HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-11-21 Bd Comm minutesItem Number: 5.a.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Board of Adjustment: July 12
Attachments: Board of Adjustment: July 12
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
FORMAL MEETING
EMMA HARVAT HALL
July 12, 2023 — 5:15 PM
MEMBERS PRESENT:
IT, l:4Iyi11-10a-T_100401IIf
STAFF PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT
CALL TO ORDER:
FINAL
Larry Baker, Nancy Carlson, Bryce Parker (via zoom), Mark
Russo, Paula Swygard
Madison Conley, Sue Dulek, Anne Russett
Doug Fern, Angie Jordan
The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM.
ROLL CALL:
A brief opening statement was read by Carlson outlining the role and purpose of the Board and
the procedures that would be followed in the meeting.
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC23-0007:
An application submitted by Doug Fern of Faith Academy requesting a special exception to
allow the expansion of a General Educational Facility in the Community Commercial (CC-2)
zone for the property located at 1030 Cross Park Avenue.
Carlson opened the public hearing.
Russo noted he consulted with the City Attorney's office that he was retained by the applicant
Doug Fern within the last year to design work on his house. That project is completed and there
are no further obligations for either party. The City Attorney's office determined that he had no
legal conflict, and he stated he can be fair and impartial about and therefore did not see it
necessary to recuse himself at this point.
Conley began the staff report with an aerial view of the property and the zoning map. The
property is zoned CC-2 Community Commercial, and the neighboring properties are multifamily
RM-44. Regarding background, Faith Academy is a private elementary school located in the
back of a commercial building in Pepperwood Plaza. In 2013 there was a special exception
approval for this general educational facility to serve 25 kindergarten and first graders with a
condition that required another special exception if enrollment increased over 50 students
and/or if an addition of 500 or more square feet was to be requested. Then in 2014 there was
another special exception granted which increased enrollment and square footage of the school,
and that included a condition that required another special exception if enrollment increased
over that current 105 student capacity and/or if there was an addition of 500 or more square feet
to the building. In 2019 there was another special exception approved to expand the square
footage of the school over 500 square feet and again this included a condition that required
another special exception if enrollment increased over 105 students and/or if there was an
addition of 500 or more square feet. Therefore, today, Faith Academy is requesting to increase
the number of students from 105 to 150 but are not proposing to expand any portion of the
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 2 of 9
building area. Conley showed pictures of the site plan for this property noting people enter this
property off Broadway Street, follow a pavement marking arrow to continue down a one-way
drive to the main school entrance for drop off and pick up of students utilizing the existing
pedestrian walkway to enter the main entrance of the school. There is a proposed one-way "Do
Not Enter" sign to be posted to help clarify traffic flow and there are some vehicular parking
spaces as well as two-way traffic access from Cross Park Avenue. Conley noted there will be
some proposed directional arrows to help clarify traffic flow for the property. On the west portion
of the building is the church entrance and there has been some screening proposed along the
east and south portion of the property. Additionally, there is a proposed expanded and relocated
bike parking and there are existing pedestrian walkways that allow students and users to access
the building as well as a fenced -in play area for the students to utilize during the school day.
There is a neighboring commercial retail use to the west, also known as the African Market, so
there are proposed pavement markings to help delineate parking spaces. To the south of the
building is a paved basketball court and a second entrance to Faith Academy.
The role of the Board of Adjustment to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application
based on the facts presented. To approve the special exception the Board must find that it
meets all applicable approval criteria which includes specific standards that pertain to the waiver
requested as well as the general standards for all special exceptions.
First Conley reviewed the specific standards found at 14-4B-4D-9: General Educational
Facilities in the CC-2 Zones. The first criteria states that the use will be functionally compatible
with surrounding uses and will not inhibit retail and service uses for which the zone is primarily
intended. For this the Board may consider such factors as size layout, size and scale of the
development and traffic circulation. Staff findings include the school entrance is on the south
side, which is located away from the commercial area of the property and the customer parking
area. The school uses a one-way rear drive drop off and pickup which is in a location that does
not interfere with the traffic in the commercial area. Additionally, the student drop-off and pickup
times don't interfere or impact the surrounding uses and deliveries. Staff does recommend a
condition to create a clear delineation between the play area and parking lot to relocate existing
parking spaces in that play area to the southwest area so access to the neighboring commercial
space will be maintained.
Number two states that the use must provide a drop off and pickup area in a location that is
convenient to or has good pedestrian access to the entrance of the facility. The drop off and
pickup area must contain sufficient stacking spaces and/or parking spaces to ensure that traffic
does not stack into adjacent streets or other public rights of way. Staff findings here include that
a rear one-way drive is used for drop off and pickup and located east of the main entrance with
pedestrian access to that main entrance. The drive total is approximately 500 feet and runs
north and south along the length of the building which will provide enough stacking for more
than 25 cars which will help prevent traffic spillover onto Broadway Street. Additionally, at least
30% of the students utilize Faith Academy owned transportation, which parks in the parking lot
on the west side of the building and 1t3 of the students attend the boys and girls after school
program which is in the suite north of the school and will contribute to less traffic at pickup.
Number three states that the site must be designed to promote safe and convenient pedestrian,
bicycle, and vehicle circulation to the school according to the standards set forth in subsection
14-2C-6F. Here staff findings review pedestrian walkways, bicycle parking and vehicular
circulation and to start with pedestrian walkways Conley noted there are existing walkways that
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 3 of 9
connect to the main entrance and to other sidewalks. For bicycle parking there is a proposed
bike rack on the site plan near the playground area, including the five required bicycle parking
spaces required by code. Regarding vehicle circulation, staff recommends a condition that
requires approval of a site plan which includes directional arrows for the one-way and two-way
drive, delineation of the parking area from the play area, restriping of all parking spaces, and a
"Do Not Enter" sign placed at the entrance of the one-way.
Next, Conley reviewed the general standards for all special exceptions, found at 14-4B-3A. The
first states that specific proposed exception will not be detrimental to or endanger the public
health, safety, comfort or general welfare. Staff finds the school has been operating at this
location since 2013 with no reported health or safety issues. Additionally, the proposed
expansion would allow for an enrollment increase to 150 students and will not impact the current
square footage of the school. Staff is recommending a condition that future expansion of the
school enrollment and/or footprint will require a special exception similar to the previous special
exceptions.
The second criteria is that the specific proposed exception will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity and will not substantially diminish or impair
property values in the neighborhood. Staff finds once again that Faith Academy has been in
operation since 2013 and the school maintains limited hours of operation, 7:30 a.m. to 3:30
p.m., and these times do not conflict with peak commercial times in the area. The Academy
does not plan to expand the building with any additions and typically places of worship and
schools are seen as amenities in a neighborhood.
Number three is the specific proposed exception will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district in
which such property is located. Again, staff finds that the school has been in operation for the
past 10 years without impeding normal and orderly development and there is viable commercial
activity in the front part of the building facing Pepperwood Plaza parking lot. The school has an
entrance located on the south side of the building that faces neighboring residences and is
separate from the commercial area to the north, and staff recommends a new special exception
application is required if the school plans to increase square footage of the building over 500
square feet and/or expand the enrollment over the 150-student limit.
The fourth criteria is that adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and/or necessary facilities
have been or are being provided. As this is an existing area, utilities, access roads, drainage
and/or necessary facilities are already provided and will continue to be provided.
Fifth is adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress or egress designed to
minimize traffic congestion on public streets. Staff found that the drive is a one-way for pickup
and drop off and have proposed a recommended condition to require directional arrow markings
as well as a "Do Not Enter" sign to be posted to help minimize traffic congestion and clarify the
traffic flow. Again, 30% of the student body does use Faith Academy owned transportation
which parks in the west parking lot while the remaining portion of students utilize private
vehicles through the east drive. Additionally, many students are siblings and plan to arrive
together.
Number six is that except for the specific regulations and standards applicable to the exception
being considered, the specific proposed exception in all other respects conforms to the
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 4 of 9
applicable regulations or standards of the zone in which it is to be located. Staff has found that a
site plan application will need to include as well as a landscaping plan in order to ensure that S2
screening requirements are met. Other than that, all other CC-2 zone requirements are met.
Finally, number seven is the proposed exception will be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan of the City as amended. Staff has found that the Comprehensive Plan calls for
neighborhood elementary schools as an integral part of a healthy, sustainable neighborhood.
