Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-21 Info Packet1 = L 1P, CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET MISCELLANEOUS IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP2 Press Release from City Manager: BBCS UI Phase 2 IP3 News Article from City Manager: Lucky's Market IP4 Invitation from Assistant City Manager: Workplace (R)evolution IP5 Quarterly Investment Report (Januaury 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015) I136 2015 Building Statistics IP7 Letter from Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT): PCC Patching — US6 DRAFT MINUTES IP8 Planning and Zoning Commission: May 7 May 21, 2015 CITY OF IOWA CITY Date City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule aj Subject to change May 21, 2015 Time Meeting Location Tuesday, June 2, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, June 16, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, July 20, 2015 4:00 PM Reception prior to meeting TBA (Johnson County) 4:30 PM Joint Meeting/ Work Session Monday, July 27, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 18, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 1, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 15, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 6, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Julie V From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Next info packet please. Tom Markus Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:43 AM Julie Voparil FW: Phase II Press Release 5 2015 BBCS UI Phase 2 FC PR Final.docx From: Kieft, David W [mailto:david-kieft@uiowa.edu] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:41 AM To: Tom Markus; Geoff Fruin; Wendy Ford Subject: Phase II Press Release IP2 Tom, Geoff and Wendy.... Balfour Beatty will be issuing the attached press release tomorrow following closing on their $35M financing for Phase II of the graduate student housing project on the Hawkeye Campus. Like Phase I, this project will be on the tax rolls for the value of the improvements, structures and improvements on State land. Phase I has been a huge success and we look forward to the same with Phase II. Let me know if you have any questions. David Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions, LLC Press Release For Immediate Release Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions Commences Second Phase of Student Housing Development at University of Iowa New development will add 252 units for the University's graduate student population. MALVERN, PA --- May X, 2015 --- Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions, a leading developer and operator of infrastructure projects for the college and university market, announced today it has reached financial close on a $34.5M student housing development project for the University of Iowa. In this second phase of Public -Private Partnership, the Balfour Beatty team will deliver 252 new units at the University's main campus in Iowa City. The new development, which will primarily target the University's more than 9,500 graduate students, is scheduled to break ground in June for delivery in August of 2016. The new housing will consist of one and two-bedroom layouts configured in three, four-story buildings totaling 250,578 square feet. The residents will enjoy the use of a separate one-story community center totaling 5,400 square feet, provided as part of the Phase 1 development, which houses the property management offices and common spaces for resident use, including a fitness center, laundry facility, multipurpose space and access to the campus shuttle service. The new housing will replace 180 units of the Hawkeye Court complex built in the 1960's. The project is being designed by Solomon Cordwell Buenz and Associates and will be built by Balfour Beatty Construction. Balfour Beatty Communities will operate and maintain the completed property and continue the successful governance committee with Iowa which ensures alignment of operational policies. Iowa will assist in marketing the expanded project and the provision of security services. The overall development project is being financed under a 41 -year ground lease with the University utilizing a loan issued by Wells Fargo Bank and equity from Balfour Beatty. "The first phase of housing delivered by the Balfour Beatty team in 2014 has been extremely well-received by the graduate student population," said Bob Shepko, president of Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions. "We are very pleased to continue this successful relationship with the University of Iowa and move forward with this second phase of housing development that will continue to greatly enhance their on -campus living experience." About Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions, LLC provides development, asset/property management, and other real estate services to colleges, universities, and their affiliated entities with a special focus on projects utilizing a Public -Private Partnership model. The company offers an alternative solution for higher education institutions to finance and execute their necessary capital plans, including academic facilities for faculty, classrooms and labs, athletic spaces, wellness centers and student housing. Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions is part of Balfour Beatty Investments, Inc. a global company focused on financing and operating the vital assets that enable societies and economies to grow: roads and railways, health and education facilities, power and water systems, places to live and places to work—the infrastructure that underpins progress. Balfour Beatty Investments is a division of Balfour Beatty plc, a UK -based international infrastructure group operating in construction services, support services and infrastructure investments. About Balfour Beatty Construction US An industry leader for more than 80 years, Balfour Beatty Construction US provides general contracting, at -risk construction management, and design -build services for a wide variety of markets, serving clients in both the public and private sectors. The company is the U.S. subsidiary of London-based Balfour Beatty plc (LSE: BBI), a leading international infrastructure group that finances, develops, builds and maintains complex building programs focused on social and commercial buildings, power and utility systems, and transportation. Consistently ranked among the nation's largest building contractors, Balfour Beatty Construction Services US has been cited as a Top 10 Domestic Building Contractor and Top 10 Green Builder by Engineering News -Record. To learn more, visit www.balfourbeattyus.com or look for BalfourBeattyUS on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. For more information contact: Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions Maureen Omrod 610.355.8136 momrod@bbcgrp.com Julie Voparil From: Tom Markus Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:45 AM To: Julie Voparil Cc: Geoff Fruin; Simon Andrew Subject: FW: News article Next info packet please -----Original Message ----- From: John Arlotti [mailto:jarlotti@crhmi.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 11:42 AM To: Tom Markus Cc: Wendy Ford Subject: FW: News article We are very close now- opening June 17th. Thanks for everyone's support we couldn't have done it without you. Sincerely John Arlotti 949-757-1000 f 866-263-1455 iarlotti@crhmi.com http://www.kcrg.com/subject/news/luckys-market-to-open-lune-17-in-iowa-city-20150519 Molly Stimmel I Assistant Property Manager Iowa City Marketplace 1660 Sycamore Street I Iowa City, IA 52240-6011 T (319) 338-6111 x2011 F (319) 354-7718 sycamoremgmt@crhmi.com I www.sycamoremall.com Lucky's Market to open June 17 in Iowa City I KCRG-TV9 1 Cedar Rapids, Iowa News, S... Pagel of 3 Access Blocked - Content Alert The URL: http://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-2/htmI/container.htmi was blocked } Wednesday, May 20, 2015 I Full Forecast s % • kcrg autos 1 ^ t • corridor careers • • ` q • here's the deal r • classifieds �:f`$ooni • garage sales NEWS WEATHER: CANCELLATIONS SPORTS VIDEOS 9.2 9.3 SHOW YOU CARE YOUNEWS CONTACT US Q Lucky's Market to open June 17 in Iowa City Grand opening to include bacon -cutting ceremony Mitchell Schmidt, Photos .p. Inarket Lucky's Market logo 1411 of21L01 Story Created: May 19, 2015 at 5:44 PM CDT (Story Updated: May 19, 2015 at 5:44 PM CDT ) IOWA CITY — In less than one month, Boulder, Colo -based Lucky's Market will open its first natural and organic grocery store in Iowa. Officials with Lucky's Market announced in a Tuesday news release the new store, located at 1668 Sycamore Street in Iowa City Marketplace's former Von Maur space, would officially open June 17. "We are proud to open our first Lucky's Market