHRISCHILLES, T. GENE 1/1/2019 X X X X X X X GOEB, CONNIE 1/1/2020 X X O/E X X X X HALL, RYAN 1/1/2023 -- -- X X X X X WEITZEL, TIM 1/1/2021 X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present 0 = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member Item Number: 5.d. AW1I Q- CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Community Police Review Board: February 20 I Oz. CITY fir CITY OF IOWA CITY ;5,N "nom- MEMORANDUM18�� 70M Date: 3/13/19 To: Mayor and City Council From: Staff Member of Community Police Review Board Re: Recommendation from Community Police Review Board At their February 20, 2019 meeting the Community Police Review Board made the following recommendation to the City Council: (1) Accept CPRB #18-02 Additional action (check one) X No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action S:RECform.doc Final/Approved COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - February 20, 2019 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Donald King called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Monique Galpin, Orville Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Latisha McDaniel, David Selmer STAFF PRESENT: Staff Chris Olney, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Chief Matherly RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (1) Accept CPRB #18-02 CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Galpin, seconded by Townsend to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the Meeting on 1/8/19 • ICPD General Orders 01-03 (Performance Evaluations) • ICPD General Orders 99-03 (Prisoner Transport) Motion carried, 3/0, McDaniel and Selmer absent. NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS Community Forum - Olney discussed the draft items for the forum included in the meeting packet and asked members for any changes. The Board agreed to proceed with the topic of discussion as being the introduction of the City's 1St newly appointed female Captain and also to have the Police Chief give a presentation and be available for questions. Proposed Ordinance Change Discussion - King informed the Board that the Ordinance change was voted on for 2nd consideration at the February 19th Council meeting. Olney added that when the transcription is available it will be included in the CPRB packet and that the final vote will be at the March 12th Council meeting. Townsend asked Staff about the information requested regarding the City's policy on requesting Council attendance at Board/Commission meetings. Olney stated that there is no City policy, a majority of the Council would have to agree to a proposal from the Board, and it would be a public meeting. Townsend handed out a memo he had written for members to review regarding a new recommendation for ordinance change. Townsend explained the recommendation would be for City Council to assign a Council member liaison who could meet with a Board member individually to discuss any issues or concerns on how the CPRB is handling its processes. After further discussion, it was agreed upon to have a sub -committee of Townsend and McDaniel meet with Legal Counsel Ford to draft a memo regarding the new proposed ordinance change to be discussed at the next Board meeting. CPRB February 20, 2019 Page 2 PUBLIC DISCUSSION None BOARD INFORMATION None STAFF INFORMATION None Final/Approved EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Galpin, seconded by Townsend to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 3/0, McDaniel and Selmer absent. Open session adjourned at 6:06 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 6:19 P.M. Motion by Townsend, seconded by Galpin to accept CPRB Complaint #18-02 as amended and forward report to City Council. Motion carried, 3/0, McDaniel and Selmer absent. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) March 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm April 9, 2019, 5:30 P.M. Helling Conference Rm April 29, 2019, 6:00 P.M. IC Public Library (Community Forum) May 14, 2019, 5:30 P.M. Helling Conference Rm June 11, 2019, 5:30 P.M. Helling Conference Rm ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Galpin, seconded by Townsend. Motion carried, 3/0, McDaniel and Selmer absent. Meeting adjourned at 6:21 P.M. COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2018-2019 (Meeting Date) KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member TERM 3/19/18 4/17/18 4/23/18 5/8/18 6/12/18 7/23/18 8/21/18 9/11/18 10/9/18 11/13/18 12/11/18 1/8/19 2/20/19 NAME EXP - Donald 7/1/19 X X X X X X X X O X X X X King Monique 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Galpin Orville 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Townsend Latisha 7/1/21 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ----- X O X X O McDaniel Royceann 7/1/21 O/E X O/E X O/E ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ ------ ------ Porter David 7/1/21 X X X X X X O X O X O X O Selmer KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD A Board of the City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 (319) 356-5041 2/21/2019 To: City Council { Complainant City Manager Equity Director Chief of Police = ; Officer(s) involved in complaint From: Community Police Review Board Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint # 18-02 This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of Complaint CPRB # 18-02 (the "Complaint"). BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows: 1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).) 2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1): a. On the record with no additional investigation. b. Interview /meet with complainant. c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers. d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance in the board's own investigation. e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses. f. Hire independent investigators. 3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis" standard of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs report, because of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2).) 4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if: a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious; or c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practice, or any federal, state or local law. 5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of fact; and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(3).) 6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to discipline the officer involved. BOARD'S PROCEDURE The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on September 27, 2018. As required bection 8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigatn. The Chief's Report was filed with the City Clerk on December 26, 2018. The Board voted on January 8, 2019 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report: ° ,Oh the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(1)(a). , The Board met to consider the Report on January 8, 2019 and February 20, 2019. Prior to the January 8, 2019 meeting, the Board reviewed audio and video recordings of the incident. FINDINGS OF FACT On August 25, 2018, the Complainant was involved in a traffic accident with another civilian in Iowa City. The accident resulted in minor vehicle damage only — no persons were hurt. The officer involved in the Complaint responded to the scene. Upon arriving on the scene, the officer involved in the complaint listened to the Complainant explain the sequence of events that caused the accident. The officer then asked the other civilian involved in the complaint her sequence of events. The officer involved in the Complaint examined the vehicles, damage to them, their locations in the road, as well as indicators of speed such as brake marks on the pavement. He shared his observations with the Complainant, and informed her that the scene as he found it was being documented by use of his body camera that was recording since he responded to the call. The officer also asked about whether there were other witnesses who may have knowledge of the incident. There was one other witness who allegedly supported the other civilian's reported sequence of events. The officer instructed the other civilian involved in the complaint to provide the contact information for the alleged witness if/when she obtained it, but the officer had no other way of identifying the witness. Upon conclusion of his investigation on the scene, the officer involved in the complaint issued a citation to the Complainant for failing to stop at a stop sign. The officer involved in the complaint explained to the Complainant his findings that supported his investigation. The Complainant did not agree with the officer's conclusions. The officer explained to the Complainant how she may contest the violation in court and showed her where on the citation all relevant information to do the same was located. The officer involved in the Complaint generated a Motor Vehicle Accident Report. In the report he documented the contact information, description, and license and insurance information for each party, a summation of the statements of the parties involved in the accident, his conclusion on the cause of the accident and to issue a citation, citation identifying information, and his own identifying information. Both parties were provided a copy of the report and were instructed to contact their insurance companies to report the accident. Approximately a month later, the Complainant challenged the citation in court. She was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the violation in the citation which the officer had issued to her on August 25, 2018. Shortly after, she filed the Complaint. ALLEGATION 1 — Improper investigation. Upon review of audio and video recordings related to the Complaint, the Board finds there is no evidence to support this allegation. The officer involved in the complaint interviewed both parties involved in the accident, examined the physical evidence, searched for additional witnesies, located and documented identifying information, license, and insurance information, and includetr4he information he gathered from his investigation on his report. The board affirmed the opine set fprth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. f y , Board's Findings: Allegation 1 — Improper investigation - Not sustained Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 1 — Improper investigation - Not sustained ALLEGATION 2 — Misinformation on collision report. Upon review of audio and video recordings related to the Complaint, the Board finds there is no evidence to support this allegation. The officer's report contains identifying information, insurance and licensing information, a summary of the statements of both the Complainant and the other civilian involved in the accident, a summary of the physical evidence from the accident, the officer's findings of the cause of the accident and basis for issuing a citation based on the facts gathered from his investigation, and proper identification of the citation, along with information about how the Complainant may contest the citation in court. Complainant points out discrepancies between the report and what she alleges is reality. Some of the discrepancies the Complainant points out go to her personal identifier information: that her weight is 264 pounds and not 240 pounds as reported; that her height is six feet tall and not five feet eleven inches as reported; and that she is Hispanic and not white as reported. Each of these inconsistencies are very minor and, more importantly, inconsequential to the overall purpose of the Motor Vehicle Accident Report under the circumstances. The Complainant herself offers no explanation for how the minor discrepancies of her personal identifiers negatively impacted her in any consequential way. To demand exacting verification on these details that are inconsequential under these circumstances is simply unreasonable. Just the opposite is likely more true: it would have been more unreasonable if the officer had required such exacting information, for example, by requiring the Complainant to stand on a scale to determine her exact weight on the scene. The remainder of the discrepancies claimed by Complainant seek to challenge the conclusion of the officer involved in the complaint as to whether she committed a violation. Through the report, though, the officer provides accurate summations of both parties' explanation for the accident, what he observed, and his own conclusion. Complainant's position is that because she disagrees with the officer's conclusion in issuing her a citation, and because the officer's conclusion to issue her a citation is in the report, that the report therefore has misinformation. The accuracy of his conclusion and whether citations were correctly issued is for the court forum. This was explained to Complainant on the scene and instructions for how to proceed in challenging the officer's conclusion and citation were provided to her in writing. In fact, Complainant did challenge the conclusion in court at a later date. The conclusions in the report were the officer's, and were accurately reported. That the Complainant disagrees with those conclusions does not make them misinformed or inaccurate. All of the pertinent and consequential information the officer provided in the report was within a reasonable degree of accuracy under any reasonable standard. The board affirmed the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief. Board's Findings: Allegation 2 — Misinformation on collision report - Not sustained Chief's Report Findings: Allegation 2 — Misinformation on collision report - Not sustained COMMENTS None. I Item Number: 5.e. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: February 14 MINUTES FINAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL February 14, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Zach Builta, Helen Burford, Gosia Clore, G. T. Karr, Quentin Pitzen, Lee Shope MEMBERS ABSENT: Thomas Agran, Sharon DeGraw, Cecile Kuenzli STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Ray Heitner, John Yapp, Michael Nolan RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: Stone Railroad Bridge. Bristow said the Development Committee asked that this item be brought before the Historic Preservation Committee as a late addition to the agenda. Bristow said Florence Stockman researched this stone railroad bridge in 2007 and her document is filed with the State Historical Society. Handouts of this document were provided. Bristow said the bridge was located on the northeast side of Iowa City. She used an 1892 Sanborn Fire Insurance map to show the railroad branch. The railroad was started around the 1870s. It was a branch line that connected a junction point called Elmira to the railroad that ran through the south side of Iowa City around the station on Wright. Boyd asked if the bridge was near the southwest corner of Taft and Lower West Branch. Bristow confirmed. She shared a 2011 aerial map from the Johnson County Property Information Viewer. She pointed out some stone abutments that were visible due to tree leaf loss. She believed there to be one on each side of the stream and another in the middle. She said she was able to trace the rail line from a 1930s aerial map. The stone bridge abutments are the last remaining visual representation of the rail line. Bristow noted that historically Iowa City and some of its subdivisions were platted to follow this train line. On a 2011 aerial map she showed the line went right through the corner by the coop. It jogged over across Iowa Avenue, followed Jefferson Street, went behind the Woodlawn District, then cut down through an area where there are still some alleys and some evidence of the rail line running through. The Chadek Green Park had a factory for many years. The rail line had a point where they could off-load material to that factory. Bristow said the newer developments in town obliterated evidence of the rail line, but the older developments show an outline of the rail line. Bristow displayed the preliminary plat for the area being discussed. In this development, where the stream jogs, the rail line was going north -south. She pointed out the general location of the limestone abutments; giant, dressed limestone. One of them has the date of 1892 carved into it. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 2 of 12 She said in order to get sanitary sewer line across this stream, the stream bed would need to be regraded, and the remaining abutments could then cause in flooding. Bristow said it was her understanding that only the middle abutment would need to be removed. The Development Committee was looking for feedback from the Commission regarding this possibility. Bristow had provided the Commission with copies of Other Planning Districts from the City's Historic Preservation Plan. She said this area was not included in the Historic Preservation Plan directly but would be included in the category other districts. She went over the objectives outlined in the plan for these other areas, which included consideration of transportation resources such as bridges and early roadways. Bristow noted the North District Plan included an image of part of the stone bridge and talked about it. The plan said according to a longtime resident, a portion of a Rock Island Railroad spur connected Iowa City with a small settlement northeast of Iowa City called Digby. This railroad spur generally followed the south branch of Ralston Creek out from Iowa City through what was now called Scott Park and cut diagonally across the Lindemann Hills SE quadrant, the area being discussed. It said although the rail spur had been abandoned and virtually disappeared as agricultural uses displaced the line, a remnant of the original stone railroad bridge over Ralston Creek was located on the Jerry Lindemann farm near Taft Avenue. Bristow explained the bridge remnant is barely visible when there is plant growth. Bristow also shared a drawing showing the planned sanitary sewer line and new trail. Bristow said the Development Committee wanted to know if the Commission felt it was important to retain any portion of the stone bridge. She said Staff recommended the idea of removing the minimal amount necessary to prevent flooding. If removed, direction is needed on what to do with the remnant. Boyd said he was a little uncomfortable having the Commission weigh in formally on something they hadn't had time to read and that members of the public weren't aware was going to be discussed. He wondered why it was added to the agenda in this manner. Bristow was not certain of the scheduled timeline for this project and deferred to representatives present at the meeting. She believed the Development Committee wanted HPC to be aware of this project to determine if it should be added to a future agenda or, if HPC did not feel it was important to look at in more depth, they could move on from here. She agreed if this needed formal discussion, it should be on the agenda so the public would know about it in advance. Ray Heitner, Neighborhood and Development Services, said this issue did have a bit of urgency, which is why it was being discussed at this time. Ray said the applicant was committed to listening to the Commission's feedback and incorporating any suggestion that might come out of discussion here. He said City engineers and the applicant's engineers have gone back and forth with several iterations, several concepts of how this site might be properly designed and engineered. Heitner said City Engineering Staff felt removal of the middle pier would probably be all that would be necessary to accommodate adequate flow level for the creek. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 3 of 12 Karr asked if they were worried about flooding houses that were being added on the lower side of the creek. He wondered if that's what made this an urgent issue now. Heitner said with the elevation change from raising the creek bed in order to accommodate the sanitary main, flooding could occur upstream from where the current stone abutments are located. Heitner wanted to know if the Commission wanted more research and discussion or if it didn't engender much thought or discussion. John Yapp, with Allen Homes, representing the developer, said he understood the concern about this not being on the agenda. Yapp said originally, when they started planning for this development, their goal was to use those abutments as a trail bridge and to preserve them in place. After inspection by their engineers, it was determined this was not possible because of the age and because there had been some scouring underneath those stones and uncertainty as to whether they could survive as a trail bridge. Yapp said their second goal was to leave them in place, maybe putting up a plaque explaining the history of them. He said the sewer line will require raising the creek bed because of City requirements for separation between water and a sewer line. Through that process, the City Engineering Staff became concerned about the flooding issue. If you raise the creek bed, that decreases the capacity of the creek. The stone piers become a pinch point in the creek. Yapp said if they had to remove the stone piers, their goal would be to create a monument adjacent to the trail to help explain the history. He said they recognize the history they provide. He noted that currently the piers are not accessible, in the middle of a creek, and not visible in summer. As a monument example, he shared slides showing a girder off the old Benton Street bridge that was turned into a trail monument with a plaque explaining its history. Boyd confirmed there were three pieces of bridge remnant and asked Yapp if he was suggesting moving all pieces to the monument. Yapp said they wanted to have the most minimal impact, removing only what was necessary to prevent flooding. Shope asked if the remaining two piers would be inaccessible to the public if left in place. Yapp believed that to be true because there is a steep creekbank with a lot of vegetation. Shope asked if there was any provision for a park along the trail. Yapp said to the south of the creek, Stonebridge Estates Part 8 will be land dedicated to the City as park space. He said the area to be dedicated goes to the creek. The east -west trail already is in place and they will be building the north -south trail all the way through and to the street. Pitzen asked if the stones were dry stacked, which would make them easier to move and restack. Yapp said they would probably need a small crane to move the stones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 4 of 12 Bristow asked about timing. Yapp said they prefer not to wait a month. Karr asked if they were moving dirt in March and trying to get everything permitted. Yapp said they would begin when weather allows. Bristow noted that upper level City Staff asked her to find out how the Commission felt about this subject instead of waiting to put it on the March meeting agenda officially. Builta thought it might make sense to remove all the pieces to prevent flooding and because they are not serving their original purpose. He thought the pieces could be used for a better purpose, whether that be a monument or something else. Karr liked the idea of removing the middle stone and using it for a monument of some sort, while keeping the remainder intact. Pitzen agreed. Burford said she liked the idea of making a monument or incorporating it into the neighborhood. Boyd liked the idea of the monument and said if the middle piece needed to go for engineering purposes, his preference was to preserve in place the other pieces and hopefully find a way to make them more accessible in the future. He thought this would add character to the neighborhood. Clore agreed with Karr. Shope agreed with Boyd. He said it was fortunate there was a park space planned in that area. Bristow wondered if accessibility to the remaining parts might be improved with the planned regrading of the stream. Yapp said he would talk to the engineers about that. Boyd said in terms of due diligence, at the next meeting this should be a Commission Information and Discussion item. That way members of the public would be aware and could come and comment if desired, and any additional information or questions could be discussed. Boyd asked if there was any other public discussion. There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1117 Seymour Avenue — Longfellow Historic District (garage demolition and reconstruction and house addition). Bristow explained this property is the farthest west in the Longfellow Historic District. She said it was unique because it had frontage and sight line from Seymour Avenue but, because of the alley right next to it, you can also see the side of the house Bristow shared a head shot of the house. It is a minimal traditional house, a very popular post- war type of construction and infill that we had in this district and others in town. It has a side HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 5 of 12 gable with a front gable projection. She said it had a little bit of a bump -out in the back originally, but it did not have a gable there. A view showing the relationship of the house and the garage was shared. Bristow assumed the metal awnings would be removed. She said they were not original and could be approved as a minor review. She said they also plan to redo the concrete slab used as an entry stoop. Bristow explained there would be an addition to the house and removal of the synthetic siding, as well as removal of the garage and the construction of a new one. Bristow said the garage is in poor condition. Staff had worked with the architect through the idea of saving it and building another one to moving it, to finally to taking it down and building a new one. She said the whole sill plate is rotted at the bottom and has had structural issues that previous owners have unsuccessfully tried to remedy. A shot of the garage from the alley showed a typical, small garage. She said the windows do not have any trim around them and are not in good condition. The siding is a Dutch lap that is weathered and split. Bowing and warping of the structure, in multiple directions, can be seen. Bristow showed a picture of the garage interior showing the poor condition of the sill plate and some of the bracing. She said they had the roof completely redone with sheathing and shingles at one point in time, but it now needs to be replaced. She said the slab underneath is cracked and everything has shifted. She said there is a slope from one side of the overhead door to the other that is probably 4 inches or so because of the settling of this garage. Because of its condition, Staff recommends taking it down. While the new garage would be a two -car garage, they would match some of the details like siding and the same kind of windows. Bristow said on the house, a side entry door will be removed because of interior space reconfiguration. Bristow said the greatest setback of the new addition would be on the west side of the house, with some visibility from the alley. Bristow showed a picture of the rear of the house. A screened porch was added in 1996. She said removing that would not be an issue for this Commission. Bristow said the house had an interesting roof line. Instead of copying the front facing gable on the back with the projection, they just slopped the roof down further. The east side of the house is closest to the neighbor and where the foundation wall is the easiest to see. The concrete block would be replicated with a facing block on the new foundation. Bristow said in the past they had some foundation issues with this house. They had parge-coated the area below in some attempt at waterproofing. She said the buttresses were not original and were probably added to help stabilize the foundation from bowing. Bristow explained this house will have the windows replaced. It does have typical double -hung windows. She said it was right at that time when builders were moving from the minimal traditional to a ranch style, but this house does not have ranch style windows such as a big picture window in the front. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 6 of 12 Bristow pointed out the sashes have some rot. They have broken panes, broken cords; those typical things we look at to repair. She said this house also had some issues in the frames, leading to a recommendation for replacement. She said when they put the synthetic siding on, they wrapped all the frames with metal. The metal trapped in moisture and has caused the frames to rot away. Some of the metal trim cover has been removed to verify this. Bristow shared the demolition plan showing the screened porch, garage and windows to be removed. The side door would be removed because of the reconfiguration of the spaces inside. It would just be walled over. A window would be removed since the addition is going to come up there. With the addition there is a slight step-in on the east side, only about 9 inches. The corner of the house will be retained. That's also where the neighbor is the closet, so being able to see that side from the street is not possible. Bristow thought retaining the corner and stepping it in a bit would be considered acceptable. Bristow showed the other, larger step-in on the west side. A dashed line showed where the actual wall will be. She said the roof comes over this space because they want to keep it as a covered porch and entry. They will enter here into a mudroom space. Bristow said the new two -car garage would enter off the alley. Bristow shared the basement plan; a new full basement. There will be an egress window because all new basements are required to have one by code. The plan showed the existing house was 30 feet and the new addition will be 25-27 feet in length. The roofline will also be stepped down so the height of the roofline on the new addition will be lower than all of the existing roofline on the house. Bristow explained it will have a couple bedrooms and a master bath in that space. Because of the door being relocated, they are relocating the basement stairs into this new addition. On the front of the house the changes will be siding and windows, and removal of the awning. The existing trim around the door, a Colonial Revival trim, will be repaired — stripped/painted. Bristow said the garage will be further back on the property.She said they are looking at plain. flat -panel doors here. Bristow explained Sanborn maps and other evidence say this house was originally clad in asbestos siding. No one knows what is underneath the existing synthetic siding and insulation. If they find asbestos shingle siding in good condition, they may keep it. She said nothing would require that they remove it. If the original siding was completely removed or found to be in poor condition, staff recommends new cement board shingle siding to capture the original intent. Bristow reiterated that this project has a large scope: Removal of the garage, construction of a new garage, a house addition, and window and siding replacement. Staff recommends approval. Boyd asked if anyone had clarifying questions. Pitzen wanted to know if the new garage would be using Dutch lap siding because that's what the old garage had. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 7 of 12 Bristow said yes, to match what was already there. She said the garage was built at the same time as the house and was not sure why they had different siding. Pitzen thought the garage probably did not have sheeting behind it, so that's why they used the Dutch lap siding. Michael Nolan, architect with Horizon Architecture, thanked the Commission and Bristow for reviewing the project. He explained the family living in the house love the location and the neighborhood and wanted to get it to a level where it will keep the same character and style for the neighborhood, but also take the next leap to be a livable home for a slightly larger family and also add in single -level living so it can continue to grow with them as they get older. He acknowledged the many what -ifs with this project. He said they planned to use hardieplank shingle siding of some sort. MOTION: Shope moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 1117 Seymour Avenue as presented in the application and Staff report with the following conditions: • All door and window products approved by Staff. • Existing siding and trim assessed, and removal/replacement approved by Staff. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. REVIEW DRAFT CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) ANNUAL REPORT. Bristow explained the annual report is the Commission's time to show the State all the great work we have done. Bristow explained the Commission should review what had been written and add or tweak the report as needed. She said the Commission had been very busy over the last year and this increased work could help demonstrate the need for additional staffing hours. In 2018 Bristow said there were 104 reviews, a 28% increase in reviews since 2015 when there were 81. There were other additions to staff time including the new preservation fund, new local landmarks, the Facebook page and increased public outreach, and the many grant projects currently underway. During 2018 Staff temporarily had an extra 10 hours per week, for a total of 30 hours per week. She said the last time they had only 20 hours per week was in 2017. Between 2017 and 2018 there was a 13% increase in reviews. Now they were back to 20 hours and had lost the assistance of the intern and the assistance of the Senior Planner, so it had been a really big cut. Bristow said that senior staff said that they will be looking at cutting back on Staff's responsibilities. Bristow noted the Commission had reviewed quite a few National Register nominations. For project reviews, Bristow said the State only counts any reviews that are for a primary structure, not a garage, and only those that are in a National Register Historic District. She said all our historic districts were also on the National Register, so we could count all of those, but we could not count the ones in the Conservation District. Bristow said certificates of no material effect were not counted because they are basically a repair or replacement with like materials. Even so, she said last year we had 28 reviews and this year we have 34. Local designations are included in the report. Bristow said the Commission did present seven local landmarks and five of them were approved. She said we did have a change to a locally designated property. That was approving the demolition of the house in the Conservation HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 8 of 12 District on South Lucas. The State wants to make sure we go through and work on protecting properties, so we have the work plan from last year. Bristow included another attachment for information. The Assistant City Manager and Tracy Hightshoe, the Neighborhood and Development Services Director asked in November 2017 for some strategic planning information just from Staff. This wasn't something that went through the Commission. This strategic planning document was included in the packet. Boyd said he had never seen this before. Bristow explained it was for overall strategic planning by upper level City management Staff. They wanted to know what we were doing in historic preservation. It does not get into the staffing shortfalls, but it does talk about the work of staff and the Commission. This Commission and historic preservation in our community have done quite a bit and will continue to do quite a bit. It includes the idea of the preservation summit held in Iowa City that they asked us to postpone. Generally, City management still wants us to try to move forward with holding a preservation summit here as soon as we can. This is not something we can do with the current staffing level, but it would be great for our community. Bristow said the next thing in the annual report to the state is to list all the ways that the Commission and Commission Staff provide technical assistance to the community and property owners. Bristow said the report talks about educational programming. She noted an outpouring of requests for interviews in the last year and said the podcast she and Agran were involved in went well. HPC former chair, Ginalie, and the former Executive Director of Friends of Historic Preservation, Alicia Trimble, presented for the Women's Club. This presentation could be repeated for other organizations. Bristow said no ordinances or resolutions were amended this year, but guidelines were updated, moving a few things from major reviews to minor reviews. Particular issues, challenges, and successes are included in the report. Bristow said she did add one because she thought it was important. The Commission approved seven potential local landmarks and five were approved by City Council this year. Two were not approved by City Council because of owner objections. No local landmarks have been approved when the owner objects. She noted some districts were approved when 20% of the owners objected, but not a local landmark, an individual property. She said recently we had a local landmark that would have protected some affordable housing which is a huge agenda for our City, but was not approved by City Council. Bristow noted that she thought Staff maintenance of the Facebook page would be cut due to short staffing. Without regular postings, she thought the Facebook page would also be at risk for removal. Bristow said a page would be filled out for each Commission member and training would be noted. She said the report is due at the State February 28th and must be signed by the Mayor prior to that. She asked that any report additions or modifications be submitted as soon as possible. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 9 of 12 DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM. Bristow explained that staff feel short of time to discuss this at this meeting and requests that it be deferred to the next meeting. The Commission agreed. She said once it is discussed, she will write up the HPC work plan and give it to City Council and the City Manager, including a memo. A few things were discussed so that the Commission could consider them for the future. Local Landmarks Bristow noted the City owns three properties that are all listed on the National Register of Historic Places but are not local landmarks: The Senior Center, which is the old Post Office, the Ned Ashton House, and the City Park Cabins. The goal is to designate them as local landmarks. She said Parks is looking at having a celebration sometime in early or late May for the cabins project. We would like to have that landmark designation completed by then. That means these will need to come before you next month so they can get through City Council on a contracted schedule by the time the celebration happens. Montgomery Butler House. Bristow wanted to mention the Montgomery Butler House as something to be considered for the work plan because it has been tabled. It was mothballed years ago and the enclosure had been compromised. She said that in 2015 a meeting was held with interested people from the public and some Staff about what to do. The problem with the Montgomery Butler House is there is no potential use. It is on the hill next to Dubuque Street with the Waterworks Park. She said in 2015 it was so overgrown with poison ivy it was hard to get to. Bristow said staff suggests the Commission take it on as a project since the mothballing has been compromised. Boyd asked the Commissioners to review the plan and, if they had specific things to add, to submit those items ahead of time for discussion at the next meeting, as well as adding a timeline. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 10, 2019 Boyd had emailed Bristow to make sure to fill in the time sheet in the back of the minutes. This has been done. MOTION. Karr moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's January 10, 2019 meeting. Pitzen seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0. COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Iowa City Downtown Update. Bristow said City Council was onboard with the idea of pursuing the National Register nomination. The State has approved the idea of using the urban renewal boundary as long as the additional necessary research is completed. An estimate for the project has been requested HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 10 of 12 from the consultant. It will still probably be early 2020 before we have a Downtown National Historic District. The idea of a downtown steering committee was discussed. Bristow said staff recommended that specific questions were answered before the committee was formed, including- • What is the role of the committee? • How often would they meet? • What kind of agenda would they have? • Is the entire goal of that committee a potential local district or is the goal somehow greater than that? Sanxav-Gilmore House Uodate Bristow said a consultant was hired to do a study, which has been completed. She said soon the report will go to the Commission and City Council. The report includes costs for preparing it to move and mothballing it, which involves monitoring it to make sure it does not deteriorate. It does provide some conjectures on possible rehab costs, but since the site and use are unknown, the rehab costs are a really wide range. It could be anything from just a rehab to make it function to a total historic rehab that makes the main staircase intact. She said they suggested completely removing the chimney on the exterior, as it had been added. All chimneys would be taken down to the roof to move the house and then rebuilt, except for this piece that runs up along the side of the house. She believed the City Manager and the Mayor were in talks with the University to just see if it could remain in place because of the costs, which are very high. 225 North Gilbert and 229 North Gilbert Boyd noted these two houses are north of the Haunted Bookshop and just east of Dr. Smollen's office, which was a proposed landmark that was unsuccessful. The City purchased them from Mercy Hospital and put out an RFP for people interested in rehabilitating and occupying them in a commercial use. There were several proposals in. The Council gave guidance to the City Manager to start pursuing conversations with these. The house that's directly north of the bookstore would potentially go to public space one, possibly a public gallery. He said there is a broader proposal so if you want more information, it's there. The Community Foundation is interested in buying the second building, the one to the north of there that's on the corner, for their offices. They are currently renting some space in the Chamber of Commerce. Their lease is up soon, and they are probably moving out. They are looking for their own space. Boyd emailed the City Manager about the houses. The City bought them at the direction of the City Council to preserve them. If there is not enough evidence to make them eligible as local landmarks, they will be preserved in the contract. The potential future owners know they could be landmarked. Bristow said she toured the houses with the consultant. She said the one to the north at 229 could be a house museum. It has its original wallpaper and everything. She said the consultant will likely have a draft of the study by April 2nd HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 11 of 12 Preserve Iowa Summit Theme: Reinvention through Rehabilitation, Newtown IA, June 6-8. Bristow said the summit will be nearby and drivable. If interested in attending, she asked the Commissioners to let her know sooner than later, as well as if they would want to stay there or commute back and forth. Other. Boyd handed out an article with interesting ideas about natural light in the second floor and how to make older buildings more useful. He said Nancy and the Downtown District asked him to share it. ADJOURNMENT: Clore moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Karr. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 14, 2019 Page 12 of 12 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 TERM NAME EXP. 3/8 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 8/9 8/23 9/13 10/11 11/08 12/13 1/10 2/14 AGRAN, THOMAS 6/30/20 X X X X 0/E X X X O/E X X O/E O/E BAKER, ESTHER 6/30/18 X X X X -- -- -- - BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X X X X BURFORD ,HELEN 6/30/21 - -- - -- X X O/E X O/E X X X CLORE, GOSIA 6/30/20 O/E X X X X O/E O/E X O/E X X O/E X DEGRAW, SHARON 6/30/19 X X X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X KUENZLI, CECILE 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E MICHAUD, 6/30/18 X X X X -- - -- -- -- -- PAM PITZEN, QUENTIN 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- X X X X X X X X X SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- X X X O/E X X O/E X SWAIM, GINALIE 6/30/18 X X X X -- -- WAGNER, 6/30/18 X X X X - FRANK Item Number: 5.f. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 Item Number: 5.g. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Housing & Community Development Commission: February 21 MINUTES FINAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ASSEMBLY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Megan Alter, Mitch Brouse, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Maria Padron and Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: [vacant position] STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Erika Kubly OTHERS PRESENT: Ryan Halst, Elias Ortiz, Craig Moser, Jake Kundert, Maryann Dennis, Shirley Tramble, Natasha Voelker, Kari Wilken, Roger Lusala, Roger Goedken, Carla Phelps, Brianna Wills, Heath Brewer, Ashley Gillette, Anthony Smith, GT Carr CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vaughan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 17, 2019 MINUTES: Eastham moved to approve the minutes of January 17, 2019 with corrections. Harms seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 8-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. MONITORING REPORTS: The Housing Fellowship (FY17, FY18, and FY19 Rental Rehab, FY19 Rental Acquisition, and FY19 CHDO Operating): Lehmann noted that Maryann Dennis with The Housing Fellowship provided a written monitoring report to the Commission. For the FYI 7, FYI 8, and FY19 Rental Rehabilitation of affordable rental housing, The Housing Fellowship has awarded HOME funds in the allocation years of FYI 7, FYI 8, and FY19 to rehabilitate 9 rental homes owned and managed by The Housing Fellowship. The Housing Fellowship also received an allocation from The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County for the project. To date The Housing Fellowship has rehabbed 5 of the 9 units and Dennis attached a spreadsheet that illustrated the properties and expenditures. The properties are: 1105 Pine Street, 700 S. 1 st Avenue, 2110 & 2112 Taylor Drive, and 1121 Ash Street. Bid advertisements were published for the rehab of 3 properties 2510 Friendship, 1202 Kirkwood and 58 Amber Lane. The bid opening was held on January 24, 2019. Four bids were received and three contracts awarded and work will start this month. Work bids are being put together for the remaining properties at 1226 Williams Street and 125 South Lowell Street. Work is expected to be complete by this summer. The properties currently occupied by low-income tenants are 1226 Williams Street, 2110 Taylor Drive, 1121 Ash Street, 125 South Lowell Street and 58 Amber Lane. For the FY19 HOME funds CHDO Rental Acquisition, The Housing Fellowship received a HOME allocation of $100,000 to acquire a rental property, The Housing Fellowship also received a State of Iowa HOME CHDO award of $450,000 to acquire three properties. The State required the properties Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 2 of 14 be less than 10 years old and move-in ready, and required the acquired properties be secured by State mortgage in first place, no private bank loan allowed, City HOME funds and State HOME funds were used to acquire a new townhome at 4940 Raleigh Lane, the cost of the townhome was $227,280 and the home is occupied by a low-income family of four. For the FY19 CHDO Operating The Housing Fellowship received $12,500 of the $25,000 in CHDO Operating HOME Grant to support the salary of The Housing Fellowship's Chief Financial Officer. Habitat for Humanity (FY17 Acquisition on N. Governor, FY18 Acquisition at 2629 Blazing Star, and FY19 Acquisitions at 2764-2774 Blazing Star). Lehmann read an email he received from Heath Brewer, director of the Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity, for this monitoring report. The FY17 Acquisition on N. Governor was completed in July 2018 and sold to an approved Habitat for Humanity applicant for under 50% of the area median income (AMI). There are five members in the family, mom and dad work for the school district as para-educators and the three children attend school in the Iowa City School District. The family utilized a homeownership assistance through the Housing Choice Voucher Program to help pay for the mortgage. The assistance administered by The Iowa City Housing Authority will allow the family to complete all payment of all mortgages on the property within 15 years of the sale all while paying less than 28% of their current income. This means the family will have an asset which is currently appraised at $250,000 in an area with consistent appreciation and real estate values. This also means they will no longer need any assistance from The Housing Authority and most importantly this opportunity has provided a stable and safe environment for the family to thrive. For the FY18 Acquisition at 2629 Blazing Star plans have been approved and the lot will be developed upon thawing of the ground. This project is slated to be the Doris Preucil Women Build project and will serve a family with an income just exceeding 40% AMI. The project timeline is March 2019 to November 2019, which allows the organization to fundraise and leverage local partnerships to develop the project for the least amount of cost. Previous women build projects raised between $50,000 and $75,000 in cash and received an average of $20,000 in free labor and materials. Finally for the FY19 Acquisitions at 2764-2774 Blazing Star plans have been approved and the lot will be developed upon thawing of the ground. This project is a zero-lot duplex project with the design highlighting two five-bedroom homes, both families building with this project have several members and will require larger than normal homes. The families have each received $25,000 from their churches to help development and are designated as the 2019 Interfaith Builds I & II. Both families have incomes under 50% AMI. It is an exciting project with a quick timeline from March 2019 to July 2019. Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program (FY19 Acquisition) Lehmann said again the Commission has been provided a handout with details of the properties and pictures and the use of CDBG funds that were a part of the project. Lehmann noted they were funded for one house for three SRO units and purchased 1311 Esther Street with $35,000 so they still have $40,000 outstanding they will use to purchase another home; they will purchase two properties instead of just one. QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION FOR FY2020 EMERGING AID TO AGENCIES APPLICATIONS: Vaughan stated they would review the applications one by one and the Commission can ask questions of any of the agencies that are in attendance. Eastham removed himself from the discussion of this agenda item as he is a board member of one of the applicants. Fixmer-Oraiz also removed herself as she is employed with one of the applicants. Redevelopment of Forest View Mobile Home Park. Lehmann said Rafael Morataya (Executive Director for the Center for Worker Justice) is unable to be here today because the Forest View Mobile Home Park is being discussed at the Planning & Zoning meeting at the same time. If there are any questions, Lehmann will relay them to Morataya and get answers back to the Commission. Padron asked about the requirements of the emerging agencies, she noted they must be less than two years old or have never had received money in the past. The Center for Worker Justice is six years old and has received funding in the past. It is unfortunate they aren't present because The Center for Worker Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 3 of 14 Justice is requesting funding on behalf of the Forest View Tenant's Association. Lehmann stated that for the Emerging Aid to Agencies they cannot have received Aid to Agencies funding in the last five years and The Center for Worker Justice has received City funding but not Aid to Agencies funding. Vaughan agreed that led to some confusion and asked Lehmann to update the application for future rounds. McKinstry asked if the entity that receives Aid to Agencies funding must be incorporated. Lehmann states the application criteria are that they do not need to be a legal entity for more than two years; it does not specify if they must be incorporated to receive funding. He noted that could be up to the discretion of the Commission as this is a new program. It was set up for new agencies, Lehmann would prefer it to be an established organization in advance of the funding, but it is not required. Padron stated she does not understand the numbers that were entered, they are requesting to pay the tenants $960 and that is $10.10 per hour which is $9,660 but they are requesting $15,000. She does not see where they explain what they will do with the rest of the funding. Lehmann said they noted the remainder would be used for general organizational funding such as communications, interpreters, child care and space rent. Lehmann said the funds are being applied for on behalf of the tenant's association so that is what the funds would be used for, not Center for Worker Justice operations. Padron asked about this tenant's association and why they are being paid to attend their own meetings. Harms agreed noting she was the chairperson for the Grant Wood Neighborhood Association for many years and never got paid, they went out and fundraised for various initiative such as the splash pad but it was all volunteers. She feels if there is an association vested in what they want done they shouldn't have to be paid. If there is a need for space, there are churches and community spaces they can use for free, and if there is a need for childcare they can find volunteers for that. Padron acknowledged that the residents of Forest View are low income residents and can see they may have difficulty getting to the meetings, she would just like to have more information from the organization. McKinstry agreed, the Commission needs more information. Lehmann said he can meet with Morataya to get answers to some of the Commission's questions and relay those back, and Vaughan as Chair can join the meeting if interested. Vaughan agreed. Padron noted that she used to work with HBK Engineering and was part of the new development of Forest View and HBK and Neuman Munson were paying for some of interpretation costs at meetings with the group so she questions how much the developer is responsible. Lehmann noted that some of those details are still being worked through as well as the relocation plan for the residents as the area is redeveloped. The reason Morataya is not here is because at the Planning & Zoning meeting tonight they are discussing those issues and he needed to be present there. Grow Johnson County. Vaughan commented that on the split of the AMI categories it has 25 persons in each category which is 100 people total and she said they likely serve many more and those numbers are important when making their considerations. She is unsure if all the recipients are low-income and it is probably hard to get those numbers but perhaps the organizations they deliver to could help get those numbers because she believes their impact is much larger than what the application states. Jake Kundert (Grow Johnson County) noted that was a technical issue and when discussed with Lehmann he suggested to just fill it out with zeros because they were having issues submitting the form. He noted because they work with a range of agencies that don't collect client data and therefore they do not have data on exact number of people served. Vaughan understands and acknowledged they do have good figures for poundage of food and number of servings that would make, etc. Johnson Clean Energy District. Vaughan asked for clarification on the structure of the organization, are they a subgroup of the Green Iowa AmeriCorps Craig Moser and GT Carr (Johnson Clean Energy District) noted they are just forming a new organization and at this point have an organizing committee that will become the board once they are set up. It will involve various persons who have worked with energy situations in other states such as architects, Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 4 of 14 homebuilders, energy auditors, etc. They are forming a 501(c) 3 this spring and their intent is to collaborate with the Green Iowa AmeriCorps team that is connected with the City and make referrals to that team as part of the process of getting the work done. Vaughan asked how far along are they in their process. Moser said their group has been meeting since October and are developing a plan and will be submitting another City grant that would help them implement a program model after the solarized Johnson County program to try and implement a large amount of energy efficiency work throughout the county next year. They are trying to coordinate with others, have met with City staff and serval other agencies, and collaborate to pull together all these efforts to meet the ambitious goals in the City Climate Action Plan. McKinstry asked about incorporation and an organization that doesn't have bylaws yet and likes the idea of corporate responsibility and insurance. He asked for clarification that the actual work done on homes is not done by the Johnson Clean Energy District. Moser confirmed that is correct. McKinstry asked where the money for the materials and labor to put into those homes would come from. Moser said some of it would come from the grant, some would come from the Green Iowa AmeriCorps (federal funds) and they are also expecting to do some significant fundraising. Moser said this is all modeled on the Winneshiek Energy District which was established seven years ago and Moser was a founding board member, and this model has been working up there and has done a great deal of energy efficiency work as well as renewable energy work. McKinstry noted it is like a clearing house for people to come to them and they do the research and investigation on what needs to be done and then someone else comes in and does the actual labor and installation. Moser confirmed and said at this point they do not have staff to do that work and would also be referring to the City rehab program which does some energy efficiency rehab work. McKinstry noted apprehension of developing capacity of telling everybody what they need to have done and needed reassurance that the ability to get it done was also available. He understands the need for a central place for people to come and get information and referrals but wanted to know there is the capacity to get work done. Moser noted part of the plan is to apply for HOME funds next year to do rehabilitation, they are just not at the point where they can do that yet. In their meetings with City staff they discovered a number of programs the City has to assist with pieces of this project but they are not well coordinated and can be confusing or difficult for clients or consumers to know which program to apply for. That this agency could play a coordinating role in steering people to the appropriate program. McKinstry asked how much it would cost to do an energy audit per household. Moser said other programs such as the one in Winneshiek County have found that a level 1 visit or audit can be competed for $125 which is a basic audit that changes out lightbulbs and aerators and a few minor things like that. A basic audit tends to create on average $100 worth of savings for a family per year. Lehmann noted they also discussed the organizations ambitions are beyond Iowa City but any use of City funds would have to be focused in Iowa City. McKinstry noted this is a way to leverage more federal funds by receiving local funds. Moser also noted there is a need for standardized data collection on amount of energy that is saved and amount energy bills are reduced and they have a program and can do this and document energy savings. Alter asked if with these funds would help with rehabilitation that would then provide the savings and they would use that data to do the fundraising. Moser confirmed that was his understanding of the purpose of these emerging agency grants, to help agencies get launched and get going so they can leverage additional funding from other services. Alter asked what else they would be using for their allocation for other than doing the $125 basic audit results. Lehmann noted the last page of the application has the full budget that shows the breakdown of how the allocation would be used. Moser noted that part of what they would do is coordinate agencies and advocate for clear air and clean energy efficiency, they need to sell the public on this whole idea. Padron noted that right now the Green Iowa AmeriCorps go to houses and do energy audits so can this agency collect data from them since they are already doing that. Moser said they would refer people to that organization to help complete the audits and do the "boots on the ground" work. Vaughan asked if both Johnson Clean Energy District and Green Iowa AmeriCorps will be doing audits Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 5 of 14 Moser said Green Iowa AmeriCorps would be doing the level 1 audits and Johnson Clean Energy District would provide level 2 audits that include things like possibly changing out a furnace or adding insulation, doing advance air sealing and ventilation, etc. These are additional services that would likely be a different income group that could afford to do them. They would do audits and hire contractors in town to do the actual work which would also strengthen the local economy by generating more market demand for contractors to do this energy rehabilitation and efficiency work. He noted that in Winneshiek County when they started doing this work there was one person doing the solar installations, at the end of a seven year period there were six electrical companies in town all doing solar installations and one actually bought solar panels by the truckload due to the high amount of business. Vaughan said they stated they would also be energy auditing and planning for homeowners, landlords and businesses and asked what percentage of their overall business they think would be for the low or middle income population. Moser said initially at least 75% with this grant fund, eventually and hopefully they will find people who can afford to pay for the audits which will help support the organization. He would also like the possibility of working with organization such as The Housing Fellowship in the future. Vaughan noted the application states the goal is to do 120 households with level 1 audits and 60 would be referred to the Green Iowa AmeriCorps. Moser said they could do some level 1 themselves but will also talk with the City rehab to see if they can assist as well. Vaughan asked if there is any charge for the audit to the low or middle income client. Moser said not the audits done by Green Iowa AmeriCorps. Vaughan asked if Johnson Clear Energy District did the audit there would be a charge. Moser said there could be some cost sharing, he is unsure since they don't have any funding as of yet, but are seeking funding to make the audits cost free. Lehmann noted that City is beginning to require that folks who receive city rehab dollars must get a Green Iowa AmeriCorps audit inspection prior to the rehab as part of the City's Climate Action Plan. Little Creations Academy. Lehmann noted a clarification, in terms of budget the amount of funds requested showed up as $56,247 but for the emerging agencies the maximum allocation is $15,000. Anthony Smith (Little Creations Academy) noted that was the amount requested for CDBG funds. Lehmann asked what the emerging funds request would be then, if it was just for the smartboard and labor costs or smartboard with labor costs per the attached bid. Smith said the request is for the cost of the smartboard and labor to install. Lehmann clarified the request is for $6,970. Vaughan said the application stated the number of people serving from the 0-30% AMI is 4 and they serve 20 children over the 80% and wondered if that was correct. Smith noted that was a mistake on the application they serve 80% at the low-income. Smith noted the smartboard will be used for the 20 children in the program plus 13 children in the afterschool program for doing assignments, lessons, etc. Padron said the daycare is in the basement of a church and wondered if the smartboard would belong to the church or to Little Creations Academy. Smith stated Little Creations Academy is a separate 501(c) 3 from the New Creations International Church and would own the smartboard. Successful Living. Vaughan asked if all clients are in residence there or if there are also outpatients. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) said at most 113 of the clientele live in their housing program and the rest are in an outreach program who live in their own houses or apartments. They make house visits to those clients. Vaughan noted the funding request is to pay staff. Goedken said it was to help cover additional expenses. He noted the rate the State pays for their services frankly has tightened and paperwork has increased so this request is to help cover the extra hours the staff puts in to complete their jobs. Vaughan stated that is likely a challenge they will face every year. Goedken agreed noting it has increased every year but they are working towards goals to be more efficient by developing or enhancing programs. Vaughan asked if they have a long-range plan for covering these additional costs. Goedken said there are different software programs that will be helpful and are requesting funds for those in this particular request. Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 6 of 14 Padron asked if the previous funding Successful Living has received from the City was from Aid to Agencies. Lehmann said in the past they have received CDBG or HOME funds for specifically acquiring or rehabilitating their housing, not from Aid to Agencies. Unlimited Abilities. Vaughan said the request is to look for a transitional home for four people and in the income breakdown 0-30% income nine people were listed. Shirley Tramble (Unlimited Abilities) said their organization currently serves eleven individuals who are below the 30% income level. Vaughan asked if that was the total population and Tramble confirmed it was. Tramble noted she founded Unlimited Abilities in 2017 and they are almost two years old. They currently lease two homes that house four individuals in one and three in the other, the rest of the individuals have their own homes. They are asking for funding to purchase their first home to house four individuals. Vaughan noted it appears to be an ambitious timeline and questioned how realistic the timeline was to one month close on a house, the next hire staff and her experience is these things typically take much longer. Tramble stated they have already begun the process, she already employs four staff and each house typically needs two members to staff it and they will have to hire two more staff members to work in the newly acquired home. Vaughan asked where the clients are referred from and if there is a waiting list. Tramble said she has a waiting list and gets referrals from DHS. She currently has four or five on the waiting list. The two homes she has now are transitional so there are clients that come, live for a bit and then move out and make space for others on the waiting list. McKinstry asked what the total cost was of the house they wish to purchase. Tramble said the have been looking and the house they were looking at was $150,000. Vaughan asked if they anticipate having to remodel or do any work on the house. Tramble said it was move -in ready and is working with a realtor and trying to stay within the $150,000 to $200,000 range. Vaughan asked if it was four bedrooms or was there a need for staff to live there as well. Trample said they only staff the homes Monday — Friday 9am to 5pm. McKinstry noted that finding a 4 bedroom house for $150,000 in Iowa City is difficult. Padron asked if they do not anticipate having to do any remodeling to the house so are the homes they are looking at already ADA compliant. Tramble noted the residents are diagnosed with mental illnesses and not physical ones so extra ADA needs are not necessary, they provide services under the habilitation waiver for mental illness. Harms asked if they have money in case they find they do need to do some repairs or remodeling on the home they purchase. Tramble said they do have a budget for those types of issues. QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION FOR FY2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENTS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (HOME) APPLICATIONS: Eastham and Fixmer-Oraiz rejoined the meeting. Lehmann began with staff comments, concerns, and questions from the applications. He noted they have a rough budget of $100,000 CDBG funds and $540,000 in HOME funds, there are currently $730,000 in requests for housing projects and $280,000 for public facilities projects. He will send out the budget sheets to the Commission so they will have that information as they put together their rankings and funding allocations. He stated they just got the appropriations announcement so they know HOME dollars are expected to go down a bit and CDBG are expected to stay flat although based on new cities joining the program and the funding allocation process, the City does not know its final allocation yet. Hopefully they will have it by the next meeting, if not the commission must set a contingency policy. Habitat for Humanity. Lehmann had five concerns/notes. First, they will have to deal with federal procurement standards (competitive bids) depending on how the project is structured. Currently the structure is the City helps with the acquisition of the lot and some of the construction so they get those funds at the end, for that construction they would have to do it competitively. The City may also structure it as down payment assistance then Habitat would essentially float the construction until the point where Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 7 of 14 they sell it to the tenant and the City would provide the funds directly to the tenant. The City will work through this to find the best fit within the federal regulations. With regards to Section 3, it is a requirement that happens with construction and rehabilitation, if it is over $100,000 of HOME funds then they may have to provide any new jobs that are created to be focused on low AMI individuals. For new construction of housing, the construction has to be completed within one year of the signing of the agreement, which happens after the environmental review, and the house must be sold within nine months. The sales price has to be within the HUD home limits for sales price limits which is currently at $228,000. Habitat has never been close to that with appraisal so that has never been an issue. The sale has to pass underwriting standards for both Habitat as the developer and the homebuyer. McKinstry asked if Habitat for Humanity had any issues with the federal regulations. Heath Brewer (Habitat for Humanity) confirmed they have briefly discussed with City staff regarding the acquisition of properties versus down payment assistance to alleviate some federal administration. He added they can float the purchase of the lot and wait until closing to use City's funds. He believes down payment assistance is probably preferable to lot acquisition as it is more direct to the homebuyer as opposed to the organization. Brouse asked if down payment assistance rather than lot acquisition would alter the project other than paperwork. Brewer said it may make the project move faster. He noted the benefit to acquisition is it requires the home to be built within a year, but even if they use the funds for down payment assistance they will still build right away, they will not land bank. McKinstry noted that the Commission scoring looks at number of individuals served and as Habitat is a homeowner project, it generally affects fewer people though more deeply. Therefore the scoring for Habitat is generally lower than other organizations that serve rental properties. Brewer acknowledged there is a large investment required to build a home to sell to a qualified buyer and a large subsidy is part of that, however his organization helps more people in other areas. In terms of selling a home to a qualified buyer, in Habitat's case between 40% and 80% AMI, when using HOME funds they look for buyers below 50% so they are subsidizing a project for people much lower than traditionally would qualify or even consider home buying opportunities. So yes, maybe they are helping fewer people but the impact is more profound, it is more of a generational investment. Homeownership provides stability for families. Many are larger in number and have trouble finding affordable rentals. Habitat is able to sell a property to a family with all home costs under 30% of the gross income, provide a mortgage they can pay for as it is well below market value, and they have equity in the home immediately. For instance they will sell a property for $140,000 that is appraised at $200,000 so that is $60,000 in instant equity and after 15 years the homeowner has full access to all that equity. This is a wealth building tool that is provided to these families so their children won't need these programs as their parents can now provide for them. Eastham asked if Habitat works with residents and families who have not obtained lawful status yet. Brewer stated they do not, per Habitat for Humanity international rules they can only work with documented citizens. The investment Habitat is making for these families is for up to 30 years so they want to make sure the homeowners will be here for 30 years. If a family is undocumented their stay in the United States may be out of their control. Lehmann noted the source of funds also requires citizenship for individuals receiving the funding. Harms noted that of course there are never enough funds to go around to fund all the great programs the community has so could Habitat take less allocation than requested and continue with their project. Brewer confirmed they could, it would just be fewer families they could serve or more time to complete projects. For every $50,000 they receive they can develop a new project. HOME funds are essential to allow Habitat to serve a lower income population. The request of $120,000 for four properties is for low income families, which frees Habitat funds to help other families that are maybe above 50% AMI. If they receive less than they asked for they will have to slow down the development of these projects. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if they did get less how they would decide if they move forward on the less than 50% AMI projects or the over 50% AMI projects. Brewer said they would move forward with the less than 50% AMI project first. He noted they have less and less applicants in the under 50% AMI category. Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 8 of 14 Eastham noted the Forest View relocation plan that is under consideration will provide homeownership opportunities for 50-60 households in the community who are mostly under 30%-40% AMI. Lehmann noted The Housing Fellowship has also developed homeownership opportunities in the past. Brewer mentioned the holistic approach of Habitat with housing goes beyond just the monthly mortgage, insurance and tax payment, they also go well beyond Code for insulation and systems they put in homes to make them affordable to operate and live in. They are always looking for opportunities to build these homes and make them affordable to live in. The goal is for homes that are safe, healthy and affordable. Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program (MYEP). Lehmann noted this is a rental/new construction project. They are requesting $200,000 to acquire two lots and construct two three-bedroom fully accessible homes to be operated as six single room occupancy units in their supported living community program. The total project budget is $600,000. Lehman said staff notes are similar to those for Habitat, they will need to comply with sealed bids, federal procurement standards, and depending on the funds allocated section 3 may apply, they have to build within one year and occupy within six months or put together a marketing plan. Also as this is five or more HOME assisted units they will have to implement the City's affirmative marketing plan. As a rental project it must comply with City underwriting requirements and regarding that with mortgage interest rates increasing and HOME rents expected to decrease need to address any concerns about adequate cash flow or borrowing ability. The proforma should also show a 15' year loss due to applying for tax exemption and the organization has to have the cash to cover it. Alter wondered if the partner could elaborate on their services and where the 16 homes they operate are, 11 of which they own. Roger Lusala (Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program) said all of their properties are in neighborhoods and named the various locations of the houses. He noted some houses have been purchased by MYEP, HOME funds have not been used for all. Eastham noted MYEP is financed with private funding for development of other homes and if they plan to continue that practice along with HOME funds. Lusala said they always finance, it is the down payment for the homes they partner with the City to provide. If MYEP has extra cash and can afford to put a down payment on a home they will do so, because they are a nonprofit they fundraise for home purchases. Eastham asked about the demand for additional units. Lusala said the demand for wheelchair accessible homes is high, currently there are people in their 20's and 30's living in nursing homes, not because they need nursing care but because there are no accessible homes elsewhere. When MYEP built the house in 2013 one of the first persons to move in was a 39 year old who had been living in a nursing home for years. The amount of accessible units available does not meet the need for the number of people they serve, additionally the wheelchairs are now bigger, people are larger and it is hard to find builders to build ADA accessible homes. When they build these units they add track ceilings to transport someone from a bedroom to a bathroom, sinks where wheelchairs can fit under, overall functioning to meet all a person's needs. Lusala said they have people on waiting lists for these units. Alter asked if the clients are renting or owning their units in these supported homes. Lusala said the clients are renting, MYEP purchases the homes so they can modify the homes to be accessible but are not in the real estate business to turn around and sell those homes. They also provide 24-hour services to those residents of the homes. Padron asked how long most residents stay in these homes. Lusala said it is very long-term living, for most it is permanent living, only to move out if their level of needs change. Alter asked if there is a three-bedroom house is it for three individuals that need services or is it a family. Lusala said it would be three individuals that need the services with staff coming and going. Lehmann added it is categorized as single room occupancy units and each client is on a separate lease. Lusala noted they were able to use the money the City awarded them last year to acquire two units rather Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 9 of 14 than just the one requested. Harms asked then how much does MYEP really need to move forward with this project this year. Lusala said the lots they purchase to build accessible units on have to be bigger lots because they cannot build up (which is cheaper, smaller lots), they often look for corner lots and those lots run about $75,000 to $100,000 each so that is why they are requesting $200,000. If they are only awarded $75,000 for each lot they will just have to search harder for those less expensive lots or do more fundraising to get to the $100,000 threshold. He noted they really need both lots as they have over 20 people on their waiting list for accessible units. McKinstry asked about the staff comment about rental rates falling and that the reimbursement rate is based on the rental rates in a given area, so if the rental rates for the whole area fall then the reimbursement to the agency falls. Lehmann said this is a concern is because they have to pass the underwriting standards with specific thresholds and CDBG fair market rents decreased from $468 to $459; rents are becoming more affordable as vacancies increase in the market. However underwriting may mandate less units being built or purchased or their mortgage rates may not stay under the $860 per month mandate. Lusala stated they are not looking at making money by the houses they rent, they are looking at providing services to the people. He added they use seven different banks because they make them compete for his business and give him the rates he needs to stay in his margins. Eastham noted a concern about underwriting and if staff feels projects are not viable it should be shared. Lehmann said it is more a concern about making sure a project passes federal underwriting rather than a concern about financial viability. In some cases, underwriting may indicate a need for the City to subsidize a project more deeply based on federal guidelines. Eastham requested the Commission see the numbers that cause a concern to be raised so they can evaluate as well. Lehmann said he will send his numbers in a follow up email. Successful Living — rental acquisition. Lehmann said the project is $240,000 to acquire four homes, they note they will add a fifth bedroom but HOME dollars are for acquisition only, so if it is not already in the property, the City cannot count any additional bedroom. For federal dollars and underwriting it is only 16 units but there will likely be another unit added after the acquisition is complete. Lehmann added that Successful Living provided responses to all staff concerns and comments. Lehmann continued noting that competitive bids will be required for any work such as adding a bedroom if that is part of the project. Successful Living has a realtor they use who is on their board which can be a conflict of interest for CDBG funds, but not HOME funds; Successful Living prefers HOME dollars. Section 3 may apply depending on the amount of funds allocated, if they have five or more HOME assisted units they will have to implement the City's affirmative marketing plan and they already do that. They may be subject to relocation requirements for properties occupied by tenants at the time of acquisition, historically that has not been an issue as they have been unoccupied or homeowner occupied. The Proforma assumes five units per property but will have to pass underwriting for four units. Additionally with the Proforma, they are assuming a 8% vacancy loss, maintenance and repairs is about $9,000 over what Lehmann would expect (generally assume 1 % of the value of the property) but Successful Living noted that amount is because of the particular houses and client population. Property taxes will show only in the first year, for SROs utilities need to be included under miscellaneous operating expenses so that is showing in the Proforma. Operating expenses are at 8% which is within the requirements, however the City typically prefers 5-7%, and finally they may be subject to federal labor provisions depending on the amount of units they have (kicks in after 8 units). Lehmann noted that he has discussed the proforma with Successful Living staff, and indicated they would not need to update unless requested by the Commission or in the case they are awarded funds Vaughan asked how many properties Successful Living currently has. Roger Goedken (Successful Living) confirmed they have five properties. Vaughan asked the occupancy on the five properties. Goedken said they are in the upper 90's right now, around a year ago they added a new intake person who has done marvelously getting better fit clients and occupancy up. The occupancy averages around 90% depending on the time of year. Vaughan asked if they have quite a bit of turnover or if this is transitional housing. Goedken said the houses they pursue are more permanent housing situations, but they have quite a bit of transition for their other houses due to mental health and levels of care changing. Goedken noted that about six months ago they had a waiting list of about 20 people and Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 10 of 14 now have a whole new list of 20 people and the list is growing so there is no shortage of need. Vaughan noted the application states the units will be affordable for five years, Goedken confirmed the period of affordability is for five years. Vaughan asked what happens after the five years. Carla Phelps (Successful Living) stated the affordability is a HUD definition based on $15,000 per unit. However Successful Living continues to provide the affordable rates for tenants past the five years, they never change the rents they charge, and they stay at the City levels. Lehmann noted the five years is for HOME compliance where the City monitors the rents, post five years the City no longer monitors. Eastham asked how long Successful Living had been operating in Iowa City. Goedken replied 21 years. Harms noted Successful Living provides supportive services and asked if they could describe the SRO units because the population they serve has specific needs and some of the amenities would be different. Phelps said it is a regular five-bedroom house, they make it nice and welcoming which is important since most people have never lived in a nice home, they keep homes clean and well maintained. They maintain good relationships with neighbors. Staff helps residents, takes them to their psychiatric appointments, takes them to get physical activity, etc. All residents have different needs so the staff working in the homes cater to the needs of the people living there. Eastham asked about the cost for the services Successful Living provides, where the payments come from. Goedken replied payment is from Medicaid. Eastham asked if Successful Living has the ability to finance home purchases with funds other than the HOME program. Phelps said they need HOME money for down payments. Goedken added they would not be able to expand their housing without support or funding from other grant sources. Banks will only assist with loans if they have down payment funds. Successful Living — rental rehab. Lehmann said this is for an existing home they own at 3107 Village Road, five bedroom SRO units, they are asking for $75,000. Staff asked if Successful Living could proceed with rehab if they have to repay any HOME funding or if they could proceed with equity rather than City assistance. Phelps responded stating they need a grant not a loan to proceed with this rehab. Eastham asked if there was a difference between Successful Living's requests for federal funds for rehab or in this case The Housing Fellowship's use of federal funds for rehab with this round of applications. Lehmann said the differences are clientele, Successful Living is persons with disabilities, The Housing Fellowship is typically families. Another difference is SRO's typically get a better rate of return on investment for the number of units because it is smaller units and they share the house, so you can often help more people in a single household than one family, which depends more on size. Lehmann noted based on the applications, 15% of the HOME allocation has to be awarded to a community housing development organization, which The Housing Fellowship is; in this case it is roughly estimated at $70,000. Eastham stated he does not see a difference in what Successful Living is doing in their rehab project versus what The Housing Fellowship is requesting. Lehmann said they are both using HOME rehab finance dollars. The Housing Fellowship — CHDO. Lehmann said this request is $26,500 for operating expenses which is up to 5% of what a HOME allocation can be used for, that and developer fees are the only ways to fund operating expenses. Lehmann noted the current estimation is around $23,000. If The Housing Fellowship receives CHDO funds they have to do a CHDO set-aside project (like a rental rehab) within 24 months of being awarded the funds. The Housing Fellowship — rental rehab. Lehmann said this is the only CHDO project that has come in, the other CHDO is HACAP but they haven't done a CHDO project in a while. They are asking for $69,180 for rental rehab of one four-bedroom and one two-bedroom property. $63,000 is requested for rehab and approximately $6,000 for administration of the grant. The Housing Fellowship must remain a CHDO for the period of affordability which in this case is 10 years minimum. Staff again asked if this project could proceed with rehab using equity rather than City assistance. Maryann Dennis (The Housing Fellowship) is unsure why the City is questioning if they could proceed with equity when they are required to provide a CHDO with the HOME reserve anyway. Could they do the Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 11 of 14 rehab with equity, sure but they just spent $225,000 in predevelopment costs for the low-income housing tax credit project. Dennis noted that even though their balance sheet may show a lot of equity, they could do it but it won't help The Housing Fellowship remain solvent. The Housing Fellowship has been a Certified Housing Development Organization for the State before Iowa City was an entitlement community. Dennis also acknowledged the conflict of interest issue stating on the application it states "identity of interest" which she feels is different than conflict of interest and The Housing Fellowship knows procurement procedures, they have always followed them, her contract manager married someone that owns a contractor company and therefore she is no longer involved in any way in the procurement or award of any contract or administration of rehab award if her husband's company is competitively awarded the bid. Lehmann confirmed that the City's legal counsel cleared that. Eastham asked Dennis to describe the process or method The Housing Fellowship is using for deciding which particular properties are due for rehab. Dennis said they look at the age and condition of the properties, they have a maintenance staff that keeps apprised of the conditions of the properties, they keep a capital improvement budget they review every year for depreciation of appliances, etc. Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP). Lehmann stated they are requesting $120,000 to renovate the emergency shelter for adult and youth victims of domestic violence, more specifically the parking area, youth services area and fencing. Eastham asked for priorities on the three or four parts of this project. Ryan Halst (DVIP) said the asphalt repair in the existing lots is the biggest priority as they are badly deteriorating. The fencing is to keep people out of the lot and keep victims safe even if outside. They would like to update the youth area because it is old, the flooring and whatnot, and things need replaced. Elias Ortiz (DVIP) added they are a 24 hour shelter that was built in 1993 and have served over 8,600 people and are always at capacity (which is about 40 individuals) and half the clientele at any given point is children. They have received CDBG funds in the past for renovations in the kitchen but the youth area has not been updated and it is important. They hold support groups for children in the shelter, do safety planning, etc. DVIP treats the children as their own clients, not as secondary to the parental client, and need a space for them. They wish to update the flooring, new functional cabinets for storage, and furniture to make the area functional and useful. Ortiz noted that last year they established Hoover's House which is the only shelter in the State of Iowa that has kenneling for dogs and cats so families don't have to make the tough choice of leaving their pets behind. That is why the fencing is so important but also Ortiz stated in the last year they have seen a huge increase (60-70%) in perpetrators showing up on the property, and security, safety and confidentiality are priority one. Little Creations Academy. Lehmann stated this request is for $51,968 public improvements project for the Little Creations daycare which predominately services low-income children. The project will consist of replacing some bathrooms, installing a boiler, floor tile, wall shelf and windows. Lehmann stated most of the projects are eligible but the boiler system will require funds to be proportioned and staff will work through how that can be done. The boiler is coming from another property, will be stored and then installed onsite. Because the boiler will also serve the religious portion of the property as well as the daycare they will need to apportion the funds. Padron noted this daycare is in the basement of the church and wondered if the daycare pays rent to the church. Anthony Smith (Pastor, Little Creations Academy) stated the daycare pays rent to the church. Padron stated they will be fixing restrooms and other items as a tenant and the landlord is the church. McKinstry recalls a previous application regarding a furnace for this space. Smith replied there are four furnaces in the building and a boiler. McKinstry asked how many of the other furnaces have been replaced. Smith stated they replaced two furnaces that are related to the daycare, the other two are related to the church which are the church's responsibility to replace. McKinstry asked how the boiler fits in, does it help to heat both the church and the daycare. Smith confirmed the boiler heats the church and one section of the daycare so that is why they need to apportion funds. Lehmann said they look at the square footage of the daycare versus the church and apportion the funds accordingly Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 12 of 14 Padron asked if the church has any intention of fixing these items themselves instead of making the tenant (daycare) fix them. Smith explained it is a unique situation with the boiler as they are getting it from another location and the church is providing the labor. Alter stated the Commission awarded a lot of money before to Little Creations Academy to install floors and remove asbestos and asked if this was a different location. Smith said the location is over 5000 square feet so the previous project covered 2400 square feet, this project will be replacing the floor tiles on the other 2400+ square feet. Old Brick — ADA Improvements. Lehmann noted this is a $400,553 project with the ADA improvements looking at a kitchen renovation (which serves the event facilities as well as the Agape Cafe which is the weekly meal for the homeless), ADA restroom and handrail improvements and some new flooring. He noted a wrinkle in the project in that it will need to meet a national objective to be able to qualify for CDBG funds. City staff is currently in discussions with the HUD representative about the possibility, the question has been escalated up the chain at HUD. Lehmann said this issue is for the kitchen renovation as well as the other project that includes the installation of a retaining wall. He stated all the ADA improvements are eligible expenses because it serves a limited clientele who are presumed to primarily be low -moderate income. Lehmann informed the Commission they can still award funds and if staff discovers part of the project may not be eligible, the award would go to the parts that are eligible. Lehmann hopes to have the answers from HUD before the next Commission meeting. Harms asked about the kitchen renovation and details on why it qualifies. Brianna Wills (Old Brick) said the primary way they qualify the kitchen renovation for low -moderate income is for 25 years Agape Cafe has operated out of this kitchen which serves homeless or no/low income individuals, about 80-100 people at each serving. Wills also stated that everyone that rents the ballroom can use the kitchen as part of the deal and because they are a low-cost rental property in Iowa City most of the guests that rent Old Brick qualify as 80% or under. There are 16 nonprofits that have offices within Old Brick and are almost all human services. Those nonprofits use the facility extensively including the kitchen. Old Brick is 163 years old and a very expensive building to maintain, they are aggressively looking at environmentally friendly options as they renovate, which can add more in terms of cost, but is important for the long term. They are trying to do the right thing and upgrade Old Brick to serve all organizations that come through. Other organizations use Old Brick too, including nonprofits that are not tenants. They rent space to tenants at $2 per square foot and elsewhere in downtown Iowa City the rental rates typically run between $18 and $25 per square foot for office space, so they are substantially subsidizing those nonprofits and that is what the mission of Old Brick is, to serve as a nonprofit incubator, and those nonprofits tend to use the facilities for fundraising events, lectures, etc. Wills added that the Agape Cafe Board of Directors are committed to help fund the kitchen renovation. Alter asked if Old Brick was on the National Registry and Wills confirmed it is. Wills added it is the second oldest public building in Iowa City, second only to the capitol, and was built on the tallest hill in Iowa City which is where the request for the second grant comes in. Old Brick — structural reinforcement. Wills continued to discuss the structural reinforcement retaining wall. When she came on board at Old Brick about a year ago she decided the property needed to be "prettied up" and opened a giant can of worms. When MMS Consulting came to survey the property and agreed to a free gardening plan, they discovered the hillside by Clinton Street had eroded to dangerous levels. Over 163 years the hill has now eroded enough to where the foundation is exposed and at a critical point where they are in danger of wall cracking, water damage, etc. Therefore this information led her to take other projects off the table because it was now the primary focus. At first they thought they could put up a retaining wall but found that the drainage from the building's roof goes through this hillside and would affect the wall. Therefore drains have to be redirected and unfortunately there isn't a sewage or drainage vent into the road for a whole city block. Therefore they will have to use water permeable pavers and this project is now estimated around $100,000 because the landscaping will have to be ripped up for the wall to be built, deal with the drainage issues. To deal with drainage they will essentially end up with a large patio at the front of the building, which will add value to Old Brick as an event facility. Wills noted that being a small nonprofit they do not have the $100,000 in reserves to pay for such a large undertaking and Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 13 of 14 such a significant capital project so they need to search for funding. Brouse asked if these improvements would quality for historical renovation grants. Wills replied they applied through the State for an emergency grant and was not awarded one because all funding for the year had been depleted. They will try again, but noted most of those grants are smaller ($5,000 or $10,000) but any funding will help. She has also investigated the cost-sharing option through the City and State and will try to obtain those funds as well for the permeable patio. Lehmann stated that for items that are not CDBG eligible staff is willing to help look for other sources. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if they had media coverage of the needs for Old Brick. Wills said they implemented a few programs such as a "brick buying" program, having your name on a brick, and also the repainting of the ballroom will have a donor wall for that, so they have been doing outreach. Fixmer-Oraiz noted that many in the community just don't know these things are going on and it is important to get the word out. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Lehmann noted the opening to replace Bob Lamkins closes March 5, to be appointed March 12. Looking for someone with a financial background or receiving rental assistance, so please encourage applicants. With regards to Legacy Aid to Agencies, the funding recommendation for the full amount was approved by Council but only for a single year so the Commission will must revisit this once this funding cycle is complete. He noted support for 3% annual funding increases so that can be built into the future planning. Eastham added he would like to discuss sooner rather than later, possibly April. Lehmann added Padron asked that applications be more consistent and perhaps give additional guidance to applicants (such as for demographic information). Padron added there were two applications that had no information on demographics and therefore on her chart they scored really low. Eastham agreed that demographic information should be part of the applications for housing projects but noted that some programs, such as the food programs, don't have a way to gather demographic information. Lehmann said this can also be discussed this spring/summer after this funding cycle is complete. With regards to community development happenings Lehmann announced they are monitoring right now, they received the RFPs for City Steps and are doing rankings and will hopefully have a consultant chosen soon to begin work this spring. Staff has started a preliminary review of affordable housing programs, they are still in ongoing discussions about how those might look. On March 5 in the Iowa City Public Library meeting room A the Chamber of Commerce is putting on an Affordable Housing Forum for developers and contractors, Commissioners are welcome to attend. Lehmann noted the next meeting is March 21 and they will do the Fair Housing Study Presentation, CDBG/HOME recommendations and Emerging Aid to Agency recommendations. He acknowledged the meeting is during spring break week and wondered if Commissioners wanted to reschedule. After discussion the Commission agreed to hold the next meeting on March 14. Community Development Week is April 22-27 please let Lehmann know of any ideas. Lehmann stated that organizations are mixing different pots of funding, Aid to Agency, CDBG/HOME, Sustainability, Human Rights Commission, Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, City funds and it has been raised whether this should be coordinated. He noted staff is also discussing this, but now they are just tracking funding; they have no formal recommendations on how to better coordinate. ADJOURNMENT: Fixmer-Oraiz moved to adjourn. Alter seconded. Passed 8-0 Housing and Community Development Commission February 21, 2019 Page 14 of 14 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/10 9120 10111 11115 12/20 1/17 2121 = Vacant Alter, Megan 7/1/21 X X X X X X X Brouse, Mitch 7/1/21 X X X X X X X Eastham, Charlie 7/1/20 X X X X X X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 7/1/20 X O/E X X X O/E X Harms, Christine 7/1/19 X X X X X X X Lamkins, Bob 7/1/19 O/E O/E X O/E O/E McKinstry, John 7/1/17 X X X X X X X Padron, Maria 7/1/20 X X O/E O/E X X X Vaughan, Paula 7/1/19 X X X X X X X Resigned from Commission Key; X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Human Rights Commission: February 19 Item Number: 5.h. APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Members Present: Jeff Falk, Cathy McGinnis, Bijou Maliabo, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara Kutzko, Noemi Ford, Adil Adams, Jonathon Munoz. Members Absent: Tahuanty Pena. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendation to Council: No. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:30 PM Approval of January 24, 2019 Meeting Minutes: McGinnis moved to approve the minutes with amendments; the motion was seconded by Falk. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 5-0. (Adams, Maliabo, Munoz not present). Funding Request for Night of 1000 Dinners: The Johnson County United Nations Association requested $250.00 for its annual Night of 1000 Dinners. At the event that celebrates International Women's Day, three organizations, Legal Aid of Southeast Iowa, 100 Grannies for a Sustainable World, and the Center for Worker Justice of Eastern Iowa will be recognized for their contributions to advancing human rights and the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals. Sponsorship of this event comes with three complimentary tickets. This is an event the Commission has sponsored for several years. To date, the Commission has supported community funding in the amount of $856.00 for fiscal year 2019. Kutzko moved to approve the request at $250.00; the motion was seconded by McGinnis. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 7-0. (Maliabo not present). Falk and Ferdig will represent the Commission at this event being held on March 13. Strategic Plan and Committee Updates: There are four committees that assist in advancing the strategic plan. The four committees are Housing (*Falk, Adams, Pena); Public Safety (*McGinnis, Maliabo); Education (Falk, Kutzko); and Community Outreach (*Adams, Falk, Munoz). Asterisks designates chairs of the committees. Housing has not been active aside from a couple of affordable housing advocates that came to talk to the Commission about area programs. Public Safety is discussing and talking about hate speech and disproportionate arrests. They do not meet every month but have been meeting more recently about hate speech that has been occurring on the University of Iowa's campus. As a committee they work on how to respond to hate speech while also looking at what has already been done. APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall They hope to be able to eventually teach people how to respond to hateful rhetoric when it happens to them. There was a brief mention of fliers that were posted in downtown Iowa City that read "Be Iowa Nice and Call Ice". The public safety committee plans on following up with law enforcement to see if there are any options re: the fliers and to take note of the occurrence of such incidents. Education has attended several meetings with the Iowa City Community School District. There appears to be a lot of misinformation between students, parents, teachers, and administrators. The committee actively works cooperatively with other organizations to assist in putting accurate information out to the community. Former chair Willis thought that the Commission could serve as an intermediate to see what issues people are concerned about and work to gather information on those issues so that things would not be anecdotal. Community Outreach has primarily done outreach to the community on the vast array of services available here in Iowa City. The committee also reminds community members of their rights and what the Human Rights Commission does. The committee admittingly has not been that active but did highlight the "Know Your Rights" program at the Broadway Neighborhood Center that included information on the Community ID program. Committees should plan on meeting to determine next steps, reevaluate goals that were set up in 2018 and to see the path that should be taken in 2019. Correspondence: Pride Con is on February 23 at Tate High School. If any Commissioners are available to sit at the vendor table, it is from 10-2. Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant: The City Council will make the decision on the Social Justice Racial Equity Grant (SJRE) recommendation at its meeting of February 19. Commissioners received correspondence from Successful Living. Its authors Carla Phelps and Roger Goedken wrote that "And then you SKIPPED OVER OUR 7th RANKED APPLICATION/AGENCY in favor of two lesser ranked organizations. YOU IGNORED YOUR OWN RANKINGS. At least two members appeared very pleased at that, so as to be able to fund personal favorites, ranked highly by one or two individuals but not by all. We found this offensive". Both Phelps and Goedken were present at the meeting of January 24 when the Commission made its grant allocation recommendations. 2 APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall McGinnis said that if she had participated in the grant allocations, she would have been in support of funding Successful Living at half the requested amount. She understands their frustration and the concerns they are raising but is not sure what the Commission can do to address them at this point. Ferdig mentioned that it might not be realized by others how much they (Commissioners) must review and get every detail in reference to grant applications. Ferdig thinks that their concern needs to be thought of in the future in terms of how the Commission does its rankings. She would like it to be discussed when they meet to talk about the grant process for fiscal year 2020. Kutzko asked if the letter needs to be responded to and Falk said that is why he wants the Commission to read and then talk about the letter, McGinnis pointed out that the Commission does a lot of cooperative events with Successful Living. For example, the City's annual job fair. Ford asked what would make the Commission not want to respond. Ferdig was not sure what responding would do at this point. Staff noted that Ford and McGinnis should not participate in any formal action on the letter because they were unable to participate in the grant process due to conflicts of interests with applicants for this year's grant cycle. Ford believes that not responding to the letter is like not acknowledging them. Ford is not suggesting the content but the gesture. That the Commission should acknowledge the email which was appropriately addressed, signed, and verbally explained their (Successful Living) view. Staff did acknowledge receipt of the correspondence to Phelps and Goedken in an email and let them know it would be handed out at the Commission meeting being held that evening. McGinnis asked what the protocol is for applicants that are not recommended for funding. Staff reported that emails are sent out to all applicants letting them know of the day and time the Commission will review the applications and make recommendations. They are also kept up to date on the recommendation and City Council's decision on the recommendation through email. Munoz's only concern about responding to the letter is due to the fact that the Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council, Successful Living still can go to City Council. They can voice this concern to City Council, the Commission 3 APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall does not have the final say and so, it is missing a step for the Commission to respond to the letter. Munoz went on to point out that there are other organizations that did not get funding and he does not think the Commission should establish a precedence of responding to all organizations that send a letter because all the Commission is doing is making a recommendation as opposed to any final decision. McGinnis asked about an organization that wrote a letter last year that was unhappy with the process. Munoz remembered that it was not an organization but a Commission member who wrote the letter. Staff explained that the Commissioner had a conflict of interest and could not participate in the grant process. They voiced concerns about the process and selection of grantees. Munoz believes that the rankings are just that, a ranking, and they are not something the Commission needs to follow. When he ranks an application there is a 1 to 2 point range between applications and so they mean a lot less than what standing alone they may seem to be. Ford feels a lot of hurt feelings can be prevented if the process was more transparent. Staff mentioned that two informational sessions were held to explain the grant process to potential applicants. Ford asked whether they knew the rankings didn't mean anything, staff replied that the rankings were discussed at the sessions but cannot make assumptions on what attendees took from the information provided. Staff also mentioned that the Commission Chair asks at the meeting where applications are discussed, and recommendations are made whether any Commissioner would like to change their ranking. The Commission is not swearing off on the rankings. The rankings can be adjusted at any point in the process. McGinnis added that attendees to the informational sessions could ask questions on the process. Staff said the presentation from the informational sessions is made available to attendees and placed on the City's website. Falk feels that the confusion may be due to public meetings that (by law) require everything to be relevant to the agenda. You just can't bring things up at a public meeting and a lot of people do not understand that and that there are reasons for this. I assume in the letter (from Successful Living) in one of the things they referred to that is on the agenda, is that you can address for 5 minutes but no one has to pay attention to you and there is no discussion about what you say. I think that can be better explained to the public. McGinnis said maybe they can lay that out at the beginning of the meeting. Staff noted that in the email sent out to applicants it was stated that comments pertaining to the 4 APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall grant would not be taken based on the decision of the Commission at its January 8 meeting. Chair Pena also noted this at the beginning of the meeting held on January 24. Munoz mentioned that every year we discover flaws in the process. Last year we got dinged because we over -funded, we recommended fully funding one organization that we should not have. Ford wants to know the reason the Commission would choose not to respond to the letter. Munoz responded that the reason the Commission is not responding is that they (applicants) have the ability to address the City Council directly and it is the City Council who ultimately makes the final decision and for precedential reasons. Ford asked for clarification of Munoz's comments. Maliabo, responded that if we respond to one then we have to respond to all. Ford believes the Commission is here to serve the community and if people have misinformation it is the Commission's job to correct it and promote growth. Ford, personally, would not mind answering 10 people if 10 people were hurt or confused. Ford is happy she wasn't involved in this decision-making process because it made her uncomfortable even just being present at the first meeting. Listening and feeling confused and not knowing how she could decide without feeling bad or biased. Ford wondered who she is to make this decision when all the organizations can benefit from the funding. Ford also wondered why, if there was money left over, not fund a partial use to Successful Living. Ferdig replied that there was only $500.00 left. Munoz provided that the Commission is a deliberative body and its reasoning is not singular. So, he does not know how to respond properly to the letter without each Commissioner having to describe why they individually chose a certain action. But he is open to vote on it, if there is a motion. Ford feels there is something dishonest about not replying to the letter. If the Commission is certain they followed the procedures and did what they could, then why couldn't the Commission just say we're sorry for how you feel we followed our procedures, if you have grievances design other ways to address them. Ford is nervous about next year if she has to be a decision maker in this process. McGinnis wonders if maybe in the next month or so it would be a good time to have a meeting about the grant. About how the process should be adapted for next year. Staff has sent out a survey to each Commissioner to gather all the comments and get feedback and this should make the meeting on the grant process more productive. 5 APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Staff also created a survey for SJRE Grant applicants to fill out to get feedback on their thoughts about the process. Munoz would like to table this discussion until after the work session is held on the grant. Ford wants to know how the City would have them do it because they're our boss. Staff responded that she believes the City Council would defer to the Commission on how it feels it should respond. But that the City Council makes the final decision on the recommendation and that the Commission is advisory to them. Falk moved for the Commission to respond by acknowledging the letter and thanking them for letting them know their thoughts and to ask them to attend the next Commission meeting to have a discussion about the process and allow non - Commission members to participate in that meeting. Falk thinks a survey will be fine and informative, but he feels that if the Commission gets a letter like this, they should respond some kind of way even if the response is kind of nebulous —we just say thanks for your input and add we're going to have a discussion about this and the time and place for such discussions. Maliabo wonders if a response is sent to this letter, will that then require the Commission to respond to other letters, if more should come. Falk thinks the Commission does not have to respond individually but could have a general response. Falk noted that the Commission would be responding but not to the actual criticism. Ferdig had concerns with the last part of Falk's motion to invite them in. She does not feel it would be constructive to invite them to a meeting. This is assuming they are aware of the fact that that the meetings are open to the public. Ferdig and McGinnis think the survey will allow applicants to note any criticism or concerns with the grant process. Falk accepted a friendly amendment to remove the last part of his motion. Adams seconded. Falk asked if he can respond to the letter as an individual. Staff reported that Falk can do as he chooses as an individual. Falk withdrew his motion and will reach out to Successful Living as an individual. Ford thinks there should be a stock letter that is available to send to organizations when there is this concern. Staff will email out the presentation from the informational sessions to Commissioners who had not already received it. 3 APPROVED MINUTES Human Rights Commission February 19, 2019 Helling Conference Room, City Hall Black History Proclamation: Munoz was acknowledged for accepting the proclamation from the City Council and in doing so reminding the community that Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated for work equality as a matter of social justice. BlackKKlansmen: Ford thought the discussion, held at The Englert, was really good. She was able to sit in the front row. It was a full house and the speaker, Ron Stallworth, was mind-blowing. He went through the whole story in the presentation. He took comments and questions from the audience. Very encouraging. It was wonderful. Youth Awards: Save the date, May 8th at The Englert. Reports of Commissioners: Malibo has attended meetings with the University of Iowa's Public Health to discuss ways in which the medical community can create better outcomes for Congolese maternal health. McGinnis went to hear Adam J. Foss; a former Boston prosecutor and criminal justice reform advocate speak at Coe College. Very good talk and very interesting. Ford has been asked to give a talk on the effects of separating families at the border. The talk is part of a non-profit agency fundraiser. More details are forthcoming. Adams spoke on a recent demonstration held in DC in support of freedom and justice in Sudan. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:41 PM. 7 Member Attendance Sheet Member Term Exp. 1/8 1/24 2/19 3/19 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11/19 12/10 Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present Present McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Present Munoz 1/2021 Excused Present Present Kutzko 1/2020 Present Present Present Falk 1 1/2020 Present Present Present Peiia 1/2020 Present Present Excused Adams 1/2022 Excused Present Present Ferdi 1/2022 Present Present Present Ford 1/2022 Present Excused Present KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Library Board of Trustees: January 24 Item Number: 51 IOWA CITY . PUBLIC LIBRARY 123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240 wrccm Susan Crag . v.nra 314356-5200 • rm 319-356-5494 • w Jcpl.org BOARD OF TRUSTEES Minutes of the Regular Meeting FINAL APPROVED January 24, 2018 Members Present: John Beasley, Kellee Forkenbrock, Carol Kirsch, Robin Paetzold, Jay Semel, Monique Washington Members Absent: Diane Baker, Wesley Beary, Janet Freeman. Staff Present: Terri Byers, Elsworth Carman, Maeve Clark, Kara Logsden, Anne Mangano, Patty McCarthy, Elyse Miller, Brent Palmer, Jason Paulios, Angela Pilkington. Guests Present: None. Call Meeting to Order. President Paetzold called the meeting to order at 5:02 pm. Public Discussion. None. Approval of Minutes. The minutes of the December 20, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Library Board of Trustees were reviewed. An addition to the President's Report, "we will work to not be part of that pattern," will be added to the sentence about legacy directors. A motion to approve the Regular Minutes with the additional language was made by Kirsch and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 6/0. Board members "officially" introduced themselves to the new Director. Carman said he is concentrating on building relationships and learning the tools we use at ICPL. Items for Discussion/Action. Policy Review: 401: Finance Policy. A request for a clarification about disbursements was made by Beasley last month. After consultation with the City Attorney's office, the policy language has been adjusted: "To ensure ongoing monitoring of the budget and to meet requirements of the local ordinance, all disbursements must be approved by the Board and signed by the President and secretary." Beasley said this fulfilled his request. Kirsch asked about whether balances can carry over. A motion to approve the policy as amended was made by Semel and seconded by Forkenbrock. Motion carried 6/0. Policy Review: 505: Volunteer Policy. Logsden said we have a great group of volunteers. Semel asked if we have any problems with volunteers. Logsden said our biggest issue is communicating about missing a shift. Byers said Community & Access volunteers range from 15 to 97 years of age. Washington asked about training; Byers said she has three different volunteer jobs, each with standard training. McCarthy said the Book End volunteers are quite reliable and $32,000 worth of materials are sold by them each year. Logsden said the annual Volunteer Recognition event is in April. This year there will be a special opportunity for volunteers to meet Carman. A motion to approve the policy was made by Kirsch and seconded by Washington. Motion carried 6/0. Strategic Plan Six -Month Review. Washington really liked the New York Public Library ad in the New York Times included in last month's packet and suggested we do something similar. In response to a question about the symposium with Obermann Center under the Collaboration section of the strategic plan, Clark said the Obermann Center often uses the library meeting rooms and we did a number of programs with them last year. This is a great partnership and it is likely this initiative will come off the strategic plan since we are regularly partnering with them. Paetzold asked where we are in the process of removing fines on children's materials. Carman said this was favorably received at the budget meeting with City Council and he believes Council is supportive. Logsden said we would put this in place in May and begin in June, once approval is received. Staff Reports. Director's Report. ICPL won best library in Little Village's Best of the CRANDIC, which included a write up in Little Village, and a plaque. Carman presented the budget to City Council, including the Capital Improvement Program items, carpet and furnishing replacement, and HVAC work. Carman said the library and its governance were viewed positively. Translating library information into multiple languages and removing barriers to access by eliminating children's fines are two examples. Carman believes it is important for the Board to hear our efforts are regarded this way. He is getting to know the landscape and publicly thanked the Board and Coordinators for helping him during the transition period. Departmental Reports: Adult Services. Tax forms have not arrived because of the government shutdown; we have been printing forms for people. Community & Access Services. Logsden thinks going forward our relationship with Grant Wood's after school program is strengthened because of our partnership with the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County on a grant. Development Office. McCarthy said there is one more Wednesday to "Eat Out and Read," at Pagliai's Pizza. Paetzold asked if there is restaurant scheduled for February for this fundraiser. McCarthy said the wine/beer tasting event at Hy -Vee takes place in February. Inservice Day. Kirsch said the report on Inservice Day was good but the day was even better. She thought the presenters were really good. Spotlight on the Collection. No comments. Miscellaneous. No comments. President's Report. Included in Transition Committee report. Announcements from Members. No comments. Committee Reports. Foundation Members. No meeting. Transition Committee. Carman said it has been anticlimactic so far, which is a good thing, said Kirsch. Carman said he is getting to know the City people, the staff, the Foundation Board, and others. He feels things are going well and he appreciates the Transition Committee. Paetzold said appointing the Nominating Committee is coming up in February and members should let her know if they have suggestions. Communications. None. Quarterly Financial Reports. Going forward, Beasley would like a few noteworthy items be bulleted to help focus on the data in the financial reports. Washington was surprised about fines and fees. Beasley reminded members the Board will assess the impact elimination of fines has on the library a few or six months after we stop charging late fees for children's materials. Beasley asked if City Council had any questions or feedback about fines. Carman said there were specifically positive comments. In fact, Councilor Teague wondered about what it would look like to be completely fine -free. Clark said ICPL's free meeting rooms were used as an example of a positive impact on access and model for other City areas where fees might potentially be reduced. In response to a question by Semel, Logsden described how items are billed Semel asked about theft. Carman said overall the data says theft is net neutral. He thinks beginning with children's materials has clear boundaries and is a controlled set and is therefore a good place to begin addressing fine elimination. Paetzold mentioned Cedar Rapids gifts books to children who cannot purchase them. Pilkington said Cedar Rapids receives a grant and is a Dolly Parton Imagination Library. Carman said this is quite expensive and successful. Children receive two books when they participate in ICPL's One Thousand Books Before Kindergarten initiative, and every child born in Iowa City receives a Begin with Books gift set that includes "The Little Engine That Could." Kirsch said her church supports Lucas School by providing books to children and other groups have similar efforts. Quarterly Use Reports. Kirsch asked if building use was affected by the Pedestrian Mall construction. Staff said it was and next year will be more challenging as construction moves to College Street. Paetzold remarked on the ever increasing download numbers. Mangano said Kanopy is not included in our statistics because it is considered a database according to the State Library. However, Library Channel 20 YouTube videos are included in the download statistic, which is why those numbers are up. Carman said we will provide members with a few bullet points for the usage reports as with the financial quarterlies next time. Disbursements. The MasterCard expenditures for December, 2018 were reviewed. A motion to approve the disbursements for December, 2018 was made by Kirsch and seconded by Semel. Motion carried 6/0. Set Agenda Order for February Meeting. Unattended children. Building calendar. Accreditation. Adjournment. A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Semel and seconded by Kirsch. Motion carried 6/0. President Paetzold closed the meeting at 6:07pm. Respectfully submitted, Elyse Miller Board or Commission: ICPL Board of Trustees ATTENDANCE RECORD 12 Month KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting MeetingDate Name Term Expiration 3/22/18 4/26/18 5/24/1 6/28/18 7/26/18 8/23/18 9/27/18 10/25/18 11/15/18 12/20/18 01/24/19 2/28/19 Diane Baker 6/30/19 O/E X x X X x X x X x O x Wesley Beary 6/30/21 Not on Board X X X X X O/E X John Beasley 6/30/21 x x x X X x x x X x X x Kellee Forkenbrock 6/30/23 X X O/E X X O/E X X O/E X X O/E Janet Freeman 6/30/19 X x x O/E O/E x x O/E x x O/E x Adam Ingersoll 7/30/18 O/E X X x X X Off Board Carol Kirsch 6/30/23 X x x x O/E x x x x x x x Robin Paetzold 6/30/23 O/E x x X X x X x X x x x Jay Semel 6/30/19 X x x x X x x x O/E X X x Monique Washington 6/30/21 X x O O X O/E x x O x X x KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting Item Number: 5.j. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Parks & Recreation Commission: January 9 IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES APPROVED JANUARY 9, 2019 RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B Members Present: Steve Bird, Luke Foelsch, Cara Hamann, Ben Russell, Angie Smith, Jamie Venzon, Joe Younker Members Absent: Suzanne Bentler, Brianna Wills Staff Present: Brad Barker, Zac Hall, Juli Seydell Johnson Others Present: None CALL TO ORDER Chairman Younker called the meeting to order at S p.m. INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBER: Younker introduced Lucas Foelsch as the newest member appointed to the Commission. Foelsch shared that he is currently a graduate student in the U of I Urban Planning Program and is currently interning with the Iowa City Neighborhood Development Services Department. He has lived in Iowa City since 2001 and is excited to be a part of the Parks and Recreation Commission. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): Moved by Hamann, seconded by Russell, to approve the Parks and Recreation fees and charges for FY20 as proposed. Motion passed 7-0 (Bentler and Wills absent). OTHER FORMAL ACTION: Moved by Venzon, seconded by Smith, to approve the December 12, 2018 minutes as written Passed 7-0 (Bentler and Wills absent). PUBLIC DISCUSSION None ELECTION OF OFFICERS — JOE YOUNKER Bird nominated Joe Younker to serve as Chairperson of the Parks & Recreation Commission. Moved by Bird, seconded by Hamann, to elect Joe Younker as the Chairperson for the Parks and Recreation Commission for 2019. Motion Passed 7-0 (Bentler & Wills absent). Smith elected Cara Hamann to serve as Vice -Chair of the Parks & Recreation Commission. Moved by Smith, seconded by Venzon, to elect Cara Hamann as the Vice -Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission for 2019. Motion passed 7-0 (Bentler & Wills absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION January 9, 2019 Page 2 of 5 PARKS & RECREATION REVIEW OF FEES & CHARGES — BRAD BARKER Barker presented the Parks and Recreation proposed user fees and charges matrix to Commission for their review. He reminded Commission that in 2018 they approved a 3% increase to most of the departments program fees for FY19. Therefore, very few changes are proposed for FY20. Staff is proposing a drop in the registration fee for adult sports programs from $90 to $30 per participant. He noted that it has become a national trend where adults prefer drop-in programs versus team sports. He pointed out that the line item for City Park Rides has been removed from the matrix since the rides were removed. He also explained that a correction was made to the FY 19 proposed fees for the Farmers Market, however, no fee changes for the market are proposed for FY20. Venzon said she is anxious to see if the decrease in fees encourages more adults to participate in the sports programs. Bird asked what activities will be offered. Barker said they will include activities such as futsal, broom ball, and 3 on 3 soccer, to name a few. Barker announced that the department will be partnering with the Iowa Sports Foundation Corridor Games to test a variety of adult sport programs. Moved by Hamann, seconded by Russell, to approve the Parks and Recreation fees and charges for FY20 as proposed. Motion passed 7-0 Gentler and Wills absent). REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF Parks & Recreation Director — Juli Seydell Johnson: • Budget: Council will review the CIP budget with staff on Wednesday, January 16. Seydell Johnson noted that there were no significant changes to the proposed operating budget. • Miscellaneous: Seydell Johnson shared that there have been a couple of recent patron issues at the Recreation Center, however, both were taken care of at the staff level. Recreation Division Superintendent — Brad Barker: • Special Olympic Winter Games: 26 athletes will compete at the Special Olympics Winter Games in Dubuque on January 11-13. • Swim Lesson Prog : As part of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan, recreation staff are making efforts to teach more kids to swim. Beginning in January, staff will partner with the College of Public Health to offer both an educational and activity component to students from Alexander Elementary and Faith Academy. Staff will be able to teach 100 (75 from Alexander, 25 from Faith Academy) students how to swim during this six-week program. • Riverfront Crossings Grand Opening Celebration: Barker, along with Lyndsey Kent, the department Communications & Marketing Program Supervisor, are beginning the planning for this event which is scheduled for July 20, 2019. Commission members are invited to submit any ideas they may have for the celebration. • Summer Planning: Recreation staff will begin work on the summer activity guide soon. The summer hiring process will begin soon as well. Parks Division Superintendent — Zac Hall • Stafiinj4: Hall noted that Parks staff has also begun their summer hiring process by posting summer positions for the Parks/Forestry Division. This is the earliest that positions have been posted. Staff will also take part in jobs fairs hosted by the University of Iowa and Kirkwood Community College. • Assistant Parks Superintendent: Tyler Baird has been hired for the new position of Assistant Parks Superintendent. Baird previously held the position of Horticulturist for four years. Baird has experienced working with both state and national park systems. He is a great resource and brings lots of energy to the position. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION January 9, 2019 Page 3 of 5 • Winter Tasks: With the continuation of good weather, staff have been working towards clearing out invasive species and tree scrubs from around the city trails. • Hickory Hill Park: Work continues at Hickory Hill Park and will continue throughout the winter. CHAIRS REPORT: Younker asked Commission members for future agenda items. Commission members had no items. COMMISSION TIME: Hamann expressed that she and her son really enjoy the playgrounds at Glendale Park, pointing out that they are perfect for very small/young children and she hopes that they will not be replaced. Seydell Johnson noted that while the master plan showed potential changes to the park (trail, shelter and new play equipment), it is not budgeted for another 4 or 5 years. Hamann encouraged staff to consider keeping, or replacing with, similar play equipment for the younger child. Smith noted that with the great weather of late, the parks, specifically Terry Trueblood Recreation Area, have been very busy. Bird expressed his concern regarding the removal of waste receptacles at City Park and suggested that staff consider replacing some near the dog waste bag dispensers. Seydell Johnson said that staff will follow up. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Hamann, seconded by Smith, to adiourn the meeting at 5:25 p.m. Motion passed 7-0 (Bentler and Wills absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION January 9, 2019 Page 4 of 5 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NAME 00 p aro °.-° oo ago 00 00 00 °�° °,�° °° o, � qT N TERM M 0 0 V7t- 000 � EXPIRES o Suzanne 12/31/20 X X O/E NM X X X X X X X X Bentler Steve Bird 12/31/21 X O/E X NM X X X X X X X X Wayne Fett 12/31/18 O/E X X NM X O/E X X O/E X X Lucas 12/31/22 * * * * * * * * * * * x Foelsch Cara 12/31/19 X X X NM X X O/E X O/E X O/E X Hamann Lucie 12/31/18 X O/E X NM X O/E O/E X X X O/E Laurian Ben Russell 12/31/21 O/E X X NM X X X X X X X X Angie Smith 12/31/21 X O/E X NM X X O/E X X X X X Jamie 12/31/20 X O/E X NM X X X X X O/E X X Venzon Brianna 12/31/22 * * * * * * * * * * * O/E Wills Joe Younker 12/31/19 X X X NM X X X X X X X X NM = No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member now Item Number: 5.k. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning & Zoning Commission: January 17 MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 17, 2019 —7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Carolyn Dyer STAFF PRESENT: Ray Heitner, Sara Hektoen, Jesi Lile, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: Jenna Palk Anderson, Tom Townsend CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ18-00025): Discussion of an application, submitted by Anderson Construction LLC, for a rezoning of approximately 0. 15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to High Density Single -Family Residential (RS -12) zone. Lile began the staff report noting this is a proposed rezoning of the former Frantz Pest Control lot by Anderson Construction LLC for a rezoning of approximately 0. 15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from Community Commercial (CC -2) zone to High Density Single - Family Residential (RS -12) zone. She showed a map showing the location of the property, it is approximately 6,750 square feet in size, it is located across the street from Walgreens to the east and a seamstress to the south, the rest of the block is zoned single-family residential. Lile showed the zoning map of the area, the rest of the block is low density single family residential and this lot acts as a bit of a transaction into the Towncrest commercial area. Lile noted the subject area is a small commercial lot, it is a difficult lot for commercial use due to its small size and the parking and stacking requirements for commercial as well as the setback requirements for this being on a commercial lot. High Density Single -Family Residential would allow for either a single family home or duplex on a lot this size. The applicant is considering three options, first is demolition of the current building and constructing a duplex, the second is an intensive survey of the site to determine historic significance and potentially seeking funding for a historic rehab (if the property is historic), and the third is renovation of the existing structure to a residential use. The applicant would prefer to renovate but the structure must be dried out to see if it is salvageable first. Lile noted the Comprehensive Plan provides the future land use goals and the ones achieved by this rezoning are to identify areas of property for infill development, to ensure infill development is capable with the neighborhood, and to provide appropriate transitions between high and low density development in between commercial areas and residential zones. In the future land use Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 2 of 7 map this lot is still identified as commercial but it is surrounded by residential. This area is part of the Central Planning District and subarea B located away from the University and the student housing demand which makes it different from most of the Central District. There is still housing demand in the area but more for families as there are many schools in the area including Longfellow Elementary, Lucas Elementary, City High, Southeast Junior High and Willowwind School. The Central District Plan also provides some goals such as promoting the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties through the district and by supporting new housing opportunities as well as removing obstacles to reinvestment in neighborhood. The current commercial zoning is a barrier to the renovation and reinvestment in this property because of the small size and the existing regulations for commercial zoning. Lile showed photos of the lot and current structure. According to the Assessor data the building was built in 1900 but staff does not have an intensive survey for this site and does not know if it is a historically significant building or not. If the applicant chooses to pursue the route of surveying the property he would need to hire an historian to conduct an intensive survey and determine historic significance if any. Lile also noted there is a lack of sidewalks on the side of Muscatine Avenue where this lot is located. For traffic implications, access and street design, the proposed rezoning is a downzoning from CC -2 to RS -12, and therefore, will not impact traffic significantly. This corner lot currently has vehicular access from both 2nd Avenue and Muscatine Avenue. There are no existing sidewalks on the property. Staff proposes as a condition of the rezoning that redevelopment or renovation of the site requires installation of 5 -foot sidewalks on both the Muscatine Avenue and 2nd Avenue frontages. In summary, this is a small, 0.155 -acre lot is not suitable for commercial infill development, as parking requirements and street setbacks would take up much of the usable space. Rezoning to high-density single-family residential would conform with the rest of the block and provide a transition to the commercial properties across the street. Because this is infill development, there are no concerns with traffic increases and no associated infrastructure or open space fees. Staff recommends the approval of REZ18-00025, a proposal to rezone approximately 0. 15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from Community Commercial (CC -2) to High Density Single Family Residential (RS -12) subject to the following condition: 1. The developer will be required to install 5 -foot sidewalks along the Muscatine Avenue and 2nd Avenue frontages upon redevelopment of the site or renovation of the existing building. This will be required prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Next steps, upon recommendation by the Planning & Zoning Commission, the rezoning will go to the City Council for final review and approval. Upon approval by the City Council, the developer will be subject to staff Design Review due to the location of the site in the Towncrest Urban Renewal Area and Site Plan review prior to the issuance of building permits. Hensch asked if the Historic Preservation Commission has ever looked at this property or in this neighborhood in general. Lile acknowledged the Historic Preservation Planner did talk to some people and got a brief summary that said the property might have some connection to some Civil War person who lived in the building, but no actual survey was competed, Hensch asked if the applicant was aware the Commission prefers to see concept plans on rezoning applications. Lile Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 3 of 7 confirmed he was and noted that she does have examples of other work the applicant has done in the City, particularly of historic buildings and homes. The applicant has not gotten to the concept plan stage of this application yet. Hensch asked why a good neighbor meeting was not held. Lile noted the applicant would have to answer that. Signs noted it was mentioned in the report and presentation that the proposed zoning was in line with the rest of the block and but the map shows the rest of the block being RS -5. Lile explained that was the residential zoning and even putting the lot at high density single family residential wouldn't allow for more than a duplex due to the lot size. Parsons asked what the difference was in setbacks from RS -5 and RS -12. Russett noted there isn't much difference in setbacks, the difference comes with the minimum lot size requirements, the current size at 2130 Muscatine doesn't meet the minimum lot size requirement for RS -5 or RS -8. Hensch asked if it remained the current zoning and the applicant was able to renovate the existing structure could it be rented and occupied. Lile stated that single family is not allowed in commercial zoning. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jenna Polk Anderson (Owner, Anderson Construction) represented the company as her husband Ben was in Denver on business. With regards to not holding a good neighbor meeting, since they were buying the property without knowing the zoning the bank did not want to wait and because it is a house the bank feels it should be zoned residential for lending purposes. The goal is to rehabilitate the property to maintain a similar look to the neighborhood. She shared work the company has previously done including a house they received the Historic Preservation Award for. If it is not possible to restore the current house then they will build a new structure. Hensch asked why they didn't have the historical analysis performed first so they would have that information before they came before Planning & Zoning. Anderson said due to limited time they wanted to see if a rezoning is even a possibility and if it is possible then they will go forward with all the surveys. Tom Townsend (2128 Muscatine Avenue) owns the property to the west of the subject property and asked if the rezoning is approved and the applicant adds the 5ft sidewalk as the adjoining property owner who would be financially responsible for continuing the sidewalk. Russett explained the sidewalk would only be in front of the subject property. Hensch closed the public hearing. Parsons moved to recommend approval of REZ18-00025, a proposal to rezone approximately 0.15 acres of property located at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from Community Commercial (CC -2) to High Density Single Family Residential (RS -12) subject to the following condition: 1. The developer will be required to install 5 -foot sidewalks along the Muscatine Avenue and 2nd Avenue frontages upon redevelopment of the site or renovation of the existing building. This will be required prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Baker seconded the motion. Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 4 of 7 Baker asked if the Commission felt they should add a condition requiring a historical study of the property. Martin said there needs to be more information first, she feels this application is so general she does not feel there is enough information to make informed decisions. She understands timing and lender issues, but there should always be time for a good neighbor meeting. Hensch agrees that if the applicant says one of their intentions is to have the historical survey performed then that should be one of the rezoning conditions. Baker asked if the historic review is done and it is decided the property is historic and would demand preservation of the historic property shouldn't that be decided before a rezoning is granted. Hensch noted they can't do much with the property if it remains commercial. Hektoen noted that just having the survey done doesn't implicate historic review, it would have to be rezoned historic for historic ordinances to apply. She noted the concern is with this particular property is that it has been neglected and there are holes in the roof and whether is can be preserved at all at this point is a very large question. If the Commission is to approve this zoning application the condition to have it reviewed for historic value doesn't necessarily result in historic preservation. Parsons is leery of adding an unnecessary cost if it doesn't result in preservation. Baker noted the lack of specifics in general with this application and wondered if it was a concern shared by others. Martin feels it is important to see concepts to make sure the fit is proper with the rest of the neighborhood. Signs added that having three different options of what might happen to the property, rather than a specific plan, makes him uncomfortable. Baker noted it would either be a renovation of the current building or demolished and new structure built but either way it would be a duplex and fall under the guidelines of the Towncrest design review regulations. Signs asked if the Towncrest design review regulations even addressed residential. Lile said mostly with building materials and a general look but not specifics. Hensch noted his concern is if the structure is in poor shape, and he believes it is, he would have liked to see a picture or analysis showing the poor condition. He also feels good neighbor meetings are imperative for rezoning, and lastly is uncomfortable with a rezoning with no concept plan. Townsend said she is not so concerned about this due to the small size of the property and because residential is the only option, commercial is not viable, and if there are holes in the roof the building is probably damaged. Martin agreed but noted there is a precedent and it is important to be consistent and have concept plans for all rezoning so they can make informed decisions. Baker asked if the application could be deferred, Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 5 of 7 Parsons noted it is after the limitation period so the applicant would have to be the one to request a deferral. Parson noted that he agrees with Townsend that the only option is residential due to lot size limitations and doesn't need to see a concept of single duplex house. Baker asked if a good neighbor meeting required a minimum number of days advanced notice. Russett replied there is not, and noted the good neighbor meeting is voluntary as is a submittal of a concept plan. Baker moved to ask the applicant to defer this until at least two weeks to allow time to arrange a good neighbor meeting. Anderson stated in regards to a concept plan and surveys it would be pouring money into a project without knowing if they are even able to rezone and rebuilt to make the neighborhood better. The timeline they were under is why a good neighbor meeting was not held. The concept plan would be similar to other properties they have constructed. Baker asked what problems a two week deferral would create. Anderson said the timeline was based on the lender and would have to find out those specifics. Parsons noted it would actually be three weeks until the next meeting. Anderson also noted that she would need more information on what actual information the Commission wants to gain from surveys so they know how to proceed. Hensch said he felt it would have been a stronger case if they knew the condition of the current structure and historic survey. He understands the consideration of cost that is often brought up. Anderson said they would like to rehab the property, they have done some research (on the soils around the building) because it had previously been a pest control business and some of the quotes to mitigate that have been very expensive, but they would still like to restore if possible. Baker said it is important the Commission checks the same boxes for each application (the good neighbor meeting, concept plans) and if this is deferred to the February 7 meeting would that be enough time. Hensch noted the Commission cannot require a good neighbor meeting so a deferral would not necessarily accomplish that. Hensch felt it was better to just go forward with a vote at this time. A vote was taken and the motion fails 3-3 (Martin, Baker, Signs dissenting). CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 3. 2019 Parsons moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 3, 2019. Signs seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2019 Page 6 of 7 PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett gave an update on the Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Conflict Resolution Review Committee meeting related to the proposed fringe area rezoning of 11.34 acres from County A -Agriculture to County R -Residential located on the south side of American Legion Road SE and west of Wapsie Avenue SE. The Commission saw this case in October 2018 and staff had recommended against this proposed rezoning because it was in conflict with the Fringe Area Agreement and policies in the Agreement on development in this area. The Commission concurred with the staff recommendation as did City Council. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors saw this case as well and they wanted to approve rezoning since it is consistent with the County's recently updated Comprehensive Plan. Therefore representatives with the Board of Supervisors and City Council met last Friday to discuss next steps. The committee agreed to move forward with the rezoning and this application will go back before City Council on Tuesday. In the event the Council agrees with the committee and move forward with this rezoning it would be against the recommendation of the Planning & Zoning Commission and there may be a request for a consult with the Commission. Russett wanted to ask if the Commission felt a consult was necessary in this case. Hensch said they recommended against the application because it violated the Fringe Area Agreement and if the Fringe Area Agreement is being updated then the issue becomes moot. The County is now asking the City do update the Fringe Area Agreement. Russett noted that City Staff has met with County Staff to begin working on an updated Fringe Area Agreement. Hensch doesn't feel a consult is necessary. All other agreed Baker stated at the last meeting the Commission found out the Cherry Avenue project was turned down by the Council in September, why did it take so long for the Commission to find out. Hensch stated that the Commission told previous staff they like to see the loop closed on the applications so when the Council acts on something the Commission would like staff to inform them. Adjournment: Signs moved to adjourn. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- = Not a Member (W.S.) 4/2 4/5 (W.S) 4/16 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/7 6/21 7/5 8/16 9/6 9/20 10/18 12/20 1/3 1/17 BAKER, LARRY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X O/E X X X DYER, CAROLYN X O/E X X X X X O/E X O O/E O X X X O/E FREERKS, ANN X X X X O/E X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ` -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X X X O/E -- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X O/E X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- = Not a Member Item Number: 5.1. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning & Zoning Commission: February 4 MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2019 — 5:15 PM — INFORMAL MEETING HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 5:15 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Russett noted the purpose of this informal meeting is an opportunity for the Commission to raise questions, concerns or issues they would like more information on so Staff can address them in the formal presentation at the regular meeting Thursday. Hektoen noted that public comment is not part of the informal meeting and therefore there will not be much discussion at today's meeting but rather an opportunity to raise questions to be addressed on Thursday and the public can have an opportunity to respond at that time. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA18-00002): A request to set a public hearing on an application to amend the North District Plan land use map from Multi -Family Residential (8-13 dwelling units per acre) to Low -Medium Mixed Residential (8-13 du/ac) for approximately 24 acres and from Low -Medium Mixed Residential (8-13 du/ac) to Multi -Family Residential (8-13 du/ac) for approximately 24 acres. Russett noted this is a request to set a public hearing for a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on February 21, 2019 and the discussion on the item would happen on February 21. Parsons asked if the Commission has to wait for the Comprehensive Plan amendment to be approved before they can move forward on the application for the rezoning/development item. Russett stated Staff is recommending before the Commission recommend approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat they do recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Parsons noted that the rezoning item will likely be a deferral then. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEMS (REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006): An application for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and rezoning of approximately 73.15 acres of land from Interim Development -Low Density Single -Family (ID -RS) zone, Low Density Single -Family (RS -5) zone, Planned Development Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone, and Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12) zone to Planned Development Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential Planning and Zoning Commission February 4, 2019 —Informal Meeting Page 2 of 4 (OPD/RS-12) zone for approximately 45.48 acres of property and Planned Development Overlay 1 Highway Commercial (OPD/CH-1) zone for approximately 23.83 acres of property; and a Sensitive Areas Development Plan. An application for a preliminary plat for Forest View, a 73.15 -acre subdivision, to create 11 commercial lots, 4 multi -family lots, 60 single-family lots, and 9 outlots. Russett stated this is a request for a rezoning in the Sensitive Areas Development Plan for the area generally known as Forest View which is south of Interstate 80 and west of North Dubuque Street. The item is the request for rezoning in the Sensitive Areas Development Plan as well as application for a preliminary plat of a subdivision. Russett provided a high-level overview of the project and will go in to much more detail at Thursday's meeting. She showed a location map of the proposed area, in terms of existing conditions the area is largely undeveloped, there is the existing Forest View Mobile Home Park and there is a handful of existing single-family residences. The rest of the land is undeveloped with a variety of sensitive areas, existing woodlands, wetlands and slopes in the area. Russett showed the existing zoning map of the area, the area is currently zoned Interim Development Single Family Residential and the mobile home park is zoned High Density Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay, and the remainder of the project site is Single Family Residential with a small section to the south zoned Low Density Multifamily. The request is to rezone the area to High Density Single Family Residential with a Planned Development Overlay and Highway Commercial with a Planned Development Overlay. Russett next showed the land use map summary of the proposed project, the area to the west is the proposed single family area where the applicant is proposing 57 units for a manufactured single family housing community, and then there will be three larger single family residential lots to the south. The plan also shows three outlots which are conservation areas to be preserved for existing woodlands and other sensitive features. There is also an outlot proposed to the south of the manufactured housing community which will serve as a dry stormwater detention basin and the private open space for the single family manufactured housing community. The area to the east of the single family manufactured housing community is the proposed multifamily area, there are four lots proposed with several buildings, two buildings on lot 15, three on lot 14, one on lot 13 and one building on lot 12 for around 473 units total proposed, 190 of which would be for senior housing. The area that is to the northeast is the proposed commercial area, the lots to the north (lots 5 -8) are proposed for hotel and larger scale office uses, the lots to the south of Forest View Drive are proposed for more neighborhood services commercial uses, and the lots along North Dubuque Street (lots 1-4) are proposed for a gas station/convenience store (lot 1) and restaurants (lots 2, 3 and 4). Russett noted in terms of the rezoning the applicant is proposing a hybrid zoning so although the base zoning is Highway Commercial some of the lots will have more of a Neighborhood Commercial feel and character. Russett noted there are many sensitive areas on the project site and woodlands, the applicant is proposing to fill in a wetlands ravine located east of Laura Drive. Russett stated that 36% of the woodlands would be impacted but the applicant is proposing to mitigate that impact through the planning of 828 new trees throughout the entire development. The applicant has submitted a detailed landscaping plan which includes placement for those replacement mitigated trees, street trees, parking trees as well as trees on site. In terms of housing, the applicant is proposing relocating the existing residents of the Forest View Mobile Home Park to new housing within the development and the applicant has worked with the residents to develop a relocation plan. Planning and Zoning Commission February 4, 2019 — Informal Meeting Page 3 of 4 In terms of transportation, the project includes the creation of the new Forest View Drive which would be a new public street running through the site which would act as a secondary access for emergencies for those living west of the project site in Mackinaw Village and Peninsula during flood events. Other transportation improvements would include a 10 -foot trail developed along North Dubuque Street. The applicant has completed a traffic study of the area, which was reviewed by City Staff. The Iowa Department of Transportation has access rights along North Dubuque Street so proposing Forest View Drive to access North Dubuque Street requires review and approval by the Iowa Department of Transportation as well as the Federal Highway Administration and the City has worked with the applicant to submit those permits and are waiting back on formal approval. With stormwater management the applicant has worked with the City's Public Works Staff to provide information on stormwater management and the project proposes three types of stormwater management facilities including detention basins, on-site underground storm water management facilities, and storm water management best management practices in the woodland areas. Hensch asked if the Commission had any specific questions they would like Staff to address at the upcoming meeting. Townsend asked about the Good Neighbor Meetings that were held but there was no information in the packet about the responses from those meetings and asked if they could see notes from those meetings. Hensch suggested new Commission members go back and review the minutes from the April 2018 meetings where this project was previously discussed. Dyer requested a copy of the original site map that was proposed so they could see what has changed in this new application. Parsons agreed this application looks similar to what was presented at the April 2018 meeting and would like to see what has changed. Hensch requested updates from the neighbors in the Idyllwild Development if they are getting satisfaction from the stormwater plan and are supportive of the plan. Signs agreed and wondered if the City has made progress helping that development with their water problems. Hensch asked about the open area for the manufactured housing and where the recreation areas would be and more details. It is very important to him that the children that live in that manufactured housing area have a place to play. Hensch still have a concern about the reduction of the square footage of the lots to be less than the 5000 square feet that is required for RS -12, he would rather reduce the number of lots to be able to get to larger square footage. He noted it seems very compact and is concerned about space for the residents. Signs noted that there has been some interest on the City's part to look at some new zoning laws that would allow for smaller lots throughout the City and perhaps hearing an update on those discussion might be helpful. This came up in the discussions about the Missing Middle and the affordable housing folks as possible ways to make housing more affordable. Planning and Zoning Commission February 4, 2019 — Informal Meeting Page 4 of 4 Hensch noted he does not have opposition to smaller lots if there is open space adjacent to the area. Dyer is concerned about garden space for the residents. She also wondered if the Mackinaw Village residents were invited to the Good Neighbor Meetings. Baker noted his primary questions concern the commercial development, particularly the master sign plan and the entrance from North Dubuque Street with access and line of sight view. Baker also had a list of questions to be address beginning with Forest View Drive being the only access to the commercial areas. Hensch noted the commercial area can be accessed from Laura Drive with connects to Foster Road. Hensch asked about traffic calming device placements along Forest View Drive and asked for an update about that. Baker asked about the reduction in street width from 60 feet to 50 feet and assumes the fire department has reviewed the plans. He also asked if zoning was determined in the prior discussions or just Comprehensive Plan revisions and was Commercial Highway zoning part of that prior discussion. Hensch confirmed it was. With regards to the proposal on senior and assisted living Baker asked if what the Commission approves be based on requiring the senior and assisted living or could the developer change it after the approval and just make it multifamily. He would like to know what provisions there are for conditions placed on the conditional zoning for the senior and assisted living housing. Additionally under Conditional Zoning Agreements does the City have the right to limit the number of bedrooms. Russett noted they do limit number of bedrooms under the Zoning Code but will provide additional information on the details at the Thursday meeting. Dyer asked if this proposal would come back in front of the Commission after the rezoning stage. Townsend has some concerns about the relocation plan and the $202,000 construction price for the single family manufactured housing and wanted more information on how that price was determined. She is concerned overall with the relocation plan and how a person who currently lives and owns one of the trailers in the current mobile home park can afford a $202,000 new home. She also asked if the residents would own the lots their new manufactured housing would be on. Parson noted there is a path to ownership for both the home and the lot. Signs added that the neighborhood association for the current residents have worked very closely with the developer on this relocation plan. Parsons requested a recap on all the open green space on the property and what it will be used for. Signs added information on any dedication of public space or green space proposed or needed. ADJOURNMENT Item Number: 5.m. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning & Zoning Commission: February 21 r CITY OF IOWA CITY C' MEMORANDUM Date: March 18, 2019 To: Mayor and City Council From: Anne Russett, Planning & Zoning Commission Re: Recommendations from Planning & Zoning Commission At their March 7, 2019 meeting the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the February 21 minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB18-00019, an application submitted by Longsterman Holding LLC for a preliminary and final plat of Pigeon Timber Second Addition, a Resubdivision of Lot 2 of Pigeon Timber, a 3 -lot, 3.17 -acre residential subdivision located at 4354 Treefarm Ln. NE, subject to approval of construction drawings and legal papers by the City Engineer and City Attorney Additional action (check one) No further action needed Board or Commission is requesting Council direction _X_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action - Done MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21, 2019 —7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Eleanor Dilkes, Ray Heitner, Anne Russett, Danielle Sitzman OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Ritter, Jimmy Becker, Ed Cole, Wilfred Nixon, Donna Davis, Jillian Nagle, Sulay Flores, Javier Laguna, Marcial Utalo, Sara Barron, Margarita Rodriguez, Margarita Baltazer, Rafael Morataya, Chris Traeger, Gustavo Caro, Beth Pruessner, Deb Heiken, Alberto Perez, Angelica Ortiz, Alberto Ortiz, Sandra Garcia, Cindy Onnen, Roberto Garcia RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 7-0 the Commission sets the public hearing on CPA18-00002 for March 7, 2019. By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of SUB18-00019, an application submitted by Longsterman Holding LLC for a preliminary and final plat of Pigeon Timber Second Addition, a Resubdivision of Lot 2 of Pigeon Timber, a 3 -lot, 3.17 -acre residential subdivision located at 4354 Treefarm Ln. NE, subject to approval of construction drawings and legal papers by the City Engineer and City Attorney. CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA18-00002): A request to set a public hearing on an application to amend the North District Plan land use map from Multi -Family Residential (8-13 dwelling units per acre) to Low -Medium Mixed Residential (8-13 du/ac) for approximately 24 acres and from Low -Medium Mixed Residential (8-13 du/ac) to Multi -Family Residential (8-13 du/ac) for approximately 24 acres. Russett noted this is just a request to set a public hearing, there is no staff presentation. Hensch asked what date Staff would like to hold the hearing. Russett requested the hearing to be at the first Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in March, March 7. Signs moved to set the public hearing on CPA18-00002 for March 7, 2019. Parsons seconded the motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 2 of 23 REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEMS (SUB18-00019): An application for a preliminary and final plat, submitted by Longsterman Holding, LLC, for Pigeon Timber Second Addition, A Resubdivision of Lot 2 of Pigeon Timber, a 3.17 - acre, 3- lot residential subdivision located at 4354 Treefarm Lane NE in Johnson County, IA. Heitner presented the staff report and started by showing an aerial view of the subject property which is approximately half a mile east of Prairie DuChien Road in unincorporated Johnson County. The subject property is currently zoned County Residential and the surrounding zoning of the subject parcel either County Residential or County Agricultural Residential. The request is to re -subdivide a 3.17 acre lot into three new lots for future single family housing. The subject property is located in the Iowa City/Johnson County Fringe Area A -North Corridor and properties that are located within this designation are subject to residential zoning requirements of Johnson County however subdivisions must also be approved by the Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission and any infrastructure improvements must meet the rural design standards that are outlined in Appendix A of the Fringe Area Agreement. Heitner stated the Johnson County Planning and Zoning Commission met on this issue on February 11, 2019, and recommended approval of the subdivision to their Board of Supervisors with the following four conditions: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation be subject to the City of Iowa City recommending approval of the application. 2. Verification that woodland mitigation is not necessary; should woodland mitigation be required, then the application would need to be reviewed again by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. A revised Storm water Management plan be submitted by the applicant and approved by Planning Development Services (PDS) staff, prior to approval by the Board of Supervisors. 4. A revised conservation easement be submitted by the applicant and approved by PDS staff, prior to approval by the Board of Supervisors. The subdivision must attain approval by the Iowa City Council before final action can be taken by the Johnson County Board. Heitner showed more pictures of the subject property with respect to how it is situated in the Fringe Area. He showed the proposed preliminary and final plats and noted the area that would be a new access easement for access to the properties on lots 2 and 3. With respect to environmental and sensitive areas there will be a 0.36 -acre conservation easement, with the purpose of preserving the natural drainageway that runs north to south through the western portion of the subject property. Currently it is estimated that only about 20% of the subject areas woodlands would be impacted by this development and Johnson County ordinance allows up to 25% to be impacted before a mitigation plan is required. The applicant has also conducted an archaeological survey, and has found that no archaeological sites have been reported to the Office of the State Archaeologist within 100 meters of the subject property. With respect to water and sewer service, water service will be provided by a private well system in the area and the lots will use septic sewer systems. Storm water management will be provided by the insulation of a 2,450- square foot bioretention cell. Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 3 of 23 Next steps pending approval of this application this evening will be Iowa City Council review and approval of the application followed by final review by the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. Staff recommends approval of SUB18-00019, an application submitted by Longsterman Holding LLC for a preliminary and final plat of Pigeon Timber Second Addition, a Resubdivision of Lot 2 of Pigeon Timber, a 3 -lot, 3.17 -acre residential subdivision located at 4354 Treefarm Ln. NE, subject to approval of construction drawings and legal papers by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Signs asked about what appears to be an existing building at the bottom of the proposed lot and if it will be removed. Heitner confirmed it will be removed and replaced to another location. Hensch opened the public hearing. Scott Ritter (Harford Consultants) came forward on behalf of the applicant to answer any questions the Commission may have. He did note the building Signs was asking about was a house and it will remain where it is, there are two additions on the house which are not in good shape and those will be removed and the remaining house will not be in the way of the new access easement. Hensch asked about the storm water management issue noting there will be a 2,450- square foot bioretention cell and asked what a bioretention cell is. Ritter noted there are slopes going down to the cell, there will be a rock bed with a pipe that carries the water both ways to the outlets north and south. The system slows down the water and allows the water exiting is supposed to be better than the water coming in controlling both the quantity and quality of the water Hensch closed the public hearing. Parsons moved to recommend approval of SUB18-00019, an application submitted by Longsterman Holding LLC for a preliminary and final plat of Pigeon Timber Second Addition, a Resubdivision of Lot 2 of Pigeon Timber, a 3 -lot, 3.17 -acre residential subdivision located at 4354 Treefarm Ln. NE, subject to approval of construction drawings and legal papers by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. REZONING/DEVELOPMENT ITEMS (REZ18-00013/SUB18-00006): Location: An area generally located south of Interstate 80, west of N. Dubuque Street, and east of Mackinaw Drive, commonly referred to as Forest View. An application for a Sensitive Areas Development Plan and rezoning of approximately 73.15 acres of land from Interim Development -Low Density Single -Family (ID -RS) zone, Low Density Single -Family (RS -5) zone, Planned Development Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone, and Low Density Multi -Family Residential (RM -12) zone to Planned Development Overlay / High Density Single -Family Residential (OPD/RS-12) zone for approximately 45.48 acres of property and Planned Development Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 4 of 23 Overlay / Highway Commercial (OPD/CH-1) zone for approximately 23.83 acres of property; and a Sensitive Areas Development Plan. An application for a preliminary plat for Forest View, a 73.15 -acre subdivision, to create 11 commercial lots, 4 multi -family lots, 60 single-family lots, and 9 outlots. Russett will begin the report with some background, then she will provide a high level overview of the proposal and discuss some changes to the project that have occurred since the Commission last saw this item in April and June of 2018, she will discuss the Planned Development Overlay rezoning and the Sensitive Areas Development Plan and the proposed rezoning. Finally she will discuss the criteria the Commission needs to review these proposals against for Planned Development Overlays and the applicants requested waivers. In terms of background, in August 2017, the Commission recommended an amendment to the North District Plan and the City Council adopted the amendment to the North District Plan to modify the "future land use map", adding certain housing, transportation, and design goals. The amendment also identified the proposed area for commercial and single family and multifamily residential. In June 2018 the Commission deferred the application for the rezoning indefinitely until additional details were worked out. Since that time, staff has worked with the applicant to address several deficiencies and while there are still deficiencies staff is working with the applicant. Russett showed an aerial of the project site and a map showing the overview of the development showing the proposed land uses, the conservation areas and the proposed transportation improvements. The main entrance to the site will be off North Dubuque Street onto Forest View Drive. The land uses proposed off North Dubuque Street and the eastern portion of Forest View Drive are commercial (identified on the map in red), the applicant is proposing a gas station and market on lot 1, lots 2, 3 and 4 along the eastern boundary of the site are anticipated to be developed with eating and drinking establishments as well as some proposed drive-thru restaurants. The applicant plans to develop a hotel south of Interstate 80 and west of the proposed eating and drinking establishments on lots 5, 6, 7 and 8. Lots 9-11 are intended for lower scale neighborhood commercial uses, those are the lots just east of the proposed multifamily. Continuing west on Forest View Drive, lots 12, 13, 14 and 15 (identified on the map in orange) are proposed multifamily housing with lot 14 intended for a senior housing development. Further west on Forest View Drive and located on the western edge of the proposed project is the proposed manufactured housing single family home community and in this area the applicant is proposing to relocate the tenants of the existing Forest View Mobile Home Park. Russett stated the areas shaded in green on the map are proposed conservation areas, noting there are many sensitive areas on this site including woodlands, wetlands and slopes and there would be conservation easements to maintain the woodlands and Outlot D. south of the single family units would be maintained as a private green space area for the manufactured housing community and also as a dry storm water detention basin. Russet noted there are also additional access points to this proposed development, one off Laura Drive, which connects with Foster Road, also Algonquin Road will connect to the community as well as an access off Flint Drive. Russett next discussed the changes the applicant has made to the proposed project to address concerns from both residents and staff since the Commission last saw this application. Many of the changes are in the manufactured housing area, outlot D, the open space area, has been Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 5 of 23 moved from the west side of the community to the south and been expanded from 0.62 acres to 1.65 acres. The applicant has also extended Flint Drive through to connect the area. The lots on the western portion of the project site meet the minimum 5000 square foot requirement in the RS -12 zone the number of manufactured housing lots has been reduced from 59 to 57. Russett noted a lot was identified at the northwest corner of the plat to be a community center for the neighborhood. Additionally lot 23 was originally proposed as a four story 24 unit multifamily building and has now been removed from the plans. The applicant has also worked with staff on lot 14 which is located toward the center of the site, the original proposal did not meet the multifamily design standards of the zoning ordinance but the plan has been revised to locate the buildings toward the public roadways and to locate the parking toward the center and back of the buildings. The applicant also identified on the plans locations and size of open space areas for the multifamily developments. Due to the impact of the woodlands to the development the applicant is required to plan replacement trees and the applicant has worked with the staff to make improvements to the Sensitive Areas Development plan related to woodland buffers and to identify the location of the replacement trees. The applicant has also submitted detailed landscaping plans to show screening, site trees, street trees, parking trees and replacement trees. Lastly the applicant has worked with a consultant and submitted a traffic study, staff concurs with the findings of the traffic study and the applicant has also worked with staff on concerns related to storm water management. Russett stated the rezoning before the Commission is a rezoning to a Planned Development Overlay (OPD) and this is required due to the sensitive features as well as the proposed manufactured housing community on the project site. OPDs allow flexibility in the proposed development, they allow clustering to preserve sensitive areas and they also allow a variety of housing types, both single family and multifamily. Finally OPDs allow applicants to request waivers to development standards and she will review the requested waivers later in her presentation. In terms of the sensitive features the project site is heavily wooded, it contains a total of 34.6 acres of woodlands, the vast majority of these woodlands (around 31 acres) are located on the proposed residential lots, and the remainder (about 6 acres) are located on the proposed commercial lots. Russett showed a table summary of the existing woodlands, the impacted woodlands and the preserved woodlands compared to the retention requirements in the zoning code. The project does meet the retention requirements for the commercial area but not for the residential area and when that happens the Code requires the mitigation of the loss of those woodlands through planting of trees, in this case the applicant would be required to plant 828 trees on the project site. The applicant submitted plans to show the location of those restoration trees which has been reviewed by the City Forester and the City Forester generally agrees with the proposed location of the restoration trees and has recommended some additional replacement trees along North Dubuque Street. The applicant has also proposed a monitoring plan for the restoration trees that will include the development of an annual report to be submitted to City staff and staff recommends the details of this monitoring plan be worked out as part of the development agreement for the project. In addition to the preservation areas the proposed plan also identifies a 40 foot wooded area along North Dubuque Street and staff is recommending as a condition of the rezoning the 40 foot area be un -impacted by the development. Russett next discussed the wetlands on the project site, just under 1 acre, 36% will be impacted by the development and the applicant has submitted a U.S. Army Corp of Engineers permit indicating the City may consider filling in a jurisdictional wetland and that permit has been approved by both the Iowa DNR and Army Corp of Engineers. Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 6 of 23 Russett showed a map of the existing zoning of the site, the area is zoned a mixture of Interim Development Single Family and a small portion of multifamily. The applicant is proposing that the area be rezoned to High Density Single Family Residential with the Planned Development Overlay (identified in the map in orange) and the blue area be redeveloped as Highway Commercial with Planned Development Overlay. Regarding the commercial rezoning the based designation proposed is Highway Commercial and the applicant is proposing a hybrid zoning district that incorporates some aspects of the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. Lots 5 6, 7 and 8 the base zone would be Highway Commercial but any development on those sites would be subject to standards for large retail uses and there would also be a recommended condition related to signage, building materials and lighting. For lots 9, 10 and 11 the base zone would again be Highway Commercial however any development would be subject to Neighborhood Commercial regulations which limits scale, building placement, addresses pedestrian connectivity, addresses parking and loading areas, screening as well as a condition related to signage, building materials and lighting. And lastly for the lots on the east side of the project, lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 development on these lots would also be subject to Neighborhood Commercial development standards with some exceptions, mainly related to the parking areas and drive-thrus. They would however be subject to conditions related to signage, building materials and lighting. Russet reiterated this is a Planned Development Overlay rezoning and there are specific review criteria that need to be addressed when reviewing Planned Development Overlay. The Commission is tasked with reviewing the rezoning against these criteria. The first is related to density, the total project is around 13 dwelling units per acre which is in line with both the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed RS -12 zoning designation. However if looking at the multifamily and single family separately the single family area is much lower at 8 dwelling units per acre and the multifamily lots are higher at around 33 dwelling units per acre. In terms of land use, mass and scale, the project proposes the lowest density development (single family) at the western portion of the project site and is located to the east of the existing single family housing development off of Mackinaw Drive. The applicant is proposing to relocate the existing Forest View Mobile Home Park tenants to either new homes in this area or elsewhere and staff is recommending as a condition of the rezoning the applicant execute an affordable housing agreement with the City that outlines the specifics of the relocation. Toward the center of the site the applicant has proposed four multifamily lots, the applicant is proposing two buildings on lot 15, three buildings on lot 14 and one building each on lots 12 and 13. On lot 14 the applicant is proposing senior housing however there is nothing in the proposal or draft conditional zoning agreement to tie development to becoming senior housing development so if that is something the Commission would like to require it would need to be a condition to the rezoning. Russett noted the highest intensity uses are the commercial uses south of Interstate 80 and along North Dubuque Street. In terms of private open space areas the applicant has identified open space areas for the residential portions of the project. The applicant has also identified the areas and square footages of open space areas on the multifamily lots. These are intended to provide seating, shade and sheltered recreational areas. There will also be several outlots where existing woodlands will be preserved through conservation easements and total around 19 acres. The City also has a public open space requirement that would be around 2.2 acres of public open space or a fee -in -lieu and at this time no public open space is being proposed on the site. In terms of traffic circulation there will be a new public street, Forest View Drive, which will serve as a secondary access to the Peninsula and Mackinaw Village neighborhoods. Access to North Dubuque Street as it is proposed now requires a permit from the Iowa Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Additionally Algonquin Road and Flint Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 7 of 23 drive would be extended as access points to the new neighborhood. In terms of sidewalks and trails the plan proposes 10 -foot and 5 -foot sidewalks adjacent to Forest View Drive and Algonquin Road and 5 -foot sidewalks on both sides of other internal roads. There is also a 10 - foot trail proposed along North Dubuque Street. Regarding transit there is a is a bus stop at the intersection of Algonquin Road and Foster Road which is walkable from the manufactured housing area. The applicant did work with a consulting firm to put together a traffic study and Russett highlighted a few aspect of that study. Currently the existing traffic count of North Dubuque Street is between 22,000 and 24,000 vehicles per day. At full built -out of the proposed development it would add an additional 15,000 vehicles which is a significant amount of traffic however the study shows with the proposed improvements the system will be able to run at an acceptable level. Due to the proximity of the development to the 1-80 interchange both the City and the Iowa Department of Transportation was interested in the projects impact on the interchange. Without the development, service levels at the interchange begin to fail around 2056 due to regular annual community growth, with the development the service levels begin to fail around 2035 so in short the proposed development would accelerate needed improvements at the interchange by around 11 years. The addition of Forest View Drive extends east from North Dubuque Street and would have both dedicated north and south turn lanes, there would be a dedicated right southbound turn lane onto Forest View Drive and there would be dual eastbound turn lanes from Forest View Drive onto North Dubuque Street. In terms of storm water the applicant has submitted a preliminary storm water management report and they are proposing three types of storm water management facilities: detention basins, on- site underground storm water storage system, and storm water best management practices. Staff is recommending a proposed condition upon final plat approval, the owner execute a subdivider's agreement with the City that addresses, among other things, the need for annual certification of private storm water management systems to ensure that the systems will be properly maintained. Russett showed on the map the locations of the proposed storm water management areas as identified in blue. Lastly regarding views, light and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties the development does transition from single family to the west, multifamily in the center and commercial to the east. The proposal also identifies buffers and screens between proposed development and existing single family. Staff also recommends as a condition of the rezoning that all single family buildings have clearly defined main entrances, a landscaped buffer be maintained the existing single family and proposed manufactured housing community and lastly that the 40 -foot buffer along North Dubuque Street remain un -impacted. Russett showed a map with the locations of the buffers. Finally the applicant has requested several waivers, and the Planned Development process does allow flexibility. They are requesting waivers from building height, public right-of-way width, lot dimensions for the single-family community, and private open space. The maximum building height in RS -12 is 35 feet and in the multifamily lots the applicant is proposing 4 story and 5 story buildings. Russett explained the criteria staff must review these waivers against in the Code is that at least 35% of the net area must be free of buildings and parking and based on staff calculations it is 44% so the applicant meets that criteria. With regards to the public right-of-way they are requesting a waiver from a right-of-way requirement of 60 feet for Cole Drive and Flint Drive to a reduction of 50 feet for those roadways. The criteria is if the applicant is able to provide enough space for required utilities. This request has also been reviewed by the Fire Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 8 of 23 Department, Public Works and the City Transportation Planner. In addition the existing Flint Drive is 50 feet so the applicant is matching what is already there. The requests for waivers to lot dimensions and size are for the manufactured housing community, the minimum lot size requirement is 5000 square feet, the minimum lot width is 45 feet, and the minimum lot frontage is 40 feet. The applicant is proposing some lots at 4000 square feet and some frontages around 36 feet. The criteria that has to be met to allow this waiver is off-street parking must be provided through a rear alley and this criteria is met for several of the lots. All the lots in center, east and south all have access from private rear alleys, the homes on the west side do not have access from a private rear alley but those are all at least 5000 square feet. Russett stated that there is a minimum 500 square feet required of open space for each single family lot but the applicant is proposing instead of providing individual open space the applicant is proposing 1.65 acres of private open space which is 1 acre more than is required. The criteria for this waiver is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to enhance the project and not negatively impact the area and that there would be no danger to public health. In terms of public correspondence Russett noted staff has received several letters from members of the community, six letter expressing opposition or concern to the project, mainly related to traffic, lack of notification, level of density and intensity of the development and concerns related to impact on the sensitive areas. Staff also received two letters expressing support, the support was in regards to the new housing for the mobile home tenants and the secondary access for emergencies provided through the development of Forest View Drive. Next steps include the public hearing on March 7 regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and further discussion of the proposed rezoning and plat. After a recommendation to City Council and upon City Council approval there would be the development of a Master Site Plan which is included as a proposed condition to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Neighborhood Services. The applicant would also be required to execute an Affordable Housing Agreement related to the relocation to be approved by City Council and finally an application for final plat. Staff is recommending deferral of the application to allow opportunity for various deficiencies and discrepancies to be resolved and to complete review of the revised Sensitive Area Development Plan and Preliminary Plat received on January 25, 2019. In addition, the Commission must first act on the proposed amendment to the North District Plan prior to taking action on the proposed rezoning, SADP, and preliminary plat. Signs asked when the North District Plan was written. Russett is not sure but will look into it. Martin asked for the difference in size for the current mobile homes to what the proposed manufactured housing is, she is wondering if there are more or less new homes being proposed and the sizes of those homes. Russett does not have that information but perhaps the applicant can address it or she will look into it. Baker agreed about receiving information about the exceptions for the manufactured housing lot sizes and private open space, he assumes the current mobile home lots are already under 5000 square feet and private open space doesn't reach 500 square feet. Baker noted that he and Townsend are new to the Commission since this application was last reviewed so he may ask questions that are redundant, and asked if this project is approved and once development has started can the developer somehow circumvent the conditions required by the Commission. For example, perhaps go to the Board of Adjustment for exceptions. He feels once they start dealing Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 9 of 23 with commercial development in particular commercial developers have their own standards and their own requests (especially for something like a gas station). He is particularly concerned about signage and lighting and once the conditions are placed at the Planning and Zoning level what is the process, if any, for changing those later. Russett stated that if there are significant changes proposed to the approved OPD plan it would have to come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review and approval for a recommendation to