Schools also provide a relationship with the surrounding neighborhoods that facilitate social
connections, identity, and the well-being of families whose children attend these schools. The
South District Plan sees neighborhood schools, especially elementary schools, as integral to
healthy, sustainable neighborhoods.
Conley stated staff received one piece of correspondence in support of this application from the
Good News Bible Church.
Staff recommends approval of the EXC23-0007, a special exception to allow the expansion of
the General Educational Facility's student enrollment from 105 to 150 students in the
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 1030 Cross Park Ave subject to the following
conditions:
1. Submittal of a site plan that demonstrates consistency with the site plan submitted with
the special exception case. The site plan shall show:
• Directional arrows for the one-way and two-way drive,
• Delineation between the play area and the parking area
• Restriping of all parking spaces, and
• A "Do Not Enter" sign added at the end of the one-way drive.
2. An enrollment of more than 150 students or an addition of more than 500 square feet of
floor area will be considered an expansion of the use that requires a new special
exception.
Baker asked if there are any State regulations that govern the ratio between classroom size and
number of students in the classroom and are there any regulations about the size of a
recreational area for a school relevant to the number of students in the school. Russett is not
sure what the State regulations are related to private schools, the applicant may be able to
answer that.
Baker noted finding number six says a site plan application must include a landscaping plan to
ensure S2 screening is met, where will that screening would be and is it the same screening
issue that's mentioned in the applicant's response where they are asking for a waiver of
screening requirements. Conley showed the one-way drive and stated according to code it is
required to have S2 screening standards in a CC-2 zone and the screening would go all the way
up the whole portion of the drive to the entrance along Broadway Street. There is already some
screening in the area, but it would need to meet the S2 screening requirements.
Russett interjected that the waiver that's being requested by the applicant is not a decision of
the Board of Adjustment, it's a waiver that's made by the Building Official.
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 5 of 9
Russo asked if the only purpose of the two-way drive was to provide access to the parking.
Conley replied yes, it currently exists as a two-way, but not only does it provide access to those
parking spots, but people exiting the one-way can exit through the two-way as well. Russo
noted wouldn't it be safer to just all be one-way only. Conley noted this property has been
operating since 2013 and it does sound like everything has been flowing correctly. Perhaps with
an addition to the student capacity there might be some congestion, but staff believes with the
proposed clarification of signage as well as the directional arrows that will help to mitigate some
of the traffic congestion. Russett added the width of the drive meets the minimum standard for
a two-way drive.
Carlson noted information regarding the special exception is to be sent out to the appropriate
people within 250 feet and she didn't see anything in the report noting that had been done and
specifically wanted to know if the people in the African Market were informed. Conley stated
there was notice sent out to the neighbors within 500 feet of the property and there was also a
sign posted on the property. In terms of the African Market, staff found that the expansion of
enrollment would not impede the delivery times or operation of the African Market and it has
been in existence along with Faith Academy for some time. She added the delivery hours of the
African Market is once a day and is not in conflict with the operation of the school, but they
haven't received any correspondence from those owners.
Carlson asked if a Good Neighbor Meeting was held and Conley replied no.
Swygard asked regarding the portion of the paved areas used for both outdoor play and parking
there is a staff recommendation of a condition to create a clear delineation between the play
area and parking lot and the two parking spaces behind the African Market identified as the
commercial space on the site plan be relocated to the southwest side of the building. Does that
mean they are relocating two parking spaces that were previously assigned to the school to now
be designated for the African Market. Russett explained that the school needs 20 parking
spaces and they meet that obligation so they're not relocating the African Market parking, they
will still have access to their site with the existing parking that's there.
Russo asked about the African Market deliveries. Conley noted the deliveries come in from the
south but the access to the market is from the north.
Doug Fern (Head of School of Faith Academy) wanted to answer a few of the questions. First,
in terms of governing authority to determine the ratio between student enrollment and
recreational space as well as student enrollment and classroom size because it's a K-6 school
they fall under City ordinances and as an elementary school there's no outside authority that
states they need X amount of square footage for recreation purposes. If they were to go
younger than K-6 and add in preschool, then the Department of Health and Human Services
would dictate how much square footage is needed. Fern added they do not intend to add
preschool. Part of the reason they are increasing enrollment is because the Iowa City School
District is moving sixth grade into junior high so in the next few years they may plan to expand
into junior high and serve more students going that direction, but not serving younger students.
Fern next addressed the question about the one-way versus the two-way noting the City has
made it pretty clear that the front access to the school needs to stay on the residential side, not
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 6 of 9
on the commercial side and the school entrance is right there where those parking spaces are.
Throughout the day there'll be a number of staff who are part time or deliveries or things like
that, that just need to come in and swoop out real quick but that typically does not happen
around drop off and pickup times. Additionally, that two-way drive keeps people from having to
drive all the way down the alley during the normal working hours of the day. Fern also pointed
out there's parking all along that building that is slanted back towards the one-way and staff will
use those spaces throughout the day as well. Regarding the screening, he stated they see the
school as being a vital part of the neighborhood and a blessing to the community. Last year
they raised about $150,000 to put a significant playground there to bless the community with
that can be used on the weekend and the evenings. Their concern with the screening was they
just don't want to put anything in that would make it feel like that wasn't a welcome space for the
neighborhood. Before they bought the building it would have been the South Neighborhood
District Association to clean up all the screening that was along Broadway, it was overgrown
and uninviting. It has been cleaned up and some new plantings are there now, a lot of work
went into beautify the neighborhood from that Association and he would hate to undo that with
just haphazard screening that is going to not look nice. He stated they were going to be asking
for a waiver of the screening from Cross Park all the way to the entrance on the north side, but
staff came back with a recommendation that they just limit the screen waiver which he thinks is
feasible noting the concern is that while there's some really nice beds that have been planted
there obviously during the winter they don't provide any screening.
Baker initially had no problem with the play area being screened but understands the concern
about screening off the visibility of the actual mural which is a vast improvement visually in that
area.
Carlson stated is appears they are planning to screen where the cars are parked and a very
small area between the playground and the two-way drive. The playground area will still be
visible from the street and is enclosed by a chain link fence with a gate. Fern confirmed that is
the staff recommendation and they agree.
Fern also stated that Southgate, the owners of the property immediately to the west, have
completely redone the whole back area there and turned it into some long-term storage. There
is a lot more traffic and now on the backside so maybe the concern with parking in the play area
is greatly reduced as there's not as much traffic coming in and out of that back area as there
once was.
Swygard asked with the expanded number of students, they currently have 10 classrooms, how
many classrooms will they expand to with the additional students. Fern explained they don't
currently have 10 classrooms; this fall they are planning on serving eight classrooms but this
plan will allow them to expand K — 8ch grade in the future if they need to. Swygard asks this
because the number of parking spaces is tied to the number of classrooms. Fern agreed and
stated currently they've exceeded the number of parking spaces required based on the number
of classrooms. He pointed out there's a bunch of unaccounted for parking spaces on the far
east side of the building so there is ample parking.
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 7 of 9
Swygard noted staff mentioned that they have to expand bike parking, how much bike parking
do they have. Fern replied currently they have one bike rack, but they're going to put a little
concrete pad up by the two-way drive put in the requirement of five.
Baker stated they use the rationale of parking and traffic that a lot of the student body is related
so the number of anticipated vehicles would be diminished, do they actually have the data about
how many are siblings within the school now. Fern stated at this time of year enrollment is a
moving target so it's hard to give a definitive number today on what it will be in the fall. Even
after school starts they have changes, students add, students leave, it's the nature of the
school. Baker noted they are asking for an increase of 50, do they have any idea of how long it
will take to reach that number. Fern doesn't think it will take very long. The majority of the
students that they serve are immigrant families and increase in enrollment has been through
word of mouth, they've hardly done any advertising at all. What they have seen in the last
couple of years are extended waiting lists and having to say no to students. Part of the reason is
because if a parent wants to enroll their kindergartener and they also have a fourth -grade
student, but they don't have room in the fourth -grade class, they've just had to say no to two
students. Therefore, their enrollment number has always been around the 90 to 100 mark. If
they make this decision to increase to junior high, they anticipate there'll be less families that will
have to make a decision to send their five year old to this school and their 11 or 12 year old to
this another school, this will be able to keep families together for a longer period of time.