in Iowa and help make natural, organic and specialty foods more accessible and affordable to more people," Lucky's Market co-founder Bo Sharon said in the release. "Not only are we committed to providing top-quality food, we are also deeply committed to supporting our local communities through various giving programs and we look forward to being a positive part of the Iowa City community." The grand opening will include a bacon -cutting ceremony at 10 a.m. and a presentation of more than $20,000 in grants to support four local non-profit organizations. Those grants will include donations to Table to Table, the Crisis Center of Johnson County, the Shelter House and Farm to Family, according to the release. Other events planned for the store's opening include a health fair June 20, local food fair June 21 and Taste of Lucky's Market June 27. All events will include live music, entertainment and food samples. Access Blocked - Content Alert The URL: http://tPc.googiesyndication.com/saf -0-2/html/container.html was blocked • The link you are accessing has been blocked by the Barracuda Web Filter because it matches a blocked category. The name of the category is: "advertisements-Doaups" Waterloo, IA » Cedar Rapids, IA » Iowa City, IA » Dubuque, IA o http://www.kcrg.com/subject/news/luckys-market-to-open-june- I 7-in-iowa-city-20150519 5/20/2015 Lucky's Market to open June 17 in Iowa City I KCRG-TV9 1 Cedar Rapids, Iowa News, S... Page 2 Troy Bond, Iowa City native with 20 years of experience in natural foods, will be the new store's director. "I'm happy to introduce Lucky's Market to Iowans who are seeking new, wholesome foods at great values," Bond said in the release. The roughly 37,000 -square -foot store, first announced in July 2014, will employ about 150 people and offer a variety of organic and gluten-free items, house -made deli items and meats, a bakery and juice bar, coffee bar and beer and wine selection. Late last year the Iowa City Council approved a seven-year, $1.75 million tax increment finance rebate to the shopping center to help revitalize the area. A portion of those funds were used to prepare the mall for Lucky's Market. That TIF is predicated on the shopping center ultimately bringing its taxable valuation up from its current $10.2 million to $16 million. From Asst. City Manager MINJ Workplace (R)evolution "Developing Inclusive and Engaging Communities" Dear Geoff -- Join elected officials and community leaders from throughout Eastern Iowa for a special presentation by Workplace (R)evolution speaker Dr. Katherine Loflin on Monday, June 8 at the Hotel at Kirkwood Center in Cedar Rapids. Dr. Loflin will speak specifically to city and county leaders in Eastern Iowa about how to develop strong communities. What: Developing Inclusive and Engaging Communities Date: Monday, June 8, 2015 Time: 5:00 - 7:00 p.m. Where: Hotel at Kirkwood Center, 7725 Kirkwood Blvd SW, Cedar Rapids Cost: Free RSVP: Click Here Dr. Katherine Loflin is an international award-winning, recognized global leader in placemaking, the creation of loved places and why it matters. She has held leadership and advisory roles in some of the most groundbreaking and innovative placemaking projects including Knight Soul of the Community, Our Miami, Calgary's Inspiring Strong Neighborhoods, and the Place Capital Inventory in Australia. Through this portfolio of work, Dr. Loflin has earned the moniker of "City Doctor" and is an in -demand placemaking consultant advising cities around the world. Dr. Loflin has been featured widely in the U.S. and international press. She was the first to create and host a radio show dedicated to the topic of placemaking called "Place Matters with Dr. Katherine Loflin". Previously, she served as Program Director for the Knight Foundation in Florida, helping to guide the foundation's charitable investment of millions annually. Dr. Loflin received a Masters and Ph.D. in Social Work from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. We hope to see you there! Diversity Focus http://www.diversilvfocus.or CITY OF IOWA CITY QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPOR T January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 Finance Department Prepared by: Brian Cover Senior Accountant OVERVIEW The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield. The primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The City's investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that cash management procedures anticipate. In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed with the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six month U.S. Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for riskless investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum standard for the portfolio's rate of return. Since the city's investments are mostly between the six month and twelve month range, the yield curve for the 12 month U.S. Treasury Bill has been added to the chart. The daily treasury yield curve rate on the six- month U.S. Treasury Bill for March 31 was 0.14% at 3131/15 and the 12 month rate was 0.26%. The investment program seeks to achieve returns above these thresholds, consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. The rate of return on the City's entire portfolio for the quarter was 0.398%. (See exhibit A) Investments purchased by the City of Iowa City for the third quarter of this fiscal year had an average return of 0.52%. Rates on new investment purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the third quarter were approximately 16 basis points higher than investments purchased at this time last year. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which banks lend to each other. In the March 18`" meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee, the decision was made to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 114 percent and currently anticipates that exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate would remain appropriate for a considerable time. (See exhibit B) The quarterly investment report lists investments by fund, by institution, by maturity date, and investments purchased and redeemed. New official state interest rates setting the minimum that may be paid by Iowa depositories on public funds in the 180 to 364 day range during this quarter were 0.05% in January, 0.05% in February, and 0.05% in March 2015. m L F— c_ C ca U m O O U CO L co N O O O O O O O O ujn4a.i jo 06e;uaaaad ill i% O Ary aS .61,47 Al `4t 'y 6106Q as, 6'1 4f7 �1�aa Q elIQ, 190 m X w 0 0 0 0 0 0 cfl 0� c i aje�j isaaajul CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND SUMMARY BY FUND 3/31/15 3/31/14 FUND INVESTMENT INVESTMENT TYPE AMOUNT AMOUNT ALL OPERATING FUNDS $120.824,704.80 $128.324,850.63 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND $ 2,000,000.00 $ 3,000,000.00 BOND RESERVE FUND $ 9,726,921.00 $ 8,626,921.00 TOTAL $ 132,551,625.80 $ 139,951,771.63 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND LISTING BY INSTITUTION TOTAL $ 132.551,625.80 $ 139,951.771.63 3/31115 3/31/14 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT INVESTMENT DEPOSITORY NAME AMOUNT AMOUNT LIMIT BANK OF THE WEST $ - S - $ 75.000.000.00 BANKER'S TRUST $ - $ - N/A CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST $ 6,000,000.00 $ 12.000.000.00 S 20 000,000 00 FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK $ 2,000,000.00 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 15,000.000.00 FIRST AMERICAN BANK $ - $ - $ 35,000.000.00 FREEDOM SECURITY BANK $ - $ - $ 15,000.000.00 HILLS BANK & TRUST $ 9,000,000.00 $ 9,000,000.00 $ 25.000,000.00 IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST $ 7,500,000.00 $ 7,500.000.00 N/A LIBERTY BANK $ - $ - S 25,000 000.00 MIDWESTONE BANK $ 45,305,071.63 S 50,305,071.63 S 100.000,000.00 TWO RIVERS BANK $ 4,000,000.00 $ 7,000,000.00 $ 10 000,000 00 U OF I COMM CREDIT UNION $ 9,746,700.00 $ 27,146.700.00 $ 50 000,OL)O 00 US BANK $ - $ - $ 65,000 000 00 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES $ 11,519,051.47 $ - N/A WELLS FARGO BANK $ 37,480,802.70 $ 25.000,000 00 $ 50,000,000.00 WEST BANK $ - $ 35,000,000.00 TOTAL $ 132.551,625.80 $ 139,951.771.63 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENTS ON HAND DETAIL LISTING BY MATURITY DATE 3/31/2015 INSTITUTION INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST NAME TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE IPAIT IPAIT 27 -Sep -06 $1.500, 000 .00 0.01 HILLS BANK MONEY MRKT 30 -Mar -10 $9,000,000.00 0.20 WELLS FARGO SAV 20 -Apr -10 $10,000,000.00 0.35 UICCU CD 28 -Jun -10 26 -Jun -15 $846,700.00 2.51 UICCU CD 28 -Jun -10 26 -Jun -15 $300,000.00 251 WELLS FARGO SAV 25 -Jul -12 $3,480,802.70 0.15 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 30 -Sep -13 30 -Sep -15 $14,824,850.63 1 00 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 04 -Mar -14 04 -Mar -16 $450,000.00 0.64 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 04 -Mar -14 04 -Mar -16 $2,030,221.00 0.64 WELLS FARGO SAV 14 -Apr -14 $24,000,000.00 0.25 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 23 -May -14 22 -Aug -17 $1,000,000.00 105 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 16 -Jun -14 05 -Jun -15 $2,000,000.00 037 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 16 -Jun -14 12 -Jun -15 $2,000,000.00 041 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 16 -Jun -14 19 -Jun -15 $2,000,000.00 0.42 UICCU CD 22 -Jul -14 24 -Jul -19 $2.600,000.00 2.01 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 31 -Jul -14 31 -Jul -15 $2,000,000.00 0.39 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 31 -Jul -14 07 -Rug -15 $2,000,000.00 0.42 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 31 -Jul -14 14 -Aug -15 $2,000,000.00 0.47 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 22 -Aug -14 21 -Aug -15 $2,000,000.00 0.47 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 22 -Aug -14 28 -Aug -15 $2,000,000.00 0.47 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 22 -Aug -14 04 -Sep -15 $2,000,000.00 0.47 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 22 -Aug -14 11 -Sep -15 $2,000,000.00 0.47 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 29 -Sep -14 29 -Sep -16 $2,000,000.00 0.70 UICCU CD 02 -Oct -14 02 -Oct -15 $2,000,000,00 0.51 UICCU CD 02 -Oct -14 09 -Oct -15 $2,000,000.00 0.51 UICCU CD 02 -Oct -14 16 -Oct -15 $2,000,000,00 0.51 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK CD 02 -Oct -14 23 -Oct -15 $2,000,000.00 0.70 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 18 -Nov -14 18 -Aug -17 $500,000.00 1.00 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Nov -14 25 -Nov -15 $2,000,000.00 0,30 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Nov -14 04 -Dec -15 $2,000,000.00 0,32 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Nov -14 11 -Dec -15 $2.900,000.00 044 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Nov -14 18 -Dec -15 $2,000,000.00 0.45 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 22 -Dec -14 23 -Dec -15 $2,000,399.07 031 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 22 -Dec -14 30 -Dec -15 $2,004,908.97 031 IPAIT CD 22 -Dec -14 08 -Jan -16 $2,000,000.00 045 IPAIT CD 22 -pec -14 15 -Jan -16 $2,000,000.00 045 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 29 -Jan -16 $2,000,000.00 0.42 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 05 -Feb -16 $2,000,000.00 042 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 12 -Feb -16 $2,000,000.00 044 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 13 -Feb -15 13 -Feb -17 $2,000,000.00 0.75 IPAIT CD 09 -Mar -15 04 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.37 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 06 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -16 $2,013,743.43 0.315 TWO RIVERS BANK CD 06 -Mar -15 18 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.38 TWO RIVERS BANK CD 06 -Mar -15 25 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.39 TOTAL $132,551.625.80 CITY OF IOWA CITY INVESTMENT ACTIVITY FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2015 INVESTMENT PURCHASE MATURITY INVESTMENT INTEREST INSTITUTION TYPE DATE DATE AMOUNT RATE INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 12/31/14 $ 140,551,625.80 PURCHASES 1/01/15 TO 3/31/15 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 29 -Jan -16 $2,000,000.00 0.42 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 05 -Feb -16 $2,000,000.00 0.42 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 28 -Jan -15 12 -Feb -16 $2,000,000.00 0.44 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 13 -Feb -15 30 -Jan -17 $2,000,000.00 0.75 WELLS FARGO SECURITIES NOTE 09 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -16 $2,013,743.43 1.00 IPAIT OPERATING 09 -Mar -15 04 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.37 TWO RIVERS BANK OPERATING 06 -Mar -15 25 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.39 TWO RIVERS BANK OPERATING 06 -Mar -15 18 -Mar -16 $2,000,000.00 0.38 TOTAL PURCHASES $ 16,013,743 43 REDEMPTIONS 1101/15 TO 3/31/15 TWO RIVERS BANK CD 23 -Jan -14 09 -Jan -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.23 TWO RIVERS BANK CD 23 -Jan -14 16 -Jan -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.24 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 23 -Jan -14 02 -Jan -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.28 CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST CD 23 -Jan -14 23 -Jan -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.30 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Feb -14 30 -Jan -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.34 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Feb -14 06 -Feb -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.42 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Feb -14 13 -Feb -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.38 MIDWESTONE BANK CD 21 -Feb -14 20 -Feb -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.43 IPAIT CD 20 -Mar -14 24 -Mar -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.42 TWO RIVERS BANK CD 20 -Mar -14 27 -Feb -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.23 IPAIT CD 21 -Mar -14 23 -Mar -15 ($2,000,000.00) 0.42 WELLS FARGO NOTE 09 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -16 ($2,013,743.43) 1.00 TOTAL REDEMPTIONS $ (24,013,743.43) INVESTMENTS ON HAND AT 3/31/15 —$—1 —32,551,625 80 41�n m 0 D 7J to m O 2 W E n g 9 3 cn o o< 0 0 n CP O N N C C p Z K, Z » O N m O O O (D 72. 7,- » N 3 Z 3 C n Z O 3 P 'o N �. N x rn T DDZ�Z Z' Z Z2Z['�Z�ZOZco:'ZNZWZI� zNzp�Q33`,Cz�zNzfAZ�N 3 r r c W e- 3 c O 3 p c ;o 3 c 3 c c 3 c 3 c y 3 c : 3 c Q° c 3 c 3 c 3 d c 3 a P 3 D D 3 c -. 3 c 4o 3 c 3 c 3 � C m D 3 c 2 P Q P 3 c y Si P m N P 0 P P x'3 Q y P N o- 0 o- Q P y p o m P N P T P P P 3 c m � m 0 m d m m m o o O 0 0 o O'�', o W N T x T y' T d V [ N N N N N T N N N lD (0 Io a y 0 T T N• N CD (D N m N N <0 (p Ul n N H3 C a C a N C fn N Vel N 69 N 41 VJ b'i N N Lei VI Ul N N y Ij N N N 0 (O a N.. V U1 N An No co OD w ccaNOWf�WOAAm0D NN AAWN I N _ON OCNn O O co W WO O WA NOAOJWOrTNWNN) N w N V O0 JO N fA N3 O _OLh -wmNW N m � N m m O Cl) N O OOO O WO O JOO to CA P m v 3 P a0 fd 0N1 " to tD fD O W O W O W W w OD W w N m O N 0) O w co tll O Q] O DJ W W N c0 du 00 O W to O -+ O O s 0 O -� O O N N O W Z O A yxZ D OD O O 41�n m 0 IP7 I SMAI111 I-II I Yf+1►I1I I:li I C1J51(-)MLI I)IilU11C www nwadot:.go Cedar Hal3kh; Field Office 5456 Kirkwood 131vd. SW, Cedar Rapids, IA 52-404 Phone: 319--36,5.6986 Fax: 319-'/30 -1564 May 12, 2015 RE: MP -006-6(729)250- -76-52 Johnson County City of Iowa City The Honorable Matt Hayek, Mayor City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 SUBJECT: PCC Patching — US 6 Dear Mayor Hayek: This letter is official notification to your City Council that the Iowa Department of Transportation proposes to let a PCC (Portland Cement Concrete) patching project on July 21, 2015. The work consists of replacing broken sections of pavement. The project is located on US 6 in Iowa City from Hawkins Drive to the south junction with Iowa 1. It is anticipated that the project will be completed in calendar year 2015. The work will be done in accordance with the current Form 810034, "Agreement for Primary Road Extension Maintenance and Operation". Project costs will be paid from the Primary Road Fund and no charges will be made against the city. Resident Construction Engineer, Hugh Holak P.E., of Manchester, Iowa, telephone number 563-927-2397, will advise you of the contractor's proposed schedule when the information is available. We would appreciate this project notification being included on your next City Council meeting agenda as a matter of information for Council members. If you have any questions concerning the work involved, please contact this office as soon as possible in order to expedite any possible changes. Sincerely yours, �G /1l �7GYiy Thomas M. Storey, P.E. District Staff Engineer TMS/rhh cc: Jim Schnoebelen, P.E., District Engineer, Iowa DOT, Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 Hugh Holak, P.E., Resident Construction Engineer, Iowa DOT, Manchester, IA 52057 Newman Abuissa, P.E., Staff Engineer, Iowa DOT, Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 u unu tl t i MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 7, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo, Sara Hektoen, Karen Howard OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Clark, Jim Langel, Gene Brag, Tom Hill, Kristin Evenson Hirst, Bruce MacKay, Dennis Hunt, Chris Hunt, Sue Hill, Lisa Lloyd. Alex Voss RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, to establish new height standards and waive the FAR requirement for Hospitals in the CO -1 Zone as noted in the staff report. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none. DEVELOPMENT ITEM (SUB15-00008): Discussion of an application submitted by Joseph Clark for a preliminary plat of Windmill Heights, a 22 -lot, 6.94 acre residential subdivision located south of Rochester Avenue, east of Green Mountain Drive and west of Teton Circle. Miklo began by noting that the front page of the staff report stated the 45 Day Limitation Period in which Commission need to act on an application is May 14, 2015, and that is not correct. At this point Staff still does not have all of the stormwater management calculations or erosion control plans, so it's technically not a complete application so the Commission is not obligated to vote by May 14. Miklo stated that the proposed subdivision is on the south side of Rochester Avenue between Green Mountain Drive and Westminster Street, it contains 6.94 acre and 22 single family lots. The property is zoned RS -5 low density single family, and that zone requires a minimum of 8000 square feet per lot and a minimum of a 60 foot lot width. All of the lots in this application comply with the requirements. In terms of the Comprehensive Plan this property is in Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 14 the North East District and it identifies this property as appropriate for single family residential. Staff also believes the proposed subdivision is compatible with the neighborhood as single family homes and ties into the existing street network. In the subdivision design the primary access will be from Rochester Avenue onto this cul-de-sac with access also to Green Mountain Drive and Westminster Street and will improve the access for the neighboring subdivisions as well as access for emergency vehicles. In terms of neighborhood open space, there isn't really suitable land available for the creation of a park area so this subdivision will be required to pay fees in lieu of roughly 6000 square feet of open space. Those fees would be paid into the City's funds for parks and recreation and could be used for improvements to the park just to the south of this subdivision. Miklo noted that stormwater management is one of the issues that is not resolved with this subdivision, there are a serious of basins on the eastern side of the subdivision and also on the southwestern side, plus the proposal relies on obtaining easements from adjacent properties where there are existing stormwater facilities. The City has received indications from most of those property owners consenting to allowing those easements, and those easements will need to be in place prior to final plat approval. The City engineers have reviewed the application and have determined that an additional easement will be necessary from lot 166 or lot 225 to the south of this subdivision so that will need some indication that those properties consent to that easement. The engineers feel that from the plans, in concept what is proposed will work, but they do not have all the calculations necessary, or the erosion control plans necessary to sign off on approval at this point. Sanitary sewer will be provided, there is an easement to the south. The only infrastructure fee that applies to this is a $415 fee per acre for water main extension fees. Both that and the fee for neighborhood extension fees will need to be addressed at the time of final plat approval. Miklo asked that Staff is recommending deferral of SUB15-00008 a preliminary plat of Windmill Heights, a 6.94 -acre, 22 -lot residential subdivision located on Rochester Avenue between Green Mountain Drive and Teton Circle until deficiencies (stormwater management plans) are resolved. Upon resolution of deficiencies, staff recommends approval. Eastham asked about the stormwater management proposal and for clarification on five separate stormwater facilities that would handle stormwater runoff from this subdivision that only one would be on the development site and the other four on adjacent properties. Miklo replied that the applicant's engineer is able to answer those questions better. Hektoen said that there is just one basin but it extends over four lots, it is not contained within an outlot, and therefore that is why easements are needed from adjacent property owners. Freerks asked if it were unusual for someone to ask a separate private property owner to manage the stormwater. Miklo agreed that it is not typical, there have been a few cases where an offsite easement has been obtained. It can happen as long as the adjacent property owners consent and the City engineers review the plan and determines that it works, it is allowed by the City ordinance. Hensch asked if the offsite easements have to be executed prior to the Commission approving the application. Miklo said that they needed to be approved before the Council approves the final plat. Hektoen said that typically the easements aren't granted until the final plat is approved and this is just the preliminary plat stage. Because this is an unusual situation Staff has asked the adjacent property owners to provide a letter indicating that they have been consulted and at least conceptually they are on board with the plan. Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 14 Eastham asked if the Engineering Department has to sign off on the stormwater management proposal before a grading permit would be issued. Hektoen acknowledged that was correct, a grading permit would not be issued until the Engineering Department signed off. Freerks opened public hearing. Joe Clark (359 Green Mountain Drive) spoke as the applicant and developer of Windmill Heights and was there to answer any questions the Commission might have. Eastham asked Clark to explain how the stormwater management plan will work. Clark asked his engineer to answer those questions. Jim Langel (515 Oakland Avenue) engineer for HBK Engineering stated that the reference to five different basins is technically three. He pointed out on the map in the northeast corner there is a small basin there, then in the southwest corner that is where a new basin is and connects to the existing and adjacent subdivision. They would not do any modifications to the existing stormwater detention basin but would connect the two so there would be a minor connection that would be needed. Eastham asked if the existing basins would drain into the new basin or would they continue to drain separately. Langel said they would continue to drain separately but ultimately once the southwest basin was reached, at a certain elevation of overflow conditions it would flow into other basins. He noted when they reviewed the existing calculations for what is Washington Park Addition 10 that had accounted for most of the arbitrary area that was draining to that location. Typically that is standard in engineering design, you must account for anything that drains into your basin and allocate that for detention. That was done in this situation, so they felt it was good to connect the two and utilize the area. Eastham asked who would have responsibility for maintaining the outlets. Langel replied that typically that is the owner or ultimately the homeowners association. Freerks asked whether the property owners in the proposed development will be required to pay for maintenance of the stormwater facility as part of the easement agreement. Langel said that because the easements are not in place yet, those details have not been discussed but that would be part of the official easement. Eastham asked how many outlets will there be to maintain with this plan. Langel replied that ultimately there would be three, the same number of basins, the two for the existing site and then also the existing one in Washington Park that would be its own. Eastham asked for clarification that one of the two on the existing site is the one draining to the north. Langel said that the northeast corner basin will have its own outlet that will need to be maintained by the new development, the one in the southwest corner will have its own outlet that will need to be maintained by Windmill Heights and then they will also continue to utilize the existing basin that is maintained by the other properties. Eastham asked if water from this subdivision was draining into existing basins to the west or are the existing basins to the west draining into the basin on the southwest basin on this new subdivision. Langel explained that all the drainage from the new subdivision will drain into the basins that are there, on an overflow condition at a certain level at the elevation inside the basin would overflow into the existing basin, the basin on the other property. Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 14 Langel added that from their standpoint they do believe they have submitted all the stormwater calculations that are necessary for engineering design, and have communicated with the City Engineers on a regular basis as they did have some additional clarifications they responded to just today. Freerks thanked Langel for that information, but noted that the City Engineers haven't had time to sign off on that information yet, Miklo confirmed. Clark also stated he had spoken to the four property owners and have signed documents from them and all are ready to move forward depending on what the easements state for the stormwater and they hope those are in place in the next week or two. Gene Brag (45 North Westminster Street) said his property is down from the proposed subdivision area and questioned where all the runoff water would go, would the water stay in the basins or will it runoff into his area. Freerks said that the applicant would come forward again later to answer any questions raised during the public hearing. Brag said that right now all that water from the proposed subdivision area drains right through his backyard and all the backyards along Westminster Street down to Washington Street. It becomes a swamp back there. They cannot afford to have more water running through their backyards, his sump pump has been running since last winter. The water just sits there. He is concerned about more development and where the water will go. He also questions the stormwater and where it will connect into. He mentioned that over in Rochester Heights all that stormwater has been connected and it drains right through Westminster Street, and with any kind of rain their street floods. He reiterated his question is where the water from this new development will end up. Freerks replied that his questions were why the Commission wants to make sure the City Engineers will sign off on these calculations. Brag mentioned he went up to look at the area on Bowling Green Place where it says undisturbed water retention area and the guy that lives there said when they get a big rain he has had to go down and replace the lid to that retention basin. Tom Hill (167 Bowling Green Place) his property is adjacent to the property and is not here to stop the development but there are a lot of questions to be answered. One of his questions was why certain residents didn't receive a letter regarding this application. Miklo clarified that the City sends letters to property owners within 300 feet of the application area. Hill said the City must be aware of the water problem on the west side of Westminster Street down to Washington Street and probably extends all the way down to Court Street. Freerks noted that if the citizens are concerned about water issues, and perhaps the City is not aware, you should call the City Engineers. Hill said the City ought to know, it's been a problem for years. Hill wants to cooperate with the new development, but doesn't want to make the water situation worse for all the residents along Westminster Street and Bowling Green Place. Hill asked for a guarantee that there will not be more water issues in resident's backyards. Hektoen said that the applicant will speak to the specifics to the stormwater runoff but they cannot exasperate the situation, the law will not allow that. Freerks said that the Commission has heard other similar situations and have worked with the City and public to assure the water situations will be better not worse due to the new project. By law they are not required to do that, they are not required to improve someone else's problem, but they can't make it worse. Hill asked what the City's responsibility for this type of situation was. He said there is a water problem in the area and it will get worse with more development, the City needs to understand that. Hill also asked if there was any guarantee that the new development's homeowners association will take care of the water Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 14 retention area that will be in his backyard. Miklo said that at the time of final plat for the subdivision there will be legal documents specifying the responsibilities for the homeowners association to maintain the stormwater facilities and any other common facilities in the subdivision. If there is an issue and they are not maintaining, the City could be notified and take recourse. Eastham stated that recourse doesn't begin until some private party notices the drain system isn't working and notifies the City. The City doesn't try to inspect all the stormwater management facilities in the community. Kristin Evenson Hirst (135 Bowling Green Place) stated her home is about four lots down from the proposed development. She said that anytime there is a cloud burst they have a temporary lake in their backyard. The water comes through the backyard fairly forcefully and it is a serious problem that seems to have become more severe over the past few years. She noted that she is very concerned about the stormwater management because it doesn't seem adequate currently and what will happen with the addition of all these new homes. Bruce MacKay (143 Bowling Green Place) wanted to share advice and feels that the Commission should look at a topographic map as on the entire west side of Bowling Green Place. When it rains there is a creek that runs through those properties. MacKay also said there was a beehive grate a couple lots up from his and he questions what purpose that serves as far as drainage, what area it serves. Freerks stated these type of questions will be answered when the City Engineers review all the details regarding the stormwater management plan. MacKay asked about the far southwest corner of the new development, and asked for more specifics about what that area would be. Freerks said the developers engineer could respond to that question. Dennis Hunt (159 Bowling Green Place) said he's lived in his home for nine years and the first three years they were there their basement flooded every single year and while they wanted to remodel the basement they had to build a passive drain to work with the sump pump to keep the water out. But now that they have remodeled the basement, he is fearful that his drain system will not be able to handle the additional stormwater runoff that will be created by the new housing development. He feels the whole area needs a new stormwater drainage system. Chris Hunt (159 Bowling Green Place) stated she was very concerned about the proposed stormwater management and that it would go directly through the corner of her backyard. The drains for the new development will go through her backyard and they were told by the developers that they would "try" not to take down any of their trees in installing the drainage system. Hunt said they have a 30 year old evergreen tree that is right in the path to that storm drain and she would be upset to lose that tree. She also is not happy that her backyard would need to be dug up, yes the developer will fill it all back in and make it all pretty, but it is a major disruption in their backyard. And like her husband, she is also very concerned about possible water in her basement. Sue Hill (167 Bowling Green Place) said her property is directly adjacent to this new development and feels she will be affected the most visually from this development. Right now it is open timber back to Rochester Avenue and that will be replaced with houses. She said they bought their lot in 1994 and at that time there was supposed to be one house back there, Jim and Loretta Clark were supposed to build their one house and now there will be 22 houses back Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 14 there. Hill also noted that the basins or berms that they say the water will be going into, after a big rain two years ago it was so full a neighbor had to dive into the water and clean out the drain so the water could drain. That was a very dangerous situation. Lisa Lloyd (169 South Westminster Street) noted that she also has the creek in her backyard and feels lucky compared to her neighbors because the drain works and they live on a slight slope so they don't have water in their backyard. She did say however that the creek gets very full after a big rain or lots of days of rain, almost five feet of water will be in the creek. She is concerned about how much more water will dump into the creek and how much erosion will happen. Alex Voss (103 Bowling Green Place) stated he has lived at his property since March 2013 and in May 2013 there was a strong rainfall and he lost a tall tree between his and Brag's property. The tree was near a swale and the ground was saturated enough to