City Council. Baker noted the Commission reviewed this project in another form last year and he asked if the biggest difference now is the multifamily and single family areas have switched. Russett said the proposal the Commission saw last year had the same locations for the single family and multifamily. Parsons noted in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposal the manufactured housing development was more in the center of the project. Baker asked what causes the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Russett said it is due to the move of the single family manufactured housing to the west side of the proposed development. Baker asked about the acceleration of the redevelopment of the 1-80 interchange due to the increased traffic, would that be an Iowa Department of Transportation cost or a cost to the City as well. Russett said those costs are negotiated between the IDOT and the City. Baker noted the definition of Commercial Highway Zoning states one of the purposes of that zone is to draw in traffic from the highway. Once off the highway, what is the signage requirement along North Dubuque Street, and how would the City keep the exit from being littered with signage. Russett said the Conditional Zoning Agreement as it currently is written would not allow any signage along North Dubuque Street. Baker asked if Lot 1 was always intended to be a gas station, even in earlier reviews. Parsons recalls it was, although there was a lot of discussion around that. Baker said if the goal is to have this area not visible with signage and lighting from North Dubuque Street that seems contradictory to the concept of having a gas station at that location, especially when the design shows a 20 foot sign right at the corner of the lot. He wonders how necessary a gas station is for this overall development. Hensch noted in the manufactured housing area there is a waiver or variance requesting the reduction for the frontage of the lots, a waiver or variance for the open space requirement, and a variance or waiver for the total square footage and he wonders if there is a restriction on the number of waivers or variances one can have. Russett replied there is no limit to the number of waivers that can be requested. Hensch opened the public hearing. Jimmy Becker (Blackbird Investments) is representing the owner and development team. He thanked Russett for a well done report and for providing a good summary of the application. Becker noted his team has over three years invested in this development and there are several decades tied to this community. On a personal note he was born in Iowa City and spent the first few years of his life here and currently has a brother that lives in the Peninsula neighborhood. Becker stated this development is significant not only in size but also and more importantly in what has been proposed, this is an opportunity here in Iowa City to set an example of how a development can work truly for the betterment of the community. He is joined tonight by several residents of Forest View Mobile Home Park and other members of the development team with a request for the Commission to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 10 of 23 Sensitive Areas Development Plan, Preliminary Plat and rezoning of the overall site. They are very excited about the proposed plan and thankful for the tireless efforts and support of City staff as they have worked diligently and thoughtfully through this process. Becker next provided a brief recap noting that in December 2017 the development team hosted a good neighbor meeting at the Elks Club, following up on that meeting in January 2018 they met with City staff and at that meeting City staff suggested to move the road, relocate the hotels and moved them off North Dubuque Street and shift the multi -residential complex on the west to the south to get out of the 300 foot sound buffer as shown. Moving the road, hotel and multi -residential complex created a ripple effect. After meeting with the City the development team met with the residents and at that meeting the residents expressed concern about the proximity of neighborhood to the commercial traffic and adjacent hotels and offices. Ultimately, as co -applicants, they decided to accept the City's recommendations and as a result moved the Forest View neighborhood to a safer, less traffic area of town. In April 2018 the proposal was presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission, at that meeting the Commission requested the team and the City resolve the following deficiencies: storm water management, sensitive areas and traffic impacts. The development team has since completed these items and have members of the consulting team present to answer any specific questions. Becker noted that since April they have worked diligently to address any concerns voiced by members of the community, City staff and members of the governing boards, all of which is reflected in the current submittal. Becker next discussed comments from the Commission's meeting on February 4 and wanted to address questions raised at that meeting. First a quick overview of the residential zone, this area gradually adapts to the adjacent neighborhoods, the clustered development is built up rather than out to preserve wetland and sensitive areas, the density is compliant with Code with 530 units in total which equates to 13 units per acre, and all traffic requirements meet DOT, Federal Highway and City standards. Second, the beautification along the entry way and preservation, it is a shared goal of both Iowa City and the development team to preserve the treescape along the eastern gateway and throughout the development. To achieve this they have dedicated a 40 - foot tree buffer on the east side and have several surrounding treescapes. As Russett described. Forest View will preserve 44.6% of trees in Forest View, counting the wooden buffers and remnant woodlands, they will also be planting 828 trees within the development and have designated outlots in total of almost 19 acres to preserve the existed forested areas. Another question that was asked was with respect to the modifications to the Forest View neighborhood since April. Russett acknowledged most of them but Becker highlighted the 30% reduction in the number of homes in the west side of the development when they removed the 24-plex. In addition, also worth mentioning they shifted the single family homes to better blend with the existing neighborhoods to the west, south and east of the development based on feedback from neighbors. They also added tree buffers on the west, south and east sides of the development as well. A question was asked about the relocation plan, the relocation plan was updated and finalized in May 2018. For the residents staying within the development each qualified resident begins by leasing a home at an initial $310 per month, this rent rate escalates at 2% annually. During the first 15 years leased a portion of the rent will be escrowed and used as a down payment. At year 15 the home will be sold to the resident at a pre -determined amount of $66,340. Another question was asked about construction price of the single family homes, as describe in the relocation plan the project cost per home is $202,000 and they have been able to hold to that price. Approximately 50% of that cost is comprised of the cost to build the homes, the remaining 50% includes the land, soft costs, financing fees, permits, roadways and infrastructure. The question asked about lot dimensions in Forest View neighborhood Becker explained what is represented today has evolved over several years and many iterations, many compromises have been made with consideration of all stakeholders. The average size of the Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 11 of 23 lots is 4800 square feet, which allows for 57 homes to be constructed, what is shown today has been signed off by all parties involved including the residents, the City, the Center for Worker Justice and the development team. Martin asked for clarification on the term single family home, does that refer to the manufactured homes. Becker confirmed that is correct. Martin wanted to understand because single family homes and manufactured homes have different loan lending requirements so there is a difference. Becker next discussed meeting the criteria for the waivers, specifically for lots 16-48 and lots 58- 73 with having the back alley ways and the frontage reduction. For the sake of the residents and the development they cannot afford anymore reductions to the number of homes. A question was asked about how many residents currently live in Forest View Mobile Home Park and there are 95 families living there. In the new development there will only be 57 homes constructed. Becker next discussed the impacts to Mackinaw Village neighborhood, the proposed development meets the intent of what was approved in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In lieu of the multifamily they have proposed single family, the density has been substantially reduced to better compliment the adjacent neighborhoods. The original Comprehensive Plan had 314 units and required the development to cut down more trees, the April plan had 83 homes and the current plan has only 57 manufactured homes. With respect to design standards the homes will be a single story with a permanent fix foundation and the road and infrastructure will be built to City Code. With respect to the setbacks, the setbacks will be in compliance with Code with a second point of access from all surrounding neighborhoods to the south and west of the development connecting from Flint Drive and Algonquin Road. With respect to lighting, the lighting will be in compliance with City Code and with respect to woodland buffers, they will be included. Becker stated there will be a treescape buffer between the proposed Forest View development and surrounding neighborhoods as requested. During the initial 15 year compliance period the homes will be owned by the owners of North Dubuque LLC and managed and maintained by Blackbird. After the 15 year compliance period the homeowners association will determine who will be responsible. To answer the question asked about safety concerns with respect to vehicular speeds along Forest View Drive, the development team and residents of Forest View share that concern and are amenable to the City's suggestions with respect to reasonable speed control measures to reduce speeds and keep the kids safe. In working with the City to address this concern they have added a circle drive adjacent to the neighborhood development with the plan. Becker next addressed the question on open space in Forest View neighborhood, there will be several outlots, one in particular (outlot D) is 1.65 acres and will be a dedicated green space recreation area including play areas, possibly a soccer field area, garden areas and a playground. This area is over an acre greater than the minimal requirement and equates to 1 '/4 of two professional football fields including both end zones. Becker noted the ownership team has committed $100,000 for recreational space and equipment for this area and the fit -out of the space will be determined by the homeowners association as no one knows better than those that will be living there. This area will be privately owned but open for public recreation use. There is also lot 49, directly to the north, which will be a community center for the residents, this lot is roughly 16,000 square feet and will include a 2400 square foot facility for the residents, it is also adjacent to 6 acres of preservation directly to the north and 8'/ acres of preservation to the east. The final question asked was regarding the Conditional Zoning Agreement, Becker noted to date they have provided everything they have and understand they will be held to the Conditional Zoning Agreement that will be drafted by the City Attorney and approved by the Council. Becker stated they recognize that they and all future owners will be Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 12 of 23 required to comply with City Code which will require City approval prior to any issuance of all permits. In conclusion Becker stated the have diligently worked with the City on their primary objectives and to address namely the relocation, access, preservation and compliance. Within the proposed this development will provide relocation opportunities and/or safe, quality affordable housing for the residents of Forest View Mobile Home Park, they addressed this by maximizing the number of homes in the neighborhood, neighboring a single family development to and existing single family neighborhood. Second, this development will provide a secondary access within the development, they address this by providing an access point that meets City, State and Federal requirements. Third this development will preserve trees, sensitive areas and the beautiful entryway, they address this by building up instead of out in cluster areas to maximize preservation, planting 828 trees and adding tree buffers along the eastern and western borders. Fourth, this development will be compatible and complimentary to adjacent developments and will not adversely impact the surrounding neighborhoods. They address this by satisfying code requirements and working with the City in consideration of all the stakeholders comments and concerns. Becker stated in the end they are here to help the residents of Forest View experience the American dream and to collaborate with the greater community to enhance connectivity in all senses of the word. Becker thanked the Commission for their time tonight and welcomes their feedback. Signs asked about the manufactured homes sitting on fixed foundations and if they would be on individual lots, each home goes with each lot, it is not a lot rental situation. Becker confirmed that was correct. Baker noted that in a previous rendition the manufactured housing was centered more to the middle of the development and the multifamily was to the west. That design proposal went through a staff review and the Comprehensive Plan was amended through a staff review and then after that the plans changed at the staff's direction? Becker confirmed that was correct. Baker next asked about the hybrid commercial area, the staff report (on page 5) states staff supports the proposed hybrid commercial zoning for the following reasons... and the fourth reason is the economical viable commercial zoning helps facilitate the construction of critical flood mitigation... is it Becker's position that this project absolutely has to have a commercial component or the entire redevelopment is not feasible. Becker confirmed the commercial area will help offset the costs for constructing the homes on the west side. Baker asked if the whole area was planned as a large residential area it would still not be financially viable. Becker confirmed that was correct. Baker asked about the North Dubuque entrance, along the interstate there will be signage (hotel, gas station available), but once a car makes the turn there is no additional signage along North Dubuque Street. Becker stated it is their intent with the retaining wall that is represented will allow for the commercial uses to have their logos inscribed on that wall. Baker next asked about lighting for the gas station, there was some provision about allowing an electronic sign that is standard with most gas stations, when he looks at the lot layout for the gas station, two 20 -foot signs one is right on the corner so he asks at what point someone driving down North Dubuque Street would they see that sign. Becker said there are a couple solutions, the sign will be seen from the interstate but more likely someone will use their phone to GPS it if they don't already know the gas station is there, those that live to the west will know it well and obviously know where to go, and those coming from the city will also be familiar with the area as Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 13 of 23 well. Baker understands many want a gas station in that area however he is concerned how it can possibly be a viable business there and maintain the green treescape entrance way into Iowa City. Baker asked if a gas station is necessary for the viability for the overall development and Becker confirmed it is. Martin asked if it was possible to get a spec of one of the homes with all the finishes details. Becker acknowledged he would get that information to the Commission. Hensch said one of the efforts in the area is to include a diversity of housing types and populations of people that can live there and the senior housing area still seems to be optional and asked if Becker could elaborate on the decision making of if that area will go to senior housing or just be multifamily. Hensch noted there is a lot of interest in having a diversity of ages in housing living in this area. Becker stated it is their intent to have full -care senior housing provided in the facility so each of those buildings will have various dedications, one to senior living, one to assisted living and another to memory care which is also why there is a difference in number of levels in each building. Therefore it is built with the intent to market it to senior living. Martin asked if they had someone in mind to purchase the senior living areas or if it would be fresh marketing. Becker said about a year ago they went out to market with the area and had interest but as things have been deferred they have had to postpone conversations. Hensch was happy to hear about traffic calming devices on Forest View Lane, and he really likes the traffic circle, he feels it is a very long stretch of road and livability for families is one of his priorities and keeping traffic slow. He noted one of the staff's options in the memo was maybe to put raised beds in that road and wondered if the development team thought that might be an option. Becker acknowledged it is something they would be open to. Hensch questioned outlot D, the proposed public space essentially for the people living in the manufactured housing neighborhood and also looks like there is some open space for recreation in outlot F but he noticed in the plans this time there is no detailing, he acknowledged Becker addressed this in his report that the residents of Forest View would make the decisions but Hensch would feel more comfortable to see something of the tentative plans for the space. Becker said they can follow up with the co -applicants and gather information for the next meeting. Dyer questioned the 828 trees they will be planting and when they will be planted. Becker said the trees will be planted as the areas are developed. As far as how they are looking to develop they will follow the road and infrastructure development. Forest View will be built first along with the initial commercial lots along the east side. Dyer said ordinarily when the Commission approves OPDs they see elevations of buildings showing the materials and use, they see recreation areas delineated with picnic tables and play equipment and they have sent OPDs back to developers to provide that information so she is concerned there is a lot of "trust me" in this proposal, there are no building elevations, no play equipment, no picnic tables, and it is a huge area of the city they are asking the whole city to accept. Becker said with respect to that there will be two agreements they will be signing with the City, one is a Conditional Zoning Agreement and the other is an Affordable Housing Agreement which will include the stipulation the developer has given $100,000 for play equipment for the recreational space to be decided upon by the homeowners. The Conditional Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 14 of 23 Zoning Agreement will hold the developer to the design standards stipulated in that agreement. Russett noted that in lieu of the elevations staff has been working with the applicant to identify some additional design standards and design guidelines which will be included in the Conditional Zoning Agreement, so if there are details missing or additional things the Commission would like to see they wish to see in the Agreement staff would be happy to have that feedback. Martin agrees with Dyer and would like to see the elevations because this area is such a high point of town and feels it is important. Hensch noted that other times when they haven't had specific elevations they have had some articulations about quality building materials, etc. That may go a long way to sway some concerns. Becker noted that Kevin Munson with Neuman Munson Architects has provided some of that detail concerning materials and what they are proposing to build. Hensch stated that would be helpful to see. Townsend had a question about the manufactured homes, some lots are 4000 square feet and some are 5000 square feet and the size of the units are larger or smaller depending on the size of the lots. Will there be a difference in the rate charged for the two different sizes. Becker noted the current rent rate to live in Forest View is $310 and that is what they will charge. Townsend said even through there is a difference in lot size and structure size. Becker noted there is no difference in structure size, only lot size. Baker has not reviewed the transportation study so asked when it was completed, did it take into account the current layout or the previous layout. Becker said it took into consideration this layout, it has more units than what is describe here because at the time it was completed it was 542 units and 530 are represented today. He believes the study was done in the last three to six months. Russett confirmed it was done at the end of last year. Baker asked if would be a safe assumption to say moving the manufactured housing to the west side versus the multifamily you are decreasing potential traffic on Algonquin Road and Mackinaw Drive. Becker confirmed and agreed it is an improvement for traffic in the existing neighborhoods. Baker noted one of the questions raised in correspondence from the neighbors was in design and in the earlier discussions of the multifamily on the west side there was a point made they would be designed to be compatible with or supportive of the existing homes in that area, now with manufactured housing on the west side there seems to be less flexibility on design and compatibility. Becker said that will be best answered by providing the specs of the manufactured housing to the Commission. Dyer asked if Flint Drive and Algonquin Road are 50 -feet wide. Becker said it will be Flint Drive and Cole Drive that will be 50 -feet wide and Algonquin Road is 60 -feet wide. Dyer believes those will be the roads that take up the whole Peninsula area traffic when Foster Road is flooded. Becker noted that with Flint Drive is already developed at 50 -feet wide. Ed Cole (620 Foster Road) is one of the owners and developers and noted this project will be right in his front yard and he is thrilled. He said they have watched these families raise their Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 15 of 23 families in Forest View for three generations and everyone has stayed together. This project has a lot of "not in my backyard" philosophy going on and it hurts, this project should be a pilot for the rest of the country on how to incorporate affordable housing into a development. Hensch asked how many lots are in the current mobile home park, how many occupied mobile homes and dimensions of the current lots. Cole said the current lots at Forest View have 16 units to an acre, which when built back in the late 40's and 50's the home sizes and lots sizes were small, and there were no requirements so they flooded as many in as could fit. He feels the average lot size would be 30x60 (1800 square feet). There are currently 155 mobile homes in the park on 16 acres. Dyer asked for the reason for reducing the number of manufactured homes from the number of occupied homes now. Cole said just the allowable space, back when the current park was built they put 16 units per acre and today's laws state 8 units per acre. Dyer asked why though if there are currently 92 occupied units why are they only proposing 57 in the new location. Becker noted there are several goals they are trying to accomplish and one of which is preserving the trees and in order to preserve the trees and wetlands and provide the homes in the correct lot size they were limited in terms of space. Also in providing the green space area and 300 foot sound buffer added to the constraining factors. Dyer noted that presumably they could use more land to put more manufactured homes on to correspond with the number needed rather than the multifamily uses. Signs acknowledged that a number of the families are planning to move elsewhere and per the relocation plan will receive money for doing so and not all the 92 families are planning to stay. Becker confirmed that was correct. Baker thanked Mr. Cole for working with the City as much as he has over the years and acknowledged if they agree about anything at all if this proposal goes forward it will be a remarkable improvement in the quality of life for a lot of people who are living out there right now and he should be commended for that. Wilfred Nixon (802 Tranquil Bluff Trail) lives just off Mackinaw Drive, he has lived in Iowa City, although not on Tranquil Bluff Trail, for 32 years. His primary concern with this proposal is the traffic. The study indicates the traffic along North Dubuque Street will increase by 15,000 vehicles a day as a result of this development buildout. The only reason for that is because of the development. Those vehicles will not just be on North Dubuque Street, they will be coming down Forest View Drive and that is an awful lot of vehicles and it will not be uniform during the day and they can envision many hours during the day when they will be seeing a 1000 vehicles an hour on Forest View Drive which is an awful lot of vehicles. It is 15 or 16 per minute, they currently don't see that sort of traffic level anywhere in this part of time, and the roads even as proposed are in no way able to handle that much traffic. And while he agrees with the need for traffic calming it will make the problem even worse. There are two things that can happen here, either they get that much traffic and they get what they might call charitably call a "hot mess" or they don't get that much traffic and the commercial entities fail because they don't have enough customers. He doesn't see a way to generate a win on this, the area is simply not able to take in 1000 vehicles per hour. Secondly this additional traffic will accelerate the need to rebuild the I- 80 interchange in about 11 years. Such interchanges typically cost several million dollars and the time value money of several million dollars over 11 years is quite a lot of dollars and it was mentioned those dollars would be an agreement with the City of Iowa City and the State, but it is still our money and is a lot of expense. Nixon questions what they will get for that money, Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 16 of 23 sometimes they get good things from development, here we are going to get a gas station He has not noticed a lack of gas stations in and around Iowa City. They are going to get some fast food restaurants, we already have some of those as well, they are going to get some hotels, the city already has a few of those too. He is not seeing anything here which is sufficiently unique to cost the City several million dollars over 10 or 11 years in terms of time value of money and 1000 vehicles per hour on a two-lane road. Given that he asks the Commission to reject the proposal as it stands. Donna Davis (1205 Laura Drive, #95) has lived in Forest View with her husband since 1986. When they first moved there it was with the intention of living there for a few years and probably saving enough money to buy a home but somehow homes were never affordable enough for them to buy and time went on and they have now lived there for over 30 years and probably would continue to live there but their trailer is falling apart. It is a 55 year old trailer and probably only built to last for 25 years. Davis acknowledged that most of her neighbors are in the same situation, the trailers are literally falling apart, falling in on their heads. Three years ago when this whole process started she doesn't think they had any idea it would take this long and they are coming to learn three years isn't that much time in the life of a city but in their lives with their old trailers is it a lot of time. Davis stated these are good people in this mobile home park, they are all neighbors in the true sense of the word, they take care of each other, they look out for each other, they are hard-working people and want to keep the neighborhood together because they are their own support system. For the people that have children they are currently in a school that is very good for them and they just want to stay together. Davis noted they are so pleased that developers are willing to give them this opportunity, for some of them this may be the only chance they ever get to own their own home and any study can tell you how important that is for people. She feels at her age this is the first time in her life she has felt housing insecure and she doesn't like it a bit. She asks the Commission to give consideration to passing this proposal. Jillian Nagle (751 Mission Point Road) wants to voice two concerns she has with the proposal, one is traffic which has been brought up a lot, but her main concern lies on Algonquin Road, there are lots of cars parked on Algonquin Road and especially in the winter it is very hard to get through and you typically have to play the jogging game with people coming the other way. With this additional road, Forest View, anyone coming from the north is typically going to be turning onto Forest View rather than going to Foster Road, it just makes more sense, which then would bring the traffic through Algonquin Road, partially because Flint Drive is going to be a smaller road as well, her concern is the additional traffic on Algonquin Road and the street being able to withstand the two-way traffic there. Her other concern is regarding the good neighbor meeting, which Becker mentioned was in December 2017, she personally doesn't remember having an invite to that meeting and she has been in her home since 2013. She did note at that time, in 2017 she didn't have an issue with the plan so maybe she was invited and didn't attend. The plan was changed in April 2018 and neighbors were notified in April of the plan change but have not been invited to a good neighbor meeting with the developer since. Nagle acknowledged the developer has done a fantastic job of including the affected residents of Forest View but the neighboring areas have been left out of the planning and voicing their opinions. Sulay Flores (1205 Laura Drive #80) (via translator) has been a resident of Forest View for five years, her husband has lived there for 10 years already and we have realized that it is a community, a neighborhood, it is well located, it is accessible, it is centrally located and they are reasonably priced living quarters, homes to live in, it is a very quiet and calm neighborhood. In the last few years she has lived there she appreciates that none of the other neighborhoods or communities have been affected so she believes it is a development that can be possible like Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 17 of 23 folks like herself that are lower income and they can share so they can obtain dignified living because all of them have opportunities to get better and improve themselves in all aspects. And in especially and in particular with improvements to housing which is a right we all have to do for ourselves. Javier Laguna (1205 Laura Drive #63) (via translator) lives in Forest View and has lived there for more than 10 years. He is in complete agreement the Commission should approve the development given that it is an opportunity for himself, his family, his children, it is close to school, it is close to shopping and it is close to his job. And this is a brighter future for my family, my children and myself. When he cannot be there for his children he knows he has a community where he lives, his neighbors, who are very good people, they all know each other and have lived there for many years. The home would be a dream come true and this would be a great new future for myself and my family, for my children so they have a place to live and call home. Marcial Utalo (1205 Laura Drive) (via translator) has lived 15 years in Forest View, he has raised his family, his children, there. Forest View is very calm, it is a quiet neighborhood, in addition to that it is a part of his heritage in this community, and he knows all of his neighbors as said previously. When he cannot get out of work early, or doesn't have someone to take his children to school or pick them up from school he calls a friend and they will pick up his children. In addition the schools are close by, work is close by, and practically this is a good development and he believes it is a great opportunity to