Currently for this year their enrollment is already at the 105 mark, without adding seventh or
eighth grade, so they anticipate that as they add junior high there'll be more families that will
choose to send their students to Faith Academy because they'll be able to serve them longer.
Baker noted if they can accommodate the increase in students without increasing space, at
what number do they have to increase space and do they have the capacity to expand space
within the building that doesn't involve actual building additional space. Fern replied fairly soon
after the 150 mark they will need to expand. They do have the option to build out in the space,
there's a good chunk of the space right now that's just a shell and they could go in and build.
About two years ago they built out some of that shell to accommodate some of the growth and
there's still room for more.
Angie Jordan (Executive Director of South of 6 Business District; President of South District
Neighborhood Association) states she has been a resident in the south district for the past eight
years and has worked in that area for the past 15 years. She just wanted to echo everything
that's already been said, as a resident especially, supporting this application. Faith Academy
has been huge in Iowa City's plan about connecting schools, and it is the example of what every
school should be doing. Additionally, there's so many residents that do not attend that school,
and families on the weekends and evenings, that use that playground area. She is glad Faith
Academy is asking for a waiver for screening that doesn't block the mural or the visibility of the
playground. If people can't see the playground, it doesn't feel like they're welcome, no matter
how green and lush it looks. Also, the mural and the landscaping that's there was six years of
work and over $20,000 of fundraising by the neighborhood to create, so again she hopes it
doesn't get blocked off.
Carlson closed the public hearing.
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 8 of 9
Baker moved approval of of the EXC23-0007, a special exception to allow the expansion
of the General Educational Facility's student enrollment from 105 to 150 students in the
Community Commercial (CC-2) zone located at 1030 Cross Park Ave subject to the
following conditions:
1. Submittal of a site plan that demonstrates consistency with the site plan submitted
with the special exception case. The site plan shall show:
• Directional arrows for the one-way and two-way drive,
• Delineation between the play area and the parking area
• Restriping of all parking spaces, and
• A "Do Not Enter" sign added at the end of the one-way drive.
2. An enrollment of more than 150 students or an addition of more than 500 square feet
of floor area will be considered an expansion of the use that requires a new special
exception.
Swygard seconded the motion.
Baker thinks it's a good improvement of the neighborhood and to an existing operation. He
would encourage them to seek that waiver on screening and he enthusiastically supports this.
Carlson noted it's exciting to see a project like this come before the Board and wishes them
luck.
Russo stated regarding agenda item EXC23-0007 he does concur with the findings set forth in
the staff report of meeting date, July 12, 2023 and concludes that the general and specific
criteria are satisfied, so unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommends
that the Board adopt the findings in the staff report for the approval of this exception. Baker
seconded the findings.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0.
Carlson stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to
a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office.
CONSIDER JUNE 14, 2023 MINUTES:
Baker moved to approve the minutes of June 14, 2023. Swygard seconded. A vote was taken
and the motion carried 5-0.
=i*Te\ 7ITILIV KIN[N4iTII4ZIII f�l
ADJOURNMENT:
Russo moved to adjourn this meeting, Swygard seconded, a vote was taken and all approved.
Board of Adjustment
July 12, 2023
Page 9 of 9
! + ' • + !
ATTENDANCE• '
2023
NAME
TERM
EXP.
318
4/12
4/19
5/10
6/14
7112
BAKER, LARRY
12131/2027
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
PARKER, BRYGE
12/31/2024
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
SWYGARD, PAULA
12/3112023
X
X
X
X
X
X
CARLSON, NANCY
12/31/2025
X
X
X
X
X
X
RUSSO, MARK
12/31/2026
X
X
X
OIE
0/E
X
Key: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
-- — = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.b.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Community Police Review Board: October 10 [See Recommendations]
Attachments: Community Police Review Board: October 10 [See Recommendations]
r
ihp CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 15, 2023
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Tammy Neumann, Community Police Review Board Staff
Re: Recommendation from Community Police Review Board
At their October 10, 2023 meeting the Community Police Review Board made the following
recommendation to the City Council:
(1) Accept CPRP Final Public Report for Complaint 23-06
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
ScRECform.doc
FINALiAPPROVED
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES — OCTOBER 10, 2023
CALL TO ORDER Chair Jerri MacConnell called the meeting to order at 5:31 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ricky Downing, Jessica Hobart, Melissa Jensen, Jam MacConnell, Saul
Mekies, Orville Townsend
MEMBERS ABSENT: Amanda Remington
STAFF PRESENT: Staff Tammy Neumann, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
OTHERS PRESENT: Iowa City Police Lt. Jeff Fink, City Councilor Laura Bergus
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
Accept the Final Public Report for CPRB Complaint 23-06.
REPORT FROM NOMINATION COMMITTEE
Downing reported the committee recommended MacConnell for Chair and Jensen for Vice -Chair.
MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Jensen, to fix the method of voting as a voice vote.
Motion carried 6/0, Remington absent.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
Mekies nominated MacConnell as Chairperson. Hobart nominated Downing as Chairperson.
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Motion by Mekies, seconded by Townsend, to close nominations for Chairperson.
BALLOT OR VOTE
By a voice vote of 4 to 1, Remington absent, Downing was elected as Chairperson (Downing
abstained). Downing declined. Ford reminded members if they are not interested in being nominated,
they need to let the Board know prior to the vote taking place.
seconded by Downing, to reopen nominations for Chairperson.
Motion carried 610, Remington absent.
Downing nominated Jensen as Chairperson. Mekies nominated MacConnell as Chairperson. Mekies
asked both why they think they would be a good Chairperson. MacConnell said she has the time and
the interest to do so. Jensen shared she has been the Chair in the past and has a good understanding
of what goes into the Board and has a good understanding of the City. Mekies asked what it is Jensen
wants to do differently than the current Chair, and what she can add to the Board if elected to the
position. Jensen explained she doesn't necessarily want to make any changes to the position, but she
thinks everybody on the Board should experience being Chair and it would be good to have a new chair
every year.
*901.1
October 10, 2023
Page 2
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS
Motion by Townsend, seconded by Downing to close nominations for Chairperson.
Motion carried 610, Remington absent.
BALLOT OR VOTE
By a voice vote of 5 to 1, Remington absent, Jensen was elected as Chairperson.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON
Jensen nominated Downing as Vice -Chair. Downing nominated Mekies as Vice -Chair. Mekies declined.
MOTION TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS:
Moved by Townsend, seconded by Downing, to close nominations for Vice -Chair.
Motion carried 510, Remington absent. Mekies abstained due to proposed changes to the process to be
discussed at the November meeting. He will request changes to the nominating committee process.
BALLOT OR VOTE
By a voice vote of 5 to 0, Remington absent, Downing was elected as Vice -Chair. Mekies abstained
due to pending proposed changes to the process to be discussed at the November meeting.
MacConnell turned the meeting over to new Chair Jensen.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion by Townsend, seconded by MacConnell, to adopt the consent calendar as presented.
• Minutes of the Meeting on September 12, 2023
• ICPD Memorandum — Quarterly Summary Report IAIRtCPRB, 3rd Qtr. 2023.
Motion carried 610, Remington absent.
Discussion of Number of Members on Nominating Committee: MacConnell asked the Board to consider
increasing the nominating committee from two to three members, especially since the number of
members has increased from five to seven. She believes this would provide for more varied input and
discussion. Townsend expressed his reluctance to add a third person stating he doesn't think it is
necessary. Mekies asked if this discussion is limited to the number of people on the nominating
committee or if he could speak about the process at this time. He stated the nominating committee
should do research and gain more information on a board member before recommending them as a
nomination. He feels it would be more professional if there was more substance behind why a person is
selected for a nomination. Downing says he feels like he knows enough about each of the other
members to make an informed nomination. Mekies disagreed. Mekies also stated while it is not in the
by-laws, it would be appropriate to exclude members of the nominating committee from the nomination
pool. Ford reported there is nothing in the CPRB by-laws or the ordinance requiring a nominating
committee and asked Bergus and Neumann if they had any knowledge of how other boards and
commissions handle their elections. Bergus said she did not know how those were handled. Neumann
reported she previously staffed the Parks and Recreation Commission which did not use a nominating
committee. She said they would hold their elections in January of each year by opening the floor for
nominations during the meeting. If the nominated person accepted, they would then move on with more
nominations or a vote. Counselor Ford stated it is up to the members of the Board to do their due
October 10, 2023
Page 3
diligence and make themselves feel comfortable about how they want to vote when a nomination is
made. He further noted because there is nothing in any of the documents stating what a nominating
committee does, if a Board member would like to rely on some information submitted by the nominating
committee, then board members need to put some direction in the documents about the responsibilities
of a nominating committee. Downing suggested perhaps there not be a nominating committee.