uproot a 25-foot tall tree. So he, like others, has concern for the extra water that could be running through their backyards and in the area due to this new development. Langel came forward to answer some of the questions raised from the public hearing. He said with regards to water on Bowling Green Place, south of the development (Oakwoods Addition Part 3) there has been some flooding and swamps in that area. The basin will be designed to not increase the flow from the existing condition, legislation is set up that way, there are rules and laws the developers must follow due to City and State regulations. Regarding the beehives south of the property, the existing basin in Washington Park Part 10, outlets to the south and there is a beehive on the backside of the berm and that beehive takes sheet flow from the grass area and catches that water and outlets it. Where that goes is actually to the south between the two properties (on Green Mountain Drive and Bowling Green Place) to an existing stormwater infrastructure in place and that takes that stormwater further to the south. Langel said the question of what is directly south of the basin in the southwest corner, that is a berm so in order to retain the water they need to create a space or a "bowl" in order to pond that area so they need to create a berm on the backside to create that bowl effect. With regards to trees, they have looked at that and in order to optimize keeping existing trees they have designed the roads where they are, there are a number of woodlands that circle around the outside of the property both on the west, east and south sides and the intention is to retain as many,as possible. Regarding the trees that run between the two properties on Oakwood Addition Part 3 and Washington Park Addition 10 he doesn't believe they will impact any of those trees on other people's properties. Eastham asked what if they do impact the trees. Langel said there are other alternatives with the alignment of the piping where they could change direction. It is required that at any intersection there is an additional manhole or structure to change the alignment of the piping so that could be done in order to miss one of the trees. Eastham asked if he was talking about piping on properties to the south, east or west. Langel said he was with regards to the easement, all piping they would add would be within an existing City easement. He pointed out in the southwest corner that is where the outlet for both the stormwater and sanitary easement would be located and would tie into an existing 15 foot easement that is already there. Freerks asked Hektoen to talk a little bit about how these existing easements work as far as if trees are on these easements. Hektoen said she hasn't reviewed the exact language with Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 14 regard to this particular easement, but generally speaking if you put in any landscaping improvements within an easement area the City has the right to remove them without compensation to the property owners. She also said it is a public easement. Eastham asked whether when a property has trees in the easement area if the property owner has no rights that allows those trees to remain untouched. Hektoen confirmed that was true. Langel also addressed the concerns about overland flow. He said the design of the detention basin is to receive all of the stormwater from the development. The outlet then connect into existing stormwater infrastructure so there would be no increase in overland flow to surrounding areas. This means there should not be any additional water in the backyards of the lots south of the proposed subdivision. With regards to the concerns on Westminster Street further to the south and west of the new development, Langel stated that the way the site is laid out, about 85% of the site flows to the southwest. The rest—about 1.65 acres—has a detention basin and will connect into existing stormwater infrastructure. Eastham asked if the infrastructure they are planning to connect to has adequate capacity to carry the maximum runoff of stormwater from these areas. Langel confirmed it would handle the runoff. It is designed to match existing conditions; they are not allowed to increase the flow downstream after the design is complete, so since they are not increasing the flow there is no need to increase the infrastructure. Eastham asked if the City was responsible for ensuring that the stormwater piping that is there now is still in good enough shape to be able to carry the additional stormwater it will be carrying due to the new development. Miklo said the City Engineer would review that when the stormwater information was submitted. Langel stated that with regards to the infrastructure further downstream, he does not know exactly what is there. There are certain limits to which they are designed—typically the 10 year storm, and that is a storm that can happen every single year (10% chance). So all infrastructure is typically designed that way except for detention basins. Detention basins are typically designed to the 100 -year storm. . Martin asked Langel to discuss the berm located in the southwest corner and whether it could potentially ease some of the water flow down south. Langel confirmed that the berm should ease the flow. They would not be increasing the flow, but because there is an additional detention basin there, they can better contain the water and slow it down. He said that in Washington Park Addition 10 there is an approximately 10 -foot berm there to retain the water further to the north—that is the four properties that are part of that existing stormwater easement. The new development would need to mimic that type of stormwater easement right next to the existing one. Martin noted that there is legislation that regulates that the developers cannot increase water flow to other properties. How could it be proved that there is more water flow, or less, or no change? Langel answered that was the reason the calculations are developed Martin asked who would be maintaining each stormwater basin. Langel said that in a typical subdivision that is normally handled within the homeowners association and would be outlined in the easement with the neighboring subdivision. Sue Hill asked if the neighbors could see a map of the proposed subdivision and where all the easements are located. Freerks stated that the Commission does have maps that show some of them, so after the meeting Miklo could show those interested. The easements from the from the Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 14 neighboring subdivisions are on file in City Hall. Miklo said that anyone interested could call City Hall and make an appointment to view the maps. Hektoen said that easements that affect Hill's lot would show on the map for Oakwoods Addition Part 3. Hill also stated that stormwater had been discussed quite a bit, but not much has been discussed regarding sanitary sewer, and where is this new development going to connect to sanitary sewer. Miklo replied that the City Engineers have determined that the sanitary sewer is adequate. Hill asked if they could see where there sewer was going through properties as well on the maps. Miklo said yes, that would be in the easements. Gene Brag questioned again the water retention areas and his impression is that all the water will not stay in those retention areas. He questioned whether water will still go through his backyard. Miklo said the water is detained for a period of time and then released into the underground system to the south. Brag questioned where the pipe ended. Miklo said the City Engineer would be able to address that question. Brag also asked where the sanitary sewer was going on the easement. Miklo showed the area along the property lines on the map where he believed the sewer system would run. It would hook into existing sewer lines. Miklo encouraged Brag and any others interested to set up an appointment with the City Engineer to view the maps. Bruce MacKay stated that his wife is a City employee and has mentioned there is an 8 -inch sanitary sewer that runs down the middle of Bowling Green Place, where the terminuses of that are, he does not know, nor where is the actual physical connection. MacKay stated that 1.65 or so acres, approximately 25% of this property will drain to the southwest, so then where does the rest of the water go, other than what goes to the strip in the northeast? Langel first answered the questions regarding the sanitary sewer, there is in the center of the right -a -way of Bowling Green Place an existing sanitary sewer, one of the final properties in that cul-de-sac directly south of the new development, has the line run to it, turns west, and then stops between the two subdivisions. That is where