e my notes from the Candidate's Forum. While my answers may have been slightly different, this is the gist of how I answered each question.
1. Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?
I am for this for several reasons. Some “hard” reasons are we have a small budget and are both landlocked and have nearly no empty buildable space left to develop. We have the oldest average aged housing stock in the county, and residential tax valuations are projected to be flat. If the church decides to move, a nearly 5 acre parcel on the intersection of our two arterials is the best place for a slightly more dense mixed commercial and residential development. Some “soft” reasons are that without significant commercial or public space we have no place to easily congregate and become a true community. In the absence of an identified sense of University Heights “SELF” we are basically just another Iowa City neighborhood. The benefits of this development will help to guarantee the financial independence as well as the high quality living standards that make University Heights a treasured home.
2. What kind of development is most appropriate at the St. Andrew Church site?
As I said in my first answer, the intersection of our two arterials, one of which is a major arterial for the greater metropolitan area, is a good one for mixed commercial and multi
family development. I don’t think there is another intersection in town with the combination of space and easy access. Our other major parcels in town are either off dead end roads or along the railroad tracks. Neither of the owners of those properties have expressed any interest in moving.
family development. I don’t think there is another intersection in town with the combination of space and easy access. Our other major parcels in town are either off dead end roads or along the railroad tracks. Neither of the owners of those properties have expressed any interest in moving.
This project has changed dramatically since first proposed in March 2009.
In June 2009 the city council, failing to achieve a supermajority, by one vote, defeated a proposal by only having 3 councilors vote in favor. That rezoning said that the back buildings was to be no more than 76 feet tall, and the front building no more than 54 feet tall. There were to be no more than 93 units total. The realignment of Sunset would have completely filled the east ravine.
The submittal today has a back building with a small room at 62 feet in height and the major top horizontal line at 50 ft. The front building is 38 feet tall. There is a total of 69 units. The Sunset realignment stays completely out of critical slopes on the east ravine. I’d like to note that the front building is only 3 feet taller than the maximum allowed in our single family neighborhoods.
3. Are you in favor of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for development at the St. Andrew Church site?
Yes. I am in favor of a rebate TIF, as the most cost effective way to acquire 2500 sq/ ft. of finished office space in the commercial area of the front building. This will allow for city offices as well as meeting space for a variety of community organizations. Also this is the best way to fund the re-alignment of the Sunset/Melrose intersection. Both of these projects are to the benefit of the community.
A rebate TIF is the only type I would favor. The only way the developer gets any money is when the project is completed and is generating tax revenue. With definite dollar amounts and a finite time period the incentive is to build a high quality project in a timely manner. Since the majority of the property currently generates no tax revenue we are not funneling tax money away from other entities. Given that the proposals discussed so far having the taxing bodies (City, County, School District) receiving a portion of revenue immediately upon collection even that is an increase over the current situation.
4. Are you in favor of the City using the PUD process, development agreement, TIF and/or other means as a way to prevent ownership of the church property by a tax-exempt entity?
Yes. A TIF agreement is the appropriate place to place those restrictions. At our August 23rd work session we talked about placing a limit of no more than approximately 10% of commercial space could owned or used by an entity such that property taxes would not be payable.
5. How do you view the financial condition of University Heights and how would you monitor and make adjustments in the future, if necessary?
Do you think city services and city infrastructure are adequate in University Heights?
I view the financial situation as living on borrowed time. Passing the Local Option Sales Tax in May 2009 has added nearly $10K of revenue per month to the city since July 2009. This tax is set to expire in 2013. Our 10-11 budget, ending June 30, 2011 had total revenue of 1.25 Million dollars. Almost exactly 10% of that revenue was LOST money at $123K. Our carryover at the end of the year was only $31K. If it weren’t for LOST we would be at a deficit. A major component to monitoring the budget going forward should be a written financial report at each regular council meeting from the finance chair. This has not happened since our last election. When faced with the equivalent of a 10% revenue decrease in 2013 we will have to look at cutting city services.
We have a dead end water line in the north end town. There are homes in town that are not on the city sewer system, or have lift and grind stations to get their sewage to the system. While it appears that we are stable now, we do have to watch these carefully.
6. What are your favorite things about University Heights? What community programs or initiatives would you encourage or how would you improve existing programs?
My favorite might seem surprising, but living in a community that is so passionate about its government and future is a remarkable thing. Thanks tonight should go to Carolyn Brown, Bill Gay and our moderator, Rebecca Reiter for planning this event. My thanks also go to every candidate here at the table. And a hearty thanks goes to everyone who came tonight and will turn out to vote in this election.
We need to continue to make our community both stable and welcoming to new arrivals. As a part of our Diamond Jubilee in 2010 there has been collected a great deal of information about the many historic individuals and events that have occurred in our city. If we got to a point where our budget would allow for it, I’d like to explore designating historic neighborhoods or sites within our town to help preserve that heritage.
For all the ballyhoo Iowa City gets for being the UNESCO city of literature, it was a University Heights resident who was the first director of the Writers’ Workshop, and the workshop itself was born in his living room when the students met in University Heights to share their stories and ideas. I’d like to see our community grow and thrive so that the next generation of creative spirits can begin to build their own legacies and continue to enhance our community.