Townsend noted the advantage of having a committee is to contact members ahead of the meeting
when the elections are done, thereby, creating a more efficient process.
Question to Chief Liston re: Arrestee Holding Area/Policy: Mekies asked if it is necessary for an
arrestee to be in the same room with the officer while the officer is completing paperwork, explaining
the amount of time it takes to do so may provoke further incidents. In Chief Liston's absence,
Lieutenant Fink responded. He explained the process stating a person is first arrested then brought to
the Iowa City Police Station to be processed. Once complete, an officer escorts the arrestee to the
Johnson County Jail. He said it comes down to there not physically being an extra room available to
use as a holding area. Fink pointed out there are very few cases where a situation escalates, and most
arrestees are very cooperative. Downing asked if it may be possible upon arrest to take the person
directly to the Johnson County Jail where the Iowa City Police Officer can complete the paperwork. Fink
said it is possible, however, all the recording devices and other items needed for their investigations are
located at the Iowa City Police Department. Townsend explained part of the Board's roll is to make
suggestions for improvement and if it can't be done systematically, that's okay.
OLD BUSINESS
Recap of Community Forum: Townsend expressed his desire to hold one, rather than two, Community
Forum's per year due to the lack of attendance as the reason. Ford stated the by-laws state "at least
one a year," therefore, two is not a requirement.
Motion by Mekies, seconded by Downing, to hold one CPRB Community Forum per year.
Motion carried 6/0, Remington absent.
PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Dean Abel, citizen of Iowa City, said he has concerns regarding facial recognition issues. He is
interested in whether the Iowa City Police Department uses facial recognition technology and if so,
under what circumstances does it become necessary and is there a written policy detailing its use. He
is concerned because of recent news of cameras downtown in public spaces in addition to the cameras
business already have in place. He wants to know if there have been any complaints or clarifications
about these issues that he is not aware of and he would like to see the Police Department respond to
the questions he has raised. He added he assumes the Board and/or Police Department are aware of
the many problems that arise with facial recognition, especially for people of color. Ford assured Abel
that his questions will be added to New Business on the November agenda. Abel thanked the board
and said he will try to be present at that meeting.
BOARD INFORMATION
As per a request from Mekies earlier in the evening, discussion of the CPRB Nomination Process will
be added to the November agenda under New Business.
MacConnell noted she has three questions she would like to add to new business on the November
agenda. 1) What is the criteria to determine if a complainant is being untruthful. 2) What degree of
consideration should be given to those reports which are determined to be partially untruthful. 3) If a
psychiatric condition appears to have influenced a report, what weight does the Board give the
CPRB
October 10, 2023
Page 4
untruthful aspects of the complaint. Mekies asked if there has been any follow-up to a complaint where
the Board determines it to be untruthful?
Hobart would like to discuss the CPRB meeting flow, i.e., when is it appropriate to make a motion, etc.,
so meetings are more structured.
Townsend expressed his concern that there may be too many items added to new business for
discussion at the November meeting. Mekies said if that becomes a concern, some items can be tabled
to the December meeting if possible.
STAFF INFORMATION
None.
TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS sub'ect to chap e
• December 12, 2023, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room
• January 9, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room
• February 13, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room
• March 12, 2024, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Room
Hobart shared she has been selected to serve on a Federal Grand Jury for the next 12 to 18 months.
These assignments include Tuesdays. After looking at her schedule for the next 12 months, it was
determined there are five potential conflicts. She said remote access may not be possible as she would
likely be driving from Davenport to Iowa City at the time of the meetings. It was decided she will
address those conflicts month by month as they occur.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Motion by Townsend, seconded by MacConnell 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 6t0. Remington absent. Open session adjourned at 6:03 P.M.
REGULAR SESSION
Returned to open session at 7:12 P.M.
Motion by Mekies, seconded by Townsend, to accept CPRB Complaint 23-06 Public Report as
amended and forward to City Council.
Motion carried 610. Remington absent.
Motion by Mekies, seconded by Townsend, to set the level of review for CPRB Complaint 23-09 at 8-8-
7(B)(1)(a) on the record with no additional investigation.
CPRB
October 10, 2023
Page 5
Motions carried 6t0, Remington absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion for adjournment by MacConnell, seconded by Townsend.
Motion carried 610, Remington absent.
Meeting adjourned at 7:13 P.M.
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2022-2023
M Ing Date
TERM
11/15R2
12/13a2
OIIIW23
OVIV23
03/14/23
0411113
W20/23
05109123
W13123
7JIV23
818P23
91IV23
1013f23
1W10123
NAME
EXPIRES
Forum
Forum
Ricky
6/30126
x
X
OtE
X
%
X
X
O/E
x
A
%
X
x
X
Downing
Jessie,
6/30126
-.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
x
%
Hobart
Melissa
6/30/25
X
X
X
DIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DIE
X
Jensen
Jerri
6/30/17
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
x
01E
X
X
X
Madonndl
Saul Mekles
6130125
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
%
X
Amanda
613W24
x
O!E
DIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Rem ngsoo
Orville
6,30/24
x
X
DIE
X
x
x
x
%
X
X
X
X
%
%
Townsend
Stuart
6/30/24
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
O/E
O
—
—
—
—
—
Vander Vegte
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
DIE = 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
DATE October 10, 2023
To: City Council
Complainant
City Manager
Chief of Police
Officer(s) involved in complaint
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #23-06
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the investigation of
Complaint CPRB #2306 (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.
t 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 Chief's professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2)).F[ LED
City 01crk.
'Olga City: Iowa
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the Police
Chief reverse or modify the Chief's 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.
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on April 18, 2023. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chief's Report was fled with the City Clerk on July 13, 2023. As per Section 8-8-6(D) of the City
Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chief's report.
The Board voted on Tuesday, August 8, 2023, to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs Report:
On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1)(a),
The Board met to consider the Report on August 8, 2023 and October 10, 2023,
Prior to the August 8, 2023 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the complaint, the Police
Chief's report, and to watch and listen to body worn camera and/or in -car camera footage showing the
interaction between the officers and the complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
This is related to a previous allegation during the same event (Complaint 23-02).
Police stopped a vehicle which had made a right hand turn from the center lane. When the officer
approached the stopped vehicle, the driver refused to roll down his window. Unsure of the driver's
intention, a "stop" belt was placed in front of the vehicle's front tire. Complainant was asked several
times to lower the window. Complainant finally lowered the window a few inches. Police officer calmly
and repeatedly asked the complainant for an I.D. Complainant refused and shouted "no" numerous
times. After a few minutes the officer opened the vehicle's driver side door. He reached in to remove
the keys. As he did so, the driver took hold of the officer's arm to prevent that action. When the officer
ordered the driver to come out of the vehicle, the driver became physically and verbally confrontational
with the officer. During the entire episode police officers were subjected to verbal abuse and physical
abuse. The officer took him to the ground using appropriate action. As the driver was being pulled
from the vehicle, the passenger in the front seat grabbed the officer's arm and the passenger in the
back seat also tried to physically prevent the officer from doing so. The front seat passenger received
an injured ankle when he tried to prevent his removal. When the officers were able to calm everyone
down, they explained the reason for the stop. The three men were placed in separate cars. The
person with the injured ankle was examined by paramedics and then transported to Univer .t �}
Hospital. The officer asked for a Breathalyzer test and the driver complied. The officer then 6SI D
i )- t
Oita' Clerk
iCW4 City, Im
consent to administer a blood and urine test. The driver refused. The officer read the driver what the
Iowa State Code stated. He read this information to the driver several different times during the
interview. The driver complained of being unable to see due to the spray that had been used. The
officer offered to take the driver to the eyewash area. The driver refused saying the officer was not
helping.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1 — Use of Force.
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion:
After viewing available videos, the complainant's allegation is unsubstantiated. The officers'
were professional and courteous throughout their interactions. Officers were accommodating by
offering eye wash and opportunity to an attorney.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #2 — Unprofessional Conduct.