the connection point would be. Freerks stated that all City sewer lines were intended to connect to one another. Langel stated that regarding the stormwater, the 1.64 acres goes to the northeast and the remaining 5 acres or so drains to the southwest. Tom Hill asked about the park that was mentioned, and if that would be a new park or an existing one. Miklo stated that the closest park is the Pheasant Hill Park. No new park would be created with this development. Hill also questioned where the new street going to Rochester Avenue from the new development would be. Miklo said it would be roughly 300 feet from the street that was added a couple years ago. Hill asked if there were any traffic concerns. Freerks said that with the new development being a cul-de-sac that isn't likely an issue and the traffic engineers will review the plans. Miklo confirmed that the transportation planners did look at the plans and one option was not to connect to Rochester Avenue but to send the traffic onto the other two connecting streets. After review staff felt it was better to have an outlet onto Rochester Avenue, which has sufficient capacity for this new development. Hill noted that the new Teton Circle area has resulted in an increase in traffic going to north through Westminster Street. Lastly Hill asked what the next step would be after this evening's meeting. Freerks said that they would let all interested parties know what the next step will be. Steve Hirst (135 Bowling Green Place) noted that the map being shown this evening was a little Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 14 misleading because Green Mountain Drive is like a mountain to the houses on Bowling Green Place and that is part of the reason that the houses on Bowling Green Drive get a lot of runoff water in their yards. They are counting on the City Engineers not to make it any worse. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved for deferral of SUB15-00008, a preliminary plat of Windmill Heights, a 6.94 -acre, 22 -lot residential subdivision until the May 21 meeting. Theobald seconded the motion. Eastham stated that the Commission has seen similar situations in the past and requests that the Staff do their best to assure the citizens that the development of this subdivision will not add to stormwater runoff. He understands legislation mandates that it does not, but the citizens need more reassurance. Also the City needs to address if there are existing stormwater problems in this area that will not be addressed just by the stormwater facilities for this new development. Freerks said while the Commission cannot address issues in existing neighborhoods, these discussions alert the City Staff and they can work to address issues. Miklo added that perhaps the neighbors could come to the City offices together and have one meeting with Staff rather than contacting separately. Theobald noted that she would like to have the Staff or developer have more information regarding the maintenance of the stormwater facilities. She finds it troubling to hear that homeowners are cleaning out these facilities. Hektoen said that the City doesn't maintain the stormwater facilities, each subdivision is responsible for that on their own. Freerks noted that some homeowners associations do a better job at maintaining their facilities than others, and only if there is a real issue does the City get involved. Eastham stated that the people that are affected by stormwater runoff by improperly maintained facilities should contact the City. Freerks noted that the number one priority is for the City Engineer to approve the stormwater management calculations so the development can proceed without issue for the developer or the neighboring citizens. As for next steps, Freerks asked that that citizens concerned have their meeting with Staff prior to the next Commission meeting, keep open communications with the developer and this will be an agenda item again at the May 21 meeting. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CODE AMENDMENT ITEM: Discussion of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to create an exemption from the floor area ratio limitation and establish new height standards for hospitals located in the Commercial Office Zone (CO -1). Freerks noted that she did receive a phone call from Will Downing who is an architect with a firm that is working on this project. He said they would not be able to attend tonight but wanted to know if she had any questions. Freerks replied to Downing that she did not. Eastham stated he received a phone call from John Thomas and Thomas expressed some of his Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 14 concerns with Eastham. Thomas' concerns were with the effect of the building heights in the CO - 1 zone where it abuts a residential zone. They discussed if this amendment would help the situation. Howard presented the staff report. The City received a request from Rohrbach Associates, architects working with Mercy Hospital on plans for a new building at the corner of Johnson and Jefferson Streets where there is currently a surface parking lot. Howard showed an aerial photograph of the area. The initial plans for the new building is a one-story building, however the building structure would be built to support some additional floors in the future. Once they checked the ordinances they found a change made to the zoning ordinance during the 2005 zoning code project would prevent Mercy Hospital from building on this site. Prior to the rewrite there as an exemption in the City Code that stated "Hospitals which existed on August 7, 1962 shall be exempt from and may expand without compliance with the dimensional requirements". Howard explained that there are three hospitals in Iowa City, but the Veterans and University Hospitals are government facilities and not regulated by City Code, since Mercy Hospital is privately owned it is subject to City zoning. Mercy Hospital has been in its location since 1962 and is a fixture in the neighborhood. Several of the existing buildings exceed the height and FAR requirements in the Commercial Office (CO -1) Zone because Mercy Hospital was exempt from the height requirements when those buildings were constructed. Howard explained that there are two issues with the current code, one is height limitations and the other is the floor area ratio (FAR). The FAR is the amount of floor area in a building in ratio to the amount of lot area. FAR is a way to control building bulk and scale. The FAR works in conjunction with the other dimensional standards, particularly the height standards to control building height and bulk. Parsons asked if the City has had issues with FAR requirements in the past. Howard replied not particularly, but in this situation because these are large blocks and the buildings were built in an area with a FAR of one, which means a one to one ratio (lot area to floor area), the lot already exceeds that allowed FAR of 1. Already on this one lot is a four story building and a four story parking structure, so the approximate FAR currently is about 2. Howard explained that the reason this zone has a FAR requirement of one is because it abuts a single family residential zone along one edge of the property. CO -1 Zones that abut other zones are allowed an FAR of 3. Howard explained that with the current zoning code no building would be able to be built on the surface parking lot unless there is a code amendment. Staff is recommending amending Title 14, Zoning to allow them to develop on the surface parking lot. Otherwise Mercy Hospital's expansion needs would have to be met in some other way, perhaps by purchasing other properties in the area. The amendment would only apply to hospitals, not all commercial properties in the CO -1 zone. Staff recommends amending the code as stated in the staff memo, which exempts them from the FAR standard, but imposes a height limit of 65 feet to be generally consistent with existing hospital buildings with an upper floor stepback of 20 feet above the 3`d floor along any street frontage that abuts a single family residential zone. This will help reduce the perceived height and mass of any new hospital building located adjacent to a lower scale single family zone. Additionally Staff recommends clarifying the language in the footnote of the dimensional table as explained in the memo. The intent is to require the lower FAR of 1 only where a lot abuts a single family residential zone. Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 14 Hensch asked if it was an inadvertent omission in the 2005 rewrite. Howard explained that the City had a used a consultant in 2005 to help analyze the zoning ordinance and they identified a lot of little amendments throughout the code that could be eliminated. At the time this exemption was deleted, other language was added that we thought would meet Mercy Hospital's needs in the future. However, it was not adequate to address this situation. Staff now recommends amendments to provide the flexibility needed for Mercy to build on its existing surface parking lots. Martin asked if the Commission would see plans for the proposed building before it was approved. Freerks stated that if they are in a zone where their plans fit, then the Commission would not see the plans, only when there is a request to change a zone for a project does the Commission review the plans. Eastham asked if there was a particular reason why this language amendment only refers to hospitals and not specifically Mercy Hospital. The way this now reads it could apply to any hospital. Howard agreed, but noted that it would be unlikely Iowa City will ever have another private hospital. If it does, these standards would apply. Parsons asked if they are going to build this new building on a flat area where there is now parking, are the other existing parking structures able to absorb the lost parking spaces along with the increased activity that will come with the new building. Howard replied that all those issues will be reviewed during the site plan review process. They will have to comply with all the requirements in the zone, including the parking requirements. Hensch noted that although it is not a conflict, he wanted it on record that he was employed with Mercy Hospital for 12 years, but left in 2005. Eastham asked also about the footnote amendment where it states except for single family residential zones, he feels there could also be multi -family zones where this could also be applicable. Howard said if it is across from a multi -family zone the FAR is currently 3. Any change to this requirement would be a more significant change that would apply to all CO -1 zoned areas. Staff has not analyzed the implications of such a change, so do not recommend it at this time. Freerks opened public hearing. None present. Freerks closed public hearing. Hensch moved to amend Title 14, Zoning Code, to recommend amendments to Title 14, Zoning Code, to establish new height standards and waive the FAR requirement for Hospitals in the CO -1 Zone as noted in the staff report. Theobald seconded the motion. Freerks noted that this type of clean-up amendment comes up time to time and is important to address. In this situation it is good for the community to allow Mercy Hospital to expand and grow in the area. The upper floor stepbacks are a good idea because there still needs Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 14 to be some type of transition when there is single family residential in the area. Eastham agreed that this amendment would allow Mercy Hospital or another private hospital in a CO -1 zone that is bordered by residential development to expand their facility in a manner that is respectful to the surrounding residential areas. Parsons stated it is beneficial that it will be one story at first, and the additional stories may come in time, but it will be a transition and not all at once. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM: Consider a motion setting a public hearing for May 21 on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan: The 2015 South District Plan Miklo stated that the Commission received a copy of the Plan in their packets and it is also on the City's website and being shared with people who participated in the planning process. Tonight is just a formality, the Commission will actually hold the public hearing in two weeks, which is also an opportunity for the Commissioners to identify any questions, concerns, or change that you would like to make to this draft before finally voting and sending it on to Council. Milko noted that there is currently a South District Plan but with the building of the new elementary school on south Sycamore Street the Council asked Staff to revisit that plan, refreshing the plan, look at it and see if any issues had changed and how to address those. Miklo stated there was a series of public meetings, interviews with individuals, bike tours, a tour with the Commission in a van to get to know the area, and this plan is a result of all of that work. Freerks asked the Commission to read through the Plan carefully and come to the public hearing with questions, concerns, praise but this is not necessarily something that will be voted on at the next meeting, more time can be taken if the public input raises questions or concerns that need more time to be addressed. Eastham moved to set a public hearing for May 21 on an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan: The 2015 South District Plan Theobald seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: APRIL 16, 2015 Dyer moved to approve the meeting minutes of April 16, 2015 with minor typo corrections. Eastman seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning Commission May 7, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 14 PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION: Freerks introduced the two new members of the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: Theobald moved to adjourn. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 7-0. Late Addition/Handouts June 1, 2015 Page 2 ITEM 3d(13) WALDEN WOOD PART 10 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE STORM SEWER AND SANITARY SEWER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR WALDEN WOOD PART 10,... — Added P & Z minutes. Setting Public Hearing: ITEM 3e(6) CONVEY 725 E. DAVENPORT STREET - RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 16, 2015, ON A PROPOSAL TO CONVEY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 725 EAST DAVENPORT STREET — See resolution Correspondence: ITEM 3f(5) Jim Cochran: Iowa City Code 9-8-1 (two abreast bicycle riding) - Staff response included ITEM 3f(7) David Robertson: Crime at Wetherby Park Regular Agenda: ITEM 5b NORTH EAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREET [CHAUNCEY] — REZONING APPROXIMATELY 0.62 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COLLEGE STREET AND GILBERT STREET, FROM PUBLIC (P-1) AND CENTRAL BUSINESS SUPPORT (CB -5) TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CB -10). (REZ15-00006) — Added copy of Chauncey Timeline and additional correspondence ITEM 5c VACATION OF BLOCK 43 ALLEY [CHAUNCEY] VACATING PORTIONS OF PUBLIC ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED IN BLOCK 43, CITY OF IOWA CITY (VAC 15-001[ mmu es. _ FORMATION PACKETS 5/21: IP 8 Hing and Zoning Commission: May 7 — See corrected Attendance Record INFORMATION PACKETS/2 IP 3 Memorandum from City Clerk: Revised KXIC Radio Show schedule m O mOx 0 0 CA N rn 77 :3 :3 Cl) KC-'-� NCD 3 X 0 m a, m CL -�-�cnv3x�+mvz Q m� x m 1 z m o m 3 3 DVDpzo;ox-m 0 G) N� 4 N rn -I ;a r;,mz L O r-a(n" as z3 0 xxx =c(nan ; X ; °xxx cl x x x 1 x;XXXy Zvv wmZ�z M> D m X°X F x xxx 00 m 0 00C)C0 o CD C) )>< i cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn � � cnaocnm�moornrnm3 x X 1 X i X X X co xxx ; x ; xxxw N xxx n x ; x ; xxx ; XXx00 w m cn xxN>>m10 -< 0m ��zmcnm 3 p C) co) CO) m y W D p z n� y r � m" = N C > `v�3x>00 ZOvxvmZ�z m > m r m xI xi xI 1 IOml ' I><I><I><1" xI xI x� , xI , XI XI olt0 w xxx ; X ; x x x x x x 1 X i X X X N 1111111119 i IxI 11X1X >11 >11 >11 >1104 x x x 1 x ; XXX z 0 m0 M Nz90 a ono �zz r 3 r;,mz L O io as z3 0 xxx vCA ; X ; °xxx z x x x 1 x;XXXy X°X x xxx 00 XXX ; x ; Xxx� o x X 1 X i X X X co n x x x ; x ; XXx00 m D 0XX;x XXXN s TI xxx i x i XXX as 7 J xxx i x ; 0 x j xxx ; x ; Xxm^, 0 xx x ; xxx, o Rx xx x ; xxx xI xi xI 1 IOml ' I><I><I><1" xI xI x� , xI , XI XI olt0 w xxx ; X ; x x x x x x 1 X i X X X N 1111111119 i IxI 11X1X >11 >11 >11 >1104 n 0 n � n rt N CD �a H M H 0 ro 00 w rt H 0 ro w n x m rt M D z > z z 0 m0 M Nz90 a ono �zz r 3 r;,mz L O io z3 0 n0 0 vCA CA z n 0 n � n rt N CD �a H M H 0 ro 00 w rt H 0 ro w n x m rt 'LoI XXIXXIXIX11 1 1 I ,qIX IX IX I l Ix I l IO IX IX cm X X X 1 X 1 X X X r- X X X 1 X 1 X X X M NIS 1>< 1>< I 1>< I 1>< IX IX NIX Ix Ix 11 I' 11 1>< IX IX LO >< >< 1 X 1 X X T M \ co cm NX X X 1 X 1 X X T I WaU���mU)0 CD N UJ X X 1 X X0000o0000 X X z T I w O N �xx- 1 X XX W! O 0 z oxxX W 1 1 xx� V IX r W T Q Z w w¢ Q O 0 LU z wN p X X X 1 X 1 X X- LLJ x O V ZO Q T co Q W == F- w Z 1- v) N o N XXX-Xi a wv)w X X X 06 Ix W O °' � w 0 zo Z�' LL LXX acn�l=- 1 X 1 XXL w�= X za z T J N X X 1 1 X X X CL 00 XX 1 X 1 Xox R©©8©8©©M a) w ;xX— 1 X 1 XXX cc LXXX 1 >C 1 XXX w J w i W Lu J= X5 z Z w w Q Q 0 x O V Q Y= m m 0 o a�vi=aZ�avi �I.-W yF-U)00� >-QwujQQ x_ 0 W . LL I- C', u u 5 oc 79 �xxx M cm ,�wcflcflaornrrn�na��n I WaU���mU)0 r - tn X0000o0000 I w 1 W W i W Q Z w w¢ Q O 0 z Q Y — m a x O V ZO Q Q W == F- w Z 1- v) 0 m 0 a wv)w w w � w 0 zo acn�l=- w�=