have a home, a dignified home, with a rent that is reasonable and affordable and in addition this development will be an improvement to the City. It is true that we aren't that many people in this area but he believes the people that oppose or refer to traffic every September when football season starts that street is always completely maxed out and he has not seen anyone protesting because there is too much traffic. He believes it is ridiculous to believe the people who live in Forest View or in the at -large community will create too much traffic on those streets. Sara Barron (Executive Director, Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) is here tonight with the support of the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition Board of Directors and members to speak in favor of this project. They have several reasons to bring to the Commission's consideration. The first is these new homes being proposed are permanent homes for single family households to have something beyond their current living conditions. While they are being called manufactured homes and there are distinctions there, these are permanent homes that will be a great improvement in quality of housing for Forest View residents. The proposal keeps the existing neighborhood together and the residents of the community have said that is a priority for them and the Coalition supports them in naming that as a priority. Barron notes Iowa City says they are a City that values inclusion and this development gets us closer to that goal of including many different housing types and family types in all the neighborhoods. For those who have been present for the many iterations of these conversations you know while people's arguments may have gotten more sophisticated that when people first came to respond to this project it was very difficult for them to hide some of the biases that were influencing their objection to the project. Barron stated that the City will need innovation in order to solve the housing problems, so while yes there are some lot size waivers and some things that are being asked for, but while we move toward that goal of what it looks like to create more housing options we need Planning and Zoning to invest in more creative solutions like the ones that are being proposed through this redevelopment. Barron notes this development stands out because the residents have been so involved in the planning process and we can be assured they may not be getting what they want because they are able to say very clearly what they want and they are getting their needs met from this project. Therefore we can set aside any of our Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 18 of 23 own concerns knowing the residents have been outstanding advocates for themselves and they have asked so many questions and have pushed for solid answers to those questions and Barron trusts them and he work they have done with the developers. Barron stated that if one were to look at some of the adjoining neighborhoods many of those home have very small green space allocations and lot sizes so really what is being proposed is not outside of the character of the neighborhood and general development of that area. Finally there is a plan in place to take excellent care of this neighborhood and urges the Commission to listen to the residents when they say they are ready to invest in this neighborhood and not let people suggest it may detract from the quality of the overall neighborhood because we know they are about to greet some really outstanding new neighbors. Margarita Rodriquez (1205 Laura Drive #121) came to Iowa City in 1990 and has lived in Forest View for 29 years now, her kids grew up there, they all went to school, elementary, junior high and high school, they all graduated and she is very proud of them. Rodriguez believes Blackbird and the owners are doing a good thing for the residents, she has lived in #153, moved to #74, moved to #91 and now she lives in #121. She says to get this project going, get the half glass to a full glass and have everybody with enjoyment. She has never had such an opportunity, when she first got here she saw a sign that said "rent to own" and when she called that number and said her name the man immediately said he didn't think she was qualified. Now she is really being given this opportunity to rent to own, please let her take it, please let her have a good home, it would be so great. What the Commission does and decides will matter, it is a choice and she will be ver, glad when they make that choice. With regards to traffic, she has lived there 29 years and football, basketball, performances, people don't slow down, she drives through there and follows the speed limits (25, 35) and sees cars not following those instructions. She asks the Commission to consider this and continue with the project as she would like to be part of it. Margarita Baltazer (1205 Laura Drive) (via translator) is the president of the Forest View Association, this night, the community of Forest View is here tonight, so that the Commission will hear the concerns from the community. This project is super important for all of them, this project is for lower income, it is a project or development for a dream for many of them, for their children, for people who have lived there for more than 30 years. You can drive by their neighborhood and check out their homes, you'll see them, hers is kind of okay but she does go to sleep and wonder what is going to happen to her home, how much more time will she have here, will it fall down, what is she to do with her children, how will she move herself to get to work. What will she tell her children, please take into consideration our children, they have dreams of having a home, a more dignified home, they all work with dignity to earn their money and pay their rent, they know this development has been very long but thanks to their community, they got organized, they spoke up, to say they want something better for themselves. They have sat down with the developers and presented their needs and concerns and have worked collaboratively, every month they have meetings and every month they have hope to give their children a better home. Baltazer noted she is a single parent, she wakes up every morning with energizing hope that she can get a better home for her child, her daughter. These homes are affordable, she can afford this home, she cannot afford any other place, they are too expensive, because she is also thinking of her daughter's future, going to university and the support she wants to provide there. If the Commission allows this development to go through you will allow the parents to dedicate more time and more money to invest into the future of our children to be university graduates. Her child and the children of Forest View are the same children like any other place and they deserve a dignified home. Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 19 of 23 Martin is curious how the residents of Forest View feel about the addition of the highway commercial area being proposed. Baltazer said the commercial part is an opportunity for the residents as well because they can have employment very close by, they will have more opportunities to work very close to home and maybe not even have to drive. She also added the school is super close by for the children. Rafael Morataya (1556 1 st Avenue, #C) is the Executive Director for the Center for Worker Justice and noted this project started before his time in the City, three years ago, and the residents have been really patience for the last three years, they have been organizing, created a tenants association to defend and understand the concept and to set a precedent for the City. The Center for Worker Justice has trust in the developer who is from Des Moines, for this project. Morataya doesn't believe the City has done a project like this before, especially to have 57 affordable housing homes. This will help 57 families, they will own homes after 15 years. This is a unique opportunity for the City to set an example for the State as a whole. Morataya presented signatures from a meeting held at the Center today for support. Chris Traeger (700 Mission Point Road) wanted to touch on something he heard from Baltzar that they have been meeting monthly with the developers and he was not aware of this and noted this has been how the entire process has been with their neighborhood, very limited information has been passed along to them, they rarely hear about meetings. It is interesting to him the developers are taking time to meet with the Forest View residents but not taking the time to meet with the surrounding neighborhoods that are being affected. Gustavo Caro (1902 Algonquin Road) (via translator) is the president of the Homeowners Association at McCormick II Condominiums which are the houses that in front of the future development. He wants to continue on something Traeger said regarding the conversations the developer has had with the various neighbors and why the neighbors in front of the development have not had any meetings with the developers of any kind. They have met with the neighbors from Mission Point on a number of occasions and many of them have different types of concerns and questions and would like to have the same treatment the other people have had with respect to transparency. It would be a good idea if it would happen after this meeting so the outcome of this development would be positive for all. Caro noted it is being said at this meeting one of the objectives is to incorporate more people that are in close neighborhoods which he believes would be important to start a new relationship with the neighbors and start dialogue and not place one group against another. As a person that lives in the neighborhood, he would like more details with respect to the traffic, which he doesn't believe it is a silly topic when there is parking issues with cars parked on either side of the street in both directions. Mission Point also has areas where parking only is allowed on one side of the street so there are really problems with the flow of people that come and go in terms of traffic and they need to address parking spaces in terms of circulation for ambulances and emergency vehicles and such. He has not heard any solutions in respect to those issues. In conclusion he noted there are some positive things they have heard, but there is more work to resolve other concerns, doubts and problems in other various neighborhoods that have not been invited. Beth Pruessner (5 Knollwood Lane) her home is in the small neighborhood south of outlot A and there has been lots of great discussion tonight, she appreciates Baker's questions about the gas station, they do appreciate the outlot A but do have concerns it will not be enough of a barrier between the gas station and the homes in her neighborhood. At the last meeting she thought the discussion of the buffer would be an acre but tonight is has been said to be 40 feet and is curious if that changed. Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 20 of 23 Russett replied that the 40 feet is a wooded buffer along the east side of the project area, along North Dubuque Street, the acreage of outlot A is different. Pruessner would also like to request to be invited to development meetings as well to hear the great discussions. She stated they do have great concerns about the gas station in lot 1 and propose it be flipped with lots 2 and 3 and be on the other side of the road and keep the fumes and lights and traffic over there. Deb Heiken (4 Knollwood Lane) she is in the northern most house in the Knollwood development and her property line will go from 65 feet from outlot A to 260 feet on the other side. As far as she can determine her bedroom window will be 200 feet from the proposed gas station we she noted they can all agree no one would want to live like that. She questions the absolute need of a gas station in this development. If there absolutely has to be a gas station then to flip it with lots 2 and 3 so at least they don't have that 24/7 lights, noise and fumes. She would much rather sleep near a restaurant that will close at some point. The other concern she has is what the future development potential is of outlot A, will it always just be trees or down the road if they need more commercial footage could they turn outlot A into something. She noted there is a lot of trust here and hard to know what will happen down the road. She asked the Commission to take into concern the rest of those living next to the commercial area. It is great for what they are doing for all families in the mobile home park, but the commercial area is of a concern. If it must be done, could it be without a gas station it would be appreciated. Martin asked how long Heiken has lived in her home. Heiken replied 23 years. Signs asked how far away Heiken's house from Dubuque Street is, say in comparison to lot 1 Heiken is unsure, but they are setback from Dubuque Street. Alberto Perez (1205 Laura Drive) (via translator) stated he would be very brief because he knows the Commission is tired and told us not to repeat ourselves. On this day, realistically, as with all the other meetings they have had they come up with the great big conclusions and decisions that affect societies in all of the country, not just Iowa. If this development works out as we believe, and as it is being planned out, this will be a very big project and rewrite history because many other people will want to repeat this project in other parts of the country. He is an artistic type of a guy, he paints portraits, he can do many things with his hands but one thing he cannot do is tell people what to do, but he is very good at observing. When he came to Iowa City and lived in Forest View he thought he would only live there for a few months, but saw the neighbors were very calm, tranquil neighbors. He comes from Los Angeles and comparatively this area is super tranquil and super calm, the people of Iowa are very noble and he liked and fell in love with this place. When this development came about the residents were told the delay would be about a year, 12 months, he was trilled, he didn't participate but then the year came by and nothing was done and they were told "next year" and while he continues to be happy knowing it was all being taken care of. Now he has completely changed his opinion because he has become aware this has taken three years, maybe going for another few months, but this guarantees that things are being thought out carefully and well done, details are being managed well, people who are managing this are being careful and thinking things out carefully. That is what made him change his mind and he will participate more in this process, he does not want to seem sarcastic or critical of things that have not been done well or things that could have been done better, he is very secure and certain that all of this time that everyone has taken, and even more time if you want, and the patience of the developers everyone will do a fabulous, grandiose development. He does not want to tell the Commission where it is okay or not okay but want he Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 21 of 23 wants to tell them. whatever they need that he can contribute to, he will do so. He will take his time to help, if he is needed to help complete this project, he is bilingual and translates at the hospital for patients. He is speaking in Spanish this evening and using a translator to make sure exactly what he wants to say is being address correctly and understood. Martin asked how long Perez has lived in Forest View. Perez replied four years. Angelica Ortiz (1205 Laura Drive) (via translator) has lived in Forest View for 23 years, her boys were born there, and the Cole family has been a blessing because they have always taken their time so the children always have a place to play sports, learn, learn about God, gone to school and don't want to move from there, all their friends are located there, many of their friends have been born and raised in Forest View. Many families have moved in and moved out of Forest View, many of the children that have moved out have fallen into depression and fallen into bad ways, including some of her neighbors, she doesn't want that to happen to her family. The Cole family is always keeping an eye on everyone, they know if the children are in the park too late and tell them to go home, they take care of our children. This is why Ortiz has been very comfortable living in this neighborhood. She noted her home is very small, she has three boys and there is only two rooms, they need an extra room and it would be a blessing to have a new home that is larger. Her home is old, with all the changes that are happening and possibility of a new home, they cannot fix anything in the old home, it is all on pause. For that reason she asks the Commission to please approve so the families can have new homes, everyone just wants better homes for their children. Alberto Ortiz (1205 Laura Drive) stated he was born and raised in Forest View, he goes to City High where he will graduate this May. This development is about the American dream, it is his families first opportunity to own a home, it has been a discussion of theirs for a while and it might finally come true. This brings opportunities to work close to home, it brings amenities to the neighborhood, the traffic and commercial is all to the east and the residential is to the rest. He asked for the Commission's support. Sandra Garcia (1205 Laura Drive) has lived in Forest View as long as she can remember, probably 20 years (she is 21) and would like to see this development go through, the family keeps growing. Like others they live in a two-bedroom home and the family is getting bigger and she would like to see her future children grow up as she did in this great community. Cindy Onnen (1205 Laura Drive) has lived in Forest View for 45 years, she has raised her children and her grandchildren in her mobile home. It is a very special place for her, it is very difficult to think about moving but the current shape of court is changing. She has seen homes go from 8 -wide to 10 -wide and replaced with 12 -wide and 14 -wide and now the trailers almost touch each other because they go so much bigger. She knows she needs to move and that the day would come, they all need a new place, they are outdated in many ways. She has been fortunate to meet many people there of many cultures, economics and religions. She has helped children, she has helped the elderly, the community is her home, and she cannot imagine living anywhere else. The importance is more to her than some because it is home, it is a community that looks after each other, they look out for the disabled and the elderly, and they care for each other. People come back to visit the place, to see how it's changed, it is very special for a lot of people. People have chosen that community to live in and cannot imagine to live anywhere else. Roberto Garcia (1205 Laura Drive) (via translator) has lived in Forest View since 1998 and just as all other have provided a short statement he agrees with the comments. They are all a community, if one asks for a favor, they all help each other. He knows his neighbors, the Planning and Zoning Commission February 21, 2019 Page 22 of 23 children call them their adoptive grandparents, because they have been there for such a long time. He does not believe it is a complicated issue with the traffic, from Foster to Dubuque and would like for the Commission to support the planning that is taking place for the homes and support our families. Hensch closed the public hearing. Parsons moved to defer REZ18-00013/SUB18-0006 until the March 7, 2019 meeting. Townsend seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY 17. 2019 & FEBRUARY 4, 2019 Townsend moved to approve the meeting minutes of January 17, 2019 & February 4, 2019. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett gave an update on the proposed rezoning at 2130 Muscatine Avenue from commercial to residential which was denied by the Planning & Zoning Commission went to Council earlier this week and they have requested a consult with the Commission. The Council is proposing March 12 at Spm. Baker noted he feels bad about that vote saying using the criteria of not holding a neighborhood meeting is not correct since Code does not require such meeting. It should not be held against the applicant. The Commission agreed to the consult meeting on March 12. Russett also noted the proposed text amendments for Title XIV was passed and adopted by City Council at the meeting on Tuesday. Russett knows the Commission had concerns about the change for the language regarding liquor and Councilman Cole had the same concerns and voted against the amendment but everyone else was in favor so it was approved. Adiournment: Parsons moved to adjourn. Signs seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member (W -S) 4/16 4/19 5/3 5/17 6/7 6/21 7/5 8/16 9/6 9/20 10/18 12/20 1/3 1/17 (W -S.) 2/4 2/21 BAKER, LARRY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X O/E X X X X X DYER, CAROLYN X X X X X O/E X O O/E O X X X O/E X X FREERKS, ANN X X O/E X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X O/E X PARSONS, MAX X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X SIGNS, MARK X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X O/E -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- TOWNSEND, BILLIE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X O/E X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member Item Number: 5.n. Awl Q- CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org April 2, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Public Art Advisory Committee: January 10 FINAL MINUTES PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE JANUARY 10TH, 2019 — 3:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Vero Rose Smith, Steve Miller, Ron Knoche, Juli Seydell Johnson, Andrea Truitt, Eddie Boyken NOT PRESENT: Wendy Brown STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Bollinger, Erika Kubly, Kumi Morris PUBLIC PRESENT: Tim Adams, Sherry Adams ELECTION OF OFFICERS: CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON Marcia Bollinger asked the Committee if any member would like to nominate a chairperson. Juli Seydell Johnson nominated Vero Rose Smith as chairperson. Andrea Truitt seconded the nomination. Motion passed unanimously. Bollinger asked if any member would like to nominate a vice chairperson. Ron Knoche nominated Steve Miller. Rose Smith seconded the nomination. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA There was no public discussion of any item not on the agenda. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 6. 2018 MEETING Knoche moved to approve the December 6, 2018 minutes. Seydell Johnson seconded. Motion passed unanimously. CITY HALL LOBBY STAIRWELL ART PROJECT: TIM ADAMS Tim Adams stated that there are a couple of items that still need to be decided regarding the City Hall lobby project. Adams asked the Committee if they want to be able to make the lighting behind the piece multi -colored and if they want to be able to adjust the color as they see fit. Adams also mentioned that Committee members has requested that the light be dimmed as well, which Adams stated could be done. Adams stated that the blue color had been selected initially because it tends to reflect well and evenly, but that the color can be changed whenever with the new multi- colored lights. Adams stated that the multi -colored lights carry extra wattage and will cost more than the individual color lights. Seydell Johnson stated that she believes the Committee should chose the multi -colored lights for the sake of having more options. Bollinger stated that the subcommittee met and had also decided multi -colored lights are the best choice. Bollinger stated that some people had also asked if the color of the lights could be dimmed and softened. Adams responded that he can configure the LEDs so that they are more evenly spaced, which would dictate the distribution of light on each panel. Bollinger also asked if there is a chance there could be more color options to choose between. Adams replied that yes, that is possible. Bollinger asked if there is a white light option currently. Adams replied that there is not a white light option, as that would require an additional set of LEDs, and that the closest the multi-colored lights could get to a white is a washed-out light blue or yellow. Adams asked Bollinger if she had requested there be more branches featured in the piece. Bollinger responded that she had but the specifics of how they appear are up to Adams. Adams suggested several ways by which they could achieve a stronger branch patterns. Adams mentioned that he had designed the dates to be cut thinly and appear subtly. Bollinger asked the Committee their thoughts on the dates because at one point they had decided that they did not want the dates to be too obvious. Seydell Johnson mentioned that she likes how they are designed because it will allow people to discover them the longer they look at the piece. Bollinger stated that she agrees, and therefore thinks they should be designed smaller. Adams stated that the smallest number he can cut with accuracy is about an inch and the smallest thickness is around a sixteenth of an inch. Bollinger asked if the dates could be engraved. Adams responded that would be possible but difficult because the pieces are so large. Vero Rose Smith asked if the Committee needs to approve the plan. Bollinger responded that, yes, the Committee needs to approve the plan as presented or with some approved contingencies. Adams asked the Committee if they have any changes they would like to make to the plan before it is approved. Adams mentioned that there were some questions about the way the flaps of metal are cut to mimic the shagbark hickory. Adams stated that he had formed the U-shape by pixelating and vectorizing a photo of shagbark hickory until it had simplified into that abstract shape. Adams ask the Committee what direction they preferred the metal flaps to peel away. Bollinger mentioned that there may be more light coming through the piece if they peel away from the bottom. Rose Smith agreed that she likes the way it appears in the sample because it allows the light to come through. Adams mentioned that he had also designed a way to allow the panels to be removed for cleaning of them and the wall. Bollinger asked Adams to tell the Committee about the transformer. Adams informed the Committee that the transformer should be about the size of one used for outdoor light landscaping and gave the Committee details on how the wiring could be run through the piece. Adams also gave details as to how the piece would be mounted on the wall. Seydell Johnson motioned to approve the design as shown on Tim Adam's plans. Knoche seconded. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC ART PROGRAM FUNDING PROPOSAL DISCUSSION Bollinger provided the memo presented to the City Council on December 18, 2018 by Thomas Agran and mentioned that Agran was encouraged to do so before the Council started formal discussions regarding the budget. Bollinger stated that it was unclear during the presentation whether the memo had been reviewed by the Public Art Advisory Committee and at no point had anyone said the memo was formally adopted by the Public Art Advisory Committee. Bollinger stated that the Council did discuss increasing the Public Art budget by $25,000 for the next fiscal year. Bollinger stated that the City Manager and the Council members would like to see a strategic plan from the Public Art Advisory Committee prior to making the final allocation of funds. Bollinger stated that she is confident the Committee or a subcommittee could draft quickly, given the number of materials already created for this purpose. Bollinger stated that she thinks there needs to be correspondence with the City Council that suggests that the memo did not receive the full approval of the Public Art Advisory Committee but that the Committee plans to create a strategic plan to present to the Council in the near future. Seydell Johnson stated that she would add that it is not from the funding source as recommended, but from the facade -change program, a program where Downtown and North Marketplace businesses can apply for loans for half the expense of making facade improvements. Seydell Johnson stated that it is part of Economic Development funding, rather than the Hotel/Motel tax, because they wanted a more sustainable long-term source of funds. Seydell Johnson asked if it was necessary for the Committee to specify that Agran is not a member of the Committee. Bollinger replied that they can specify that the Public Art Advisory Committee will take the lead. Seydell Johnson suggested mentioning that the Committee will be working in conjunction with Thomas Agran. Seydell Johnson also mentioned that she understood that Council was also interested in the funding being used more widely throughout the community rather than being focused within Downtown, so the idea was that the Downtown would have its own funding for art and that this funding received by the Committee is to be used elsewhere, to encompass all the other neighborhoods and districts. Rose Smith asked what the timeline on producing the correspondence with Council would be. Bollinger responded that the sooner the better. Knoche stated that his understanding of the situation is that the $50,000 will be a part of the budget proposal that Council will move forward with, but that the money will not be able to be allocated until the strategic plan is developed by the Committee, and that the strategic plan not only has to address public art but also the Council's strategic plan that they have in place. Rose Smith stated that a subcommittee had already been formed to discuss funding earlier, composed of Steve Miller, Eddie Boyken, and herself, and that they could continue that subcommittee. Knoche stated that it is important that the strategic plan drafted by the subcommittee comes back to the Committee before it is presented to Council. Bollinger asked if a motion needed to be made for the Committee to communicate with City Council regarding the status of this situation, because she feels that it would be wise to inform Council that the memo did not come from the Public Art Advisory Committee, that the Committee is appreciative of Council's consideration to increase the budget, and that the Committee will also be working on a strategic plan to present to Council. Seydell Johnson stated that her understanding is that Council would like the strategic plan to be presented to them in a work session, which she believes the full Committee should attend. Rose Smith confirmed that the Committee needs to make a motion to approve that the Committee did not create the proposal, explain in a correspondence to the Council that the Committee has formed a subcommittee to continue forward with this initiative, and that the Committee will make another presentation to the Council in a work session after the Committee has completed and submitted a strategic plan. Seydell Johnson stated that she would add that once the subcommittee has drafted the strategic plan it will be brought to the full Committee for approval. Seydell Johnson motioned for staff to create a memo based on the points previously stated by Rose Smith to present back to the Council. Boyken seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Steve Miller arrived at 4:20 p.m. COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR REPORTS: There were no committee announcements or reports. STAFF REPORTS: Bollinger stated that information about Poetry in Public was sent out prior to the holidays and that the deadline is February 1. Bollinger asked the Committee if any member was interested in serving on the Poetry in Public Selection Committee this year. Rose Smith mentioned that she volunteered last year and enjoyed the process. Bollinger mentioned that she will try to arrange the meeting before Spring Break, that it usually occurs on a weekday and lasts around two hours, and that the selection committee usually meets at Prairie Lights. Bollinger mentioned that there are usually representatives from the University of Iowa, the UNESCO City of Literature Board, the Iowa City Public Library, Prairie Lights, and Iowa Book. Truitt volunteered to serve as representative from the Public Art Advisory Committee. ADJOURNMENT: Knoche motioned to adjourn. Seydell Johnson seconded. Meeting Adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Public Art Advisory Committee Attendance Record 2018-2019 Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member Term 5/3 6/7 7/12 8/2 9/6 10/4 11/1 12/6 1/10 Name Expires Wendy Brown 01/01/20 x x x x x x x O/E O/E Erin Fitzgerald 01/01/20 x x X X X x -- -- -- Ron Knoche x x x X x x x x x Jul! Seydell- x x X X X X x X x Johnson Vero Rose Smith 01/01/21 x O/E x O/E X X x x x Steve Miller 02/01/21 x O/E x x X x x x x Andrea Tru itt 01/01/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- x x Eddie Boyken 01/01/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a member