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion:
After viewing available video footage, the complainant's allegation is unsubstantiated. The
officers' were professional and courteous throughout their interactions. Officers were
accommodating by offering eye wash and opportunity to an attorney.
COMMENTS:
None
FILED
Gila CIE
na FJty Iowa
Item Number: 5.c.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Historic Preservation Commission: October 12
Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission: October 12
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023 —5:30 PM— FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Lewis, Deanna Thomann, Noah Stork, Jordan Sellergren, Frank
Wagner, Christina Welu-Reynolds, Carl Brown
MEMBERS ABSENT: Nicole Villanueva, Margaret Beck
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow
OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Ginalie Swaim, Bob Miklo, Sharon DeGraw, Anne Marie
Taylor
CALL TO ORDER:
Sellergren called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS:
HPC23-0061: 1047 Woodlawn Avenue — Woodlawn Historic District (new rear deck and repairs to
earlier addition):
Bristow began the staff report noting this is a Queen Anne house with some detailing that could be
described potentially as Carpenter Gothic or could be a little bit reminiscent of Italianate. The house
has been added on multiple times including a 1984 addition on the back which has a really low gable
roof. The project before them today is the deck and while normally a deck can be reviewed by staff this
one cannot follow the guidelines for a staff review. Bristow showed some images of the house, the main
block of the historic building noting there was a second floor added at some point in time, maybe
around 1915. The one-story addition again was added in 1984 and that gable roof addition projects out
with the screen porch beyond the side of the house and then where the deck is as well. Bristow
explained the issue is that decks must be behind the house and set in from the sidewall of the building
about eight inches and so for that reason an exception to the guidelines will be required for approval.
The current deck is deteriorated and there's been some damage to that corner of the house because
there was no ledger board flashing causing some rotten damage and that was the impetus for this
project. Bristow showed the plan for the new deck, it will align with the side of the screen porch and
extend towards the sunroom and will have a railing along the side and at the stair. Otherwise, there will
be benches around one side with a current drop -in hot tub kept in the deck. Bristow stated the
guidelines are fairly simple for this project, locating the deck on the back, setting it in eight inches,
designing it so the size and scale don't distract, attaching in a manner to not damage the historic
building, in this case they are attaching it to the modern addition. Regarding the section on balustrades
and handrails, the square spindles would be at least an inch and a half in width and there'd be a top
and bottom rail. Bristow stated because they want their deck to align with their screen porch staff
recommends approval through the use of an exception to the guidelines for the uncommon situation
created by the existing rear addition to the house.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 2 of 10
MOTION: Wagner moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 1047
Woodlawn Avenue, as presented in the application through the use of an exception for the
uncommon situation by the existing rear addition to the house. Welu-Reynolds second.
Sellergren asked because this is a modern structure that's behind the old home, in a situation like this
they're able to make repairs to that modern structure because it happened before the Historic
Commission was in place. Bristow confirmed yes, the addition has lap siding, it has trim, it has
shingles, and modern windows and they are not looking at repairing those, but it has the same general
basic things that they would have on a historic house and therefore would continue to keep them as
they are. She did talk with the homeowners about how they might be able to revise the addition to make
it fit in better with the historic portion of the house if they ever wanted to, so that's always the possibility
if they decide to remodel the addition. Otherwise, it can stay like this forever, it is clearly a postmodern
addition architecture.
A vote was taken and the motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Villanueva and Beck absent).
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect -Chair and Staff review
HPC23-0043: 518 South Lucas Street — Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District (concrete site stair
rreolacement):
HPC23-0047: 314 South Governor Street — Governor -Lucas Conservation District (concrete site stair
replacement):
Bristow quickly reviewed these two applications, both homes are owned by the same owner and just
need the concrete stairs replaced.
Minor Review -Staff review
HPC23-0037: 738 Rundell Street - Longfellow Historic District (deteriorated window and door
replacement):
Bristow explained the homeowners converted the garage to living space and ended up determining that
the rear door and the side window were both damaged beyond repair so they will be replaced.
HPC23-0041: 521 South Governor Street — Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District (vinyl„siding
removal and historic siding and trim,re2air):
Bristow noted this house has had a couple projects and one of them was that they removed the vinyl
siding and uncovered some interesting details such as they could tell that there were brackets holding
up a different kind of entry canopy and that the current one is smaller than the one that was there
before. They could see that there were shutters on the building, this was probably a colonial revival
house that was remodeled early in the 1900s.
HPC23-0044: 707 Rundell Street— Longfellow Historic District (overhead door replacement):
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 3 of 10
Homeowners are replacing the overhead door.
HPC23-0046: 1328 Muscatine Avenue -- Longfellow Historic District (roof shingle replacement
Bristow believes they'll end up doing a several other projects on this home, but this one is the
replacement of the roof shingles.
HPC23-0060: 737 Grant Street — Longfellow Historic District (front step replacem2aL
Homeowners are replacing their front steps.
Intermediate Review -Chair and Staff review
HPC23-0052: 1025 Woodlawn Avenue — Woodlawn Historic District new barn foundation):
Bristow stated this has been a very long time coming and they are finally getting a new foundation on
the barn at 1025 Woodlawn Avenue, this barn has needed a new foundation for at least a decade. It
currently has a stone foundation and the new foundation will just be smooth poured concrete. She
explained this barn did have a wood floor suspended in it that was broken and so it'll have a new floor
as well. They will be actually moving the barn over, Goodwin House Movers will be doing that, and
they will remove the lean-to. Because the lean-to shows up on all of the Sanborn fire insurance maps
they think it is a very old lean-to so they're actually just going to remove it and reinstall it. There's a
possibility they might move it to the other end of the barn instead of this one.
HPC23-0055: 521 South Governor Street — Governor -Lucas Street Conservation District (shutter
installation):
Bristow stated they are installing new shutters that will be functioning shutters
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 14.2023
MOTION Wagner moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
September 14, 2023, meeting, as amended. Thomann seconded the motion. The motion carried
on a vote of 7-0 (Villanueva and Beck absent).
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
302 (316) East Bloomington Street. Slezak Hall aka Palaai's buildin
Bristow stated this building has actually has all of the numbers between 302 to 316, 302 being the front
portion. This was originally a hall where people met on the upper floor with stores below. The three-
story apartment building was added and the back area at one point in time there was a carriage house
and a stable. She showed a detailed image of the property, pointing out the brackets and dentals. She
is unsure if the current windows are the original with trim or if they were reduced. There likely would
have been a storefront with two entrances since it was divided in half down the middle. From Linn
Street they can see the west elevation of the building and a possible decorative element over a
storefront or perhaps some kind of loading door. Bristow noted the Holub apartments would have been
upstairs. From the 1888 Sanborn map it shows grocers on each side and the stage on the second floor
in the main hall. There was a dining room parlor and a carriage hoist on the first floor, laundry on the
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 4 of 10
second, sleeping on the third and the feed area. Bristow stated they believe everything was in place no
later than 1888. The Iowa Site Inventory form, which is basically what historians and consultants use to
fill out information to document it for the State, shows this building had been studied multiple times. At
one point in time someone determined that the building would be eligible for the National Register and it
would be as it has good integrity and would definitely be eligible under the National Register criterion A
which relates to events that have happened over time. Bristow could not recall which of Iowa City's
criteria that relates to but because it would be eligible for the National Register it would also be eligible
for local landmark listing.
Bristow stated this item was brought up because Sellergren, as the Chair, requested that it be on the
agenda for discussing it for a potential local landmark designation. If that process were to proceed it
could potentially proceed with the Commission determining that they want to locally landmark it so that
the application for rezoning would come to the Commission for review. The process is first they would
discuss the building and its history and a public hearing for everyone to speak, then it would move on to
the Planning and Zoning Commission and finally it would move to City Council. If the owner were to
object to the landmark rezoning a supermajority of City Council would have to vote to approve it for it to
become a local landmark. Bristow also wanted to note in 2015 a subcommittee of the Commission did
meet to look at historic properties in the community that are not currently either locally landmarks, nor in
a district of any type, to see which ones should be landmarks and this building was on that list.
Sellergren opened the public hearing
Thomas Agran stated he was a former commissioner and wanted to talk about this because like a lot of
people in Iowa City that saw that this building went up for sale it had him reflecting about this property
and reflecting also on his time on the Commission and experiences he had on the Commission. He
wanted to share some of his experiences as they prepare to look in more depth to this property. The
main example he wanted to bring up is the landmarking that they attempted for 410 Clinton Street,
which is brick building across from Dey House. Basically, that was a similar situation, the property
owner didn't want landmark status but it advanced through because it obviously deserved to be a
landmark. Then in the midst of all that the property owner sold to the Clark family and when it went to
the supermajority at Council, led by Susan Mims, it did not get the super majority. Agran read an
excerpt from the Press-Citizien article at the time. "Since that vote the City has been in talks to the
property owner asking what could persuade them to voluntarily pursue local landmark designation.
Brian Clark says the goal is to pursue more units. He said the owners of two adjacent properties, 400
North Clinton Street and 112 East Davenport Street have signaled a willingness to sell providing the
City rezones adjacent properties to allow higher density. Clark said he would be willing to designate
412 North Clinton as a local historic landmark in exchange." Hagar stated his summary of that is
developers do not need handouts and the last one is apartments downtown in the Clark family. So what
happens when a property like this comes up for sale is that a developer with deep pockets, who's not
afraid to play hardball with the City, will buy the property and then what happens is that there's this
emotional hostage taking the property where they twist the City's arm because people are worried and
don't want to step tread on individual property rights. It's the owner, they own the building. What
happens is they take the property hostage, and they try to get handouts, they tried to get approvals for
things that would never otherwise ordinarily be approved. There are other scenarios where this also
happened. Across from the Co-op what happened was undesignated buildings got torn down and they
encroach upon a historic property. Agran stated as the Commissions think about this, also think about
how this could be parceled up in some kind of deal as the remaining property that didn't sell across
from the Co-op ended up being so encroached upon by these inappropriate buildings for the scale of
the neighborhood and they ended up later tearing that building down. Another example is the Elks
building where they're going to tear it down and then leave a big hole in the ground right across from
City Hall. Or Ted Pacha, who on Christmas Eve, bulldozed the antebellum railroad cottages over on
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 5 of 10
South Dubuque Street. Those are the outcomes that are possible here. People don't come back to
Iowa City because they love the three over one new builds that go up everywhere with the empty retail
on the bottom and that's what will go on here if it's not landmarked. Like the empty gravel lot on Van
Buren Street that Michael Rivera manages, there's all kinds of bad outcomes here. Agran think that
there are different strategies for what they can do, some are more extreme and some are less extreme.
Maybe there's a development moratorium, whether it's a demolition permit moratorium in this area,
maybe instead of do dealing with an individual landmark status they could expand the district to include
Bloomington Street, or they could do what's actually the easiest thing, which is to landmark the
property. He is hopeful they will do that, but of course will need a supermajority and are going to get
pushback from the property owner. Agran noted the Scarda family, or whoever owns this building,
chose to own this building but don't own the parking lot across the street, they don't own the HeadStart
preschool next door, both places that would be great to be redeveloped. He encourages them to
landmark this property, but they will have to have that supermajority so he encourages them to find out
if they have the votes with City Council to make sure that this thing is going to sail through otherwise
the same thing that happened on 410 North Clinton is going to happen here. Lastly, developers own
the buildings, they own the deeds to all these properties, but they just own the deeds and they don't
own the history of the community. There is a structure created to allow them to protect that history and
that is landmark status and it exists so that no matter who owns the building, and what their inclinations
are over time, because property owners come and go, the building can stay relevant to the community.
Agran also noted that he was on the Commission when they went through that whole study to find other
properties that they to also should landmark, but the urgency now is because this building came for
sale. However, 75% of the 19th century building stock in Iowa City is not protected, all of downtown is
not protected, and they only find the urgency when things like this happen. Again, he really hopes that
they landmark it, prioritize it and get the votes.
Ginalie Swaim noted she has done laundry in that laundromat before she had washing machine, she
went to have pizza there when the dorms didn't serve meals on Sunday nights, and she thinks she
visited somebody who lives in in the apartments. This commercial building dates far back to the
relations with the Czech neighborhood. The customers do the grocery stores, and hall upstairs and the
stable and so she could get emotionally connected to this building but on greater self-examination that's
what history is about, that people wrap their own lives into a building and come up with some meaning
which the building then can preserve for the people or the community if it's protected. Obviously, this
building has great integrity, it has an incredible community history, and it is always anchored that
corner. It's a keystone between the Downtown and the Northside. Swaim would echo was Agran has
said and when she was on this Commission many of those issues came up and things happen very
fast. She sincerely hopes everything can turn out the way they would like it to and landmark the
property.
Bob Miklo (900 North Johnson Street) wanted to point out that this hall clearly meets the criteria for the
National Register as well as the local landmark. Its association with the Czech immigrant community
demonstrates broad patterns of local history as well as national history. It tells the story of the
community being built by immigrants and its architecture is a good representation of a commercial
storefront. He also noted it's unique in that it contained an ethnic social hall and a historic hotel, then
later apartments and livery were horses were cared for and tended to. There are very few surviving
buildings in Iowa City with this much history or character. Miklo also pointed to the Comprehensive
Plan, including the Central District Plan, which was unanimously adopted by City Council as a blueprint
for the community's future, calls for the protections of buildings like this and of the Northside
commercial district. Therefore, the City has already gone on record that this is an important building in
the life of the community and should follow up with zoning protections to enforce that policy. Again,
there are a few properties in Iowa City with this rich history and this well preserved.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 6 of 10
Sharon DeGraw is with the Friends of Historic Preservation and lives in the Northside. She agrees with
all the history of the building and that it needs to be preserved for that reason. It's an example of being
a certain type of architecture that they want to value and preserve. However, she also sees the tie into
the way that perhaps the business community and decision makers think is that this building is an
economic boost to the commercial area and the residential houses. So if it goes and things like it go,
what they replace it with has much less economic value in terms of the way the Downtown District
wants to think about what they need to do to create a vibrant downtown Iowa City. DeGraw would hope
that they engage the Downtown District in the discussion of how to land market locally also.
Thomann stated the value of this building and the stories it tells, the fact that it was important to farmers
back in the day and they would come and stay in these hotels and they put their horse and carriage or
whatever else in the stable. She lives just a few blocks away from this building and if she is going to
see her farming relatives in town, it's at Pagliai's, she runs into them all the time. People are drawn to
not only Pagliai's but also this building, it's very comfortable for them. She doesn't see her relatives in
downtown proper, but people will come into this building and eat and enjoy themselves. It's important in
that way, it's not just important to the City but to the surrounding areas too. Thomann is really
concerned about this part of town, the houses around here are being run down and it may be
happening intentionally. She has also heard a little bit of gossip and it sounds like a developer has
bought two houses within this block and she is sure they're eyeing this building now too. They've got
these two houses they bought, it would be easy buy this building, clear out this whole block, build tall
and City Council might just go for this because they are on a mission now as they want density and
housing. Is it possible to do the landmark status vote tonight. Bristow replied no. Thomann stated that
it is her concern because things will move so quickly, there will be a buyer and it may be the person
who bought the two houses or the company that did and it'll start rolling without them being even able
to say anything and that concerns her.
Welu-Reynolds asked Bristow to review again the recent history. Bristow stated it has been owned by
the same family for like 150 years or something like that. Welu-Reynolds asked if they have local family
members who might buy the building. Bristow is unsure. Bristow stated they should set aside any
consideration of ownership and consider this a community building that needs to be landmarked as
soon as possible. Welu-Reynolds is not worried about who owns it it's just that because it is up for sale
right now that weighs on their timeline for could happen tomorrow. If something gets out to potential
buyers that the historical commission may label this as a landmark that may have an effect on who
purchases the property.
Bristow noted it's currently listed at $5 million, which is $3 million more than its assessed value, it's
assessed at $1.8 million so that leaves few buyer options.
Anne Marie Taylor is on the Johnson County Historic Preservation Commission and lives in a house
that Iowa City very creatively saved. It's an old house on Burlington Street and was part of the
UniverCity program that renovated houses and now it's a single-family home. She is really concerned
about what's going to happen, the ad says it is not on historic preservation protection so they can
basically do what they want. That land at $5 million, one could only make money off of it if they knock
everything down around it. She would like to see whatever can be done to protect the community and
to protect Iowa City's history like this. Taylor acknowledged them talking about the City wanting more
and more housing but would go in there would not be the housing Iowa City is looking for, it would be
high dollar with some stores, probably a Subway and things like that, at the bottom. The housing going
into the core of Iowa City right now is not affordable, it is very expensive and doesn't benefit the people
there, it kicks the people who are renting out further and further. Taylor just wanted to let them know
that those of them with the County also discussed this and would appreciate anything this Commission
can do.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 7 of 10
Sellergren wanted to make a point with regard to housing density, which is that there's a new
development going up on Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque, it's a four -acre lot with a total of 15
townhomes going in, there could be 100 or 200 so she doesn't think housing density is necessarily the
top incentive. People shouldn't be swayed by that argument.
Lewis asked what the timeline for the process is to make it a landmark. Bristow explained the owner
will be contacted and staff will meet with the owner after this meeting tonight, before an application will
be submitted for rezoning and be processed, it would come before this Commission, so there's a
possibility it'll be on the November agenda.
Stork asked if they do make this landmark status designation does that lock it into looking like this
forever and any little thing that the future owner wants to do comes before this Commission an
exception. They should be considering that as well, yes there's so much human history here in this
building and it's wonderful, maybe not about the laundry building, that could be knocked down right
now.
Sellergren stated if they don't landmark it there's probably a 90% chance that it comes down
Welu-Reynolds noted the question is does this building deserve landmark status.
Sellergren stated yes but the other question is it an emergency and that answer is yes, it is.
Stork agrees it is an urgent issue.
Bristow noted if it were to be landmarked they would have to follow the guidelines like everyone else
and retain historic materials on the building, modern materials that maybe don't fit the building could be
changed, they could make an addition or something if approved by the Commission, just like any other
property, there wouldn't be a desire to keep something that would be considered non -historic just
because it happens to be there right now. It would follow the guidelines like any other property, the
building definitely has the integrity to be landmarked, as well as be listed in the National Register. It is
also a part of the social history and for those reasons it would definitely be eligible and that's the easy
part of the landmark process.
Stork asked about The Mill because this feels like The Mill situation a little bit. Bristow agreed but
stated there's more architectural integrity and with The Mill it did not have integrity for what it was
historically, they can't landmark the business, only land and buildings, that's what rezoning and
guidelines do.
Stork noted they could also start to consider newer time periods as now historical. Bristow confirmed
yes, basically it just needs to be 50 years old to be eligible.
Lewis asked if they start doing this process does that slow down the selling process. Bristow doesn't
know, it is a process but honestly it's probably more of a political process than anything else. There is a
point when City Council sets a public hearing where there's a moratorium on demolition, so specifically
if there were an application to demolish the building they would have to post that application for seven
days and then they could take the building down.
Sellergren noted then this is truly an emergency situation. Bristow reiterated they'll start with a public
hearing and that has to be published seven days before the public hearing.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 8 of 10
Thomann stated if they do get to the point where they're able to recommend this for being a landmark
status property, she encourages those that feel passionately about this to go to the other meetings after
this, P&Z, City Council, and tell them the historic value in this.
Sellergren noted there's a lot of public interest in this topic and was surprised there weren't more
people here but really did appreciate the those who did come.
Sellergren asked if the Commissioners were wanting to move forward with this process and all agreed
to move forward. She noted there also is probably openness to special meeting, if that's possible.
Stork asked about this district or surrounding districts and if this building is close enough to be included.
Bristow stated this area is not included in any of the districts because the districts nearby are residential
districts and this is a commercial area. When creating a district they basically stick to a type, each
district has a story and is a cohesive unit.
Bob Miklo noted when he was on staff a number of years ago they considered a national registered
district for the Northside, including the commercial area, and it was found to be eligible for the National
Register but there was considerable property owner objection. As a result the commercial area was
removed from the proposed historic district.
Thomas Agran stated there are five undeveloped parking lots and multiple single -story buildings in the
Northside Business District so they don't have to make space on this lot for development. They don't
have to make space on this lot for density. Currently if the zoning for this building is CB-2, whatever the
price to but, given the University metrics that they're predicting for student housing, all the other
housing coming online, this is urgent, and should be treated as urgent. He noted Sellergren or
somebody else should talk to the City manager and ask what is possible there and how City staff
envisions that property being and the demolition of it being leveraged. The current zoning and
opportunities for zoning changes that might be leveraged against the property might be a step to take
while they wait for the due process of the landmark status.
Bristow stated this property has been in this configuration since 1888, staff would not recommend
building another building in the middle of that empty parking lot, that would not be something that would
follow guidelines.
Bob Miklo noted in terms of urgency he would encourage them to pursue this as quickly as possible but
because there is a lease for the pizza place it's not going to be torn down tomorrow so they do have
some time. He cautions against doing a special meeting and to follow the normal procedure to the
extent possible so that it doesn't look like they're rushing or cutting corners and are following the
procedure and legitimately designating the building as a landmark.
Thomann noted a lot of the homes in this area are RNS-12 and also don't have protection so if
someone wants to do development in this area of the Northside, it's going to happen.
Sellergren also noted there's a City Council primary and Council will be changing over in January, so
they should not just talk to the City Council members but also the candidates.
Anne Marle Taylor wanted to share one other piece of experience, before living in Iowa City she was in
the legislative and government relations for the American Institute of Architects and worked with the
national organizations doing things to try and protect properties. One of the things that they did was
spend a lot of time working on in some of the state legislatures was being sure that an area didn't
become the building, because everything around it has been knocked down or removed. Another
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
OCTOBER 12, 2023
Page 9 of 10
example is when she was working in Seattle, particularly old historic buildings that was about to get
protection on Monday, were knocked down over the weekend. So someone who is willing to pay $5
million is only going to do that if they can make the money with tall buildings with all sorts of things. The
sooner they can protect this building the better. It's not just because it's a pizza place it's because the
history of this building and its place in the area is remarkable and needs to be protected, there's not
another place like this in Iowa City.
Sellergren stated the next step is to talk with the landowner, they might decide they do want the
landmark status, they've had it in the family for all these years and have taken such care of it.
Historic Preservation Awards:
Bristow gave an update on the Historic Preservation Awards and thanked everybody for their help. She
did note however, even with the assistance it took so much of her time that she could not review
projects for a month. Therefore, they may have to rethink how they do this in the future.
Thomann asked if there is a student assistant that could help. Bristow replied they do have an intern
however the assistance that the intern provides totally depends on the individual intern and their
abilities.
ADJOURNMENT:
Wagner moved to adjourn the meeting. Thomann seconded. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0
(Villanueva and Beck absent).
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 pm.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2022-2023
NAME
TERM
EXP.
10/13
11/10
1/12
2/9
3/22
4/13
5/11
6/8
7/13
8/10
9/14
10/12
BECK,
6/30/24
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
MARGARET
BOYD, KEVIN
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
0/E
X
X
—
BROWN,
6/30/23
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
CARL
LARSON,
6/30/24
O
KEVIN
SELLERGREN,
6/30/22
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
JORDAN
STORK, NOAH
6/30/24
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
THOMANN,
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DEANNA
VILLANUEVA,
6/30/25
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
NICOLE
WAGNER,
6/30/23
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
FRANK
WELU-
6/30/25
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
REYNOLDS,
CHRISTINA
LEWIS,
_
_
_
_
_
_
X
X
X
X
ANDREW
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E= Absent/Excused
--- = Not a member
Item Number: 5.d.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Parks & Recreation Commission: September 13 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Parks & Recreation Commission: September 13 [See Recommendation]
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: 11 /08/2023
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Staff Member of Parks and Recreation Commission
Re: Recommendation from Parks and Recreation Commission
At their September 13, 2023, meeting the Parks and Recreation Commission made the
following recommendation to the City Council:
To move forward with the 2024-2028 Parks & Recreation CIP as presented.
Additional action check on
X No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION APPROVED
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2023
ROBERT A. LEE RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B
Members Present: Rachel McPherson, Alex Stanton, Aaron Broege, Connie Moore, Missie
Forbes, Alex Hachtman, Melissa Serenda, Brian Morelli
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Juli Seydell Johnson, Tyler Baird, Gabe Gotera
Others Present: Carin Crain, Mitzi Read, Sue Protheroe, Jerry Protheroe, Beth Pfohl, Mark
Cannon, Anne Jensen
CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hachtman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council
action):
Moved by Serenda, seconded by Morell,_to recommend moving forward with the 2024-
2028 Parks & Recreation CIP as presented. Motion Passed 8-0.
OTHER FORMAL ACTION:
Moved by Broege, seconded by Moore, to approve the August 04, 2023, minutes. Motion
passed 7-0 (Serenda Absent).
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Commissioner Serenda arrives at 5:02 p.m.
Sue Protheroe comments on behalf of City Park Pool: Back to the Future, a group which is a
large bunch of community members who are passionate about City Park and have organized to
ensure that a future pool at least matches the current pool in terms of capabilities and the
communities it serves. Protheroe passes out copies of the City Park Pool: Back to the Future —
vision statement. Protheroe explains that previously a member of the group had spoken to the
Commission regarding the vision statement. Protheroe details that the group focuses on how the
pool can be used and the groups it serves, which the current design checks each box. Protheroe
clarifies that the group is not promoting a specific design for City Park Pool at the current time.
Protheroe says that the Back to the Future steering committee had met earlier in the week to
discuss the public input process after listening to the Williams and Associates talk during the
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 2 of 12
Sept 5 City Council meeting, understanding that the list of potential focus groups is not set in
stone, but that Juli had said there could be 14 focus groups, which means that the list of potential
focus groups has only I 1 groups. The steering committee had identified two groups that they feel
should also be represented. Firstly, the primary groups that use the pool like club swimmers &
water polo, and secondly, the group that is not on the list of potential focus groups, senior
citizens, a large group of pool users in the communities that should be sought out for input.
Beth Pfohl comments on the behalf of the City Park Pool: Back to the Future steering committee.
Pfohl says that during the Sept 5 City Council, a consultant said that replacing City Park pool
allows for the opportunity for conversation between user groups. Pfohl believes in the power of
various pool user groups speaking to one another and coming to understand what others need,
especially regarding the pool. Pfohl says that if conversation is allowed, we have the opportunity
for building community consensus, however the current public input plan as detailed in the
consultant condition report does not allow for discussion between user groups, unless the open
houses are structured in a way to provide this opportunity. Pfohl suggest that the open houses be
structured in a way that provides an opportunity for real dialogue between community members,
saying that it is important that all types of users hear each other's concerns and needs. Pfohl
envisions an event where people are assigned to facilitate the breakout groups, each addressing
the same set of guiding questions, before reporting back to the large group. Because the focus
groups are composed of similar minded users, the public gathering will be the only opportunity
for community members to hear and discuss and understand each other.
Carin Crain talks about the Robert A. Lee Pool while Marc Cannon passes out a handout to the
commission. Crain explains that she has been gathering pool counts for 10 months, the reason
being is because the Parks and Recreation department has said that pool usage is insufficient and
have not defined sufficiency, to support increased hours of operation. Crain says that the
department has talked a lot about the numbers of users, highlighting a page in her handout which
shows a collage of all the pool users throughout the day. Crain says that her collage is important
because it shows that 23 people who were at the pool on that day were not included in the full
counts distributed. Crain says that commissioners are asked to make recommendations based on
data and that if their data is not good, then their recommendations are not sound. Crain suggests
that the commission do is insist on accurate date. Crain refers to further pages in her handout that
show where in staff counts that errors lie, how she knows that the errors are there, and shows that
the errors are always less. Crain says that there is a consistent under count that has been going on
for 10 months. Going forward Crain asks that the Commissioners insist on accurate data, and that
respectfully, they correct the inaccuracies shown in the submissions to this body. Crain says that
as citizen who uses the pool, everyone counts, and that she wants to be counted.
Dir. Seydell Johnson makes the clarification for both the public and Commission, that when the
Commissioners had last looked at pool data for their decision about Fall RAL Pool hours, the
Commission has access to both the public and staff counts, side -by -side and made their decision
using all the numbers provided.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 3 of 12
2023-2028 PARKS AND RECREATION CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT —
Dir. Juli Sevdell Johnson
Dir. Seydell Johnson presents the attached PowerPoint over the 2024-2028 Parks & Recreation
Capital Improvement Plan.
Vice -Chair Moore asks what a pump track is, regarding the Terrill Mill Skate Park project. Parks
Supt. explains that a pump track in this instance is paved and includes pumps, and curves, and
banks that work together as a circuit that can be used by bikes, scooters, skateboards, and even
an athletic style wheelchair.
Commissioner Forbes asks if the Terrill Mill Skate Park is the skate park near City Park. Dir.
Seydell Johnson confirms this, saying that it is near the boathouse on Dubuque Street. Forbes
asks how much traffic is at the park to justify the price tag needed to update. Seydell Johnson
responds that while the exact number is not known, staff do know that the park is highly used
and believe that once the public input process begins, users of the park will be contacting staff
with strong input.
Vice -Chair Moore asks about the origins behind the name of Carson Lake, regarding the Carson
Lake Park Project. Dir. Seydell Johnson replies that she is unsure on the origin of the name of the
area but that it may be related to the current landowners. Moore asks if Carson Lake is the final
name for the park. Seydell Johnson replies that Carson Lake is likely not the final name of the
park, unless the name is part of the legal agreement for the land acquisition.
Commissioner Serenda asks if there are plans to extend the Highway 6 Trail from Heinz to Scott
Boulevard, making a good circuit as opposed to walking through the industrial area. Dir. Seydell
Johnson responds that in the long-term, yes. Seydell Johnsons explains that this was in the
Bicycle Master Plan, but it would not be seen in this 5-year budget plan.
Commissioner Morelli asks how much of the Federal Highway funds are devoted to trails versus
roads, or if the trail budget comes out of the Parks and Recreation budget. Morelli asks that if
trail headways are so expensive, can the department set aside a percentage of the budget for
several years to take on the bigger projects. Dir. Seydell Johnsons says that this option is
something that the Commission can recommend the City Council to consider. Morelli asks if it is
possible to receive more information on the funds received for trails. Seydell Johnson says that in
the past, an MPO representative has spoken on the subject to the Commission and that this could
certainly be done again in the future.
Commissioner McPherson asks about the "Public v Private" land for the Carson Lake Park
Project. McPherson asks that if the land has a current owner, then is the land private. Dir. Seydell
Johnson explains that the land is currently farmland and as it develops it will either be donated to
the City through Neighborhood Open Space or purchased by the city as a part of the water
retention area. Seydell Johnson says that as it is being discussed today, the land is private, but in
the long-term it will become public.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 4 of 12
Commissioner Serenda asks what the fate of projects on the Unfunded list are. Dir. Seydell
Johnson responds that the purpose of the list is so that City Council and Finance staff know that
there are still projects that the department would like to pursue.
Commissioner Broege says that the RAL pool and Mercer pool projects are happening after the
City Park Pool project is completed and asks if there is accounting for the potential funding
needed on the 2026-2027 CIP. Seydell Johnson says that the potential funds have been discussed
but not yet added to a project because the parameters of the project have not been decided.
Commissioner Forbes asks regarding a sports complex, if there are any private partners for a
complex, so as to not put all the expenses on the City. Dir. Seydell Johnsons says that there was
some talk about this a few years prior, and that Think Iowa City commissioned a feasibility study
but that that was about as far as it went. Seydell Johnson believes that it could come up again but
that it is not currently being actively pursued. Commissioner Broege asks if there are any plans
on what would be included for the sports complex. Seydell Johnsons says that there are plans.
Commissioner Morelli says that most of the work in Court Hill Park looks to be done but points
out that the old park shelter was removed leaving a field in the middle of the park and that a year
later, he would love to see the space updated and replanted. Morelli says that there are several
old trees in Court Hill Park with a tree coming down every few weeks whenever there is another
big wind. Morelli asks what the process is for the general upkeep of the trees. Parks & Forestry
Supt. Baird responds that staff have a shelter on hand to install, it just requires the time and funds
to get the shelter pad in place. Baird says that staff have spoken to the Streets department to see
if they can help with keeping the costs lower but that assistance would likely go towards the
basketball court. Baird says that he can have staff look at the seeding in the park, explaining that
the recent drought has made it a challenge to get things growing. Baird confirms that the trees in
the park are old and while the limbs can fall semi frequently, there has been nothing concerning
seen when looking at them, making it hard to know what will fall before it does. Morelli says
that there has been a big limb hanging in a tree in the park since the 2020 derecho. Tyler
responds that staff did not see the limb as a large hazard at the time of the storm, but that staff
can investigate it again.
Commissioner Serenda asks if it would be appropriate to report tree hazards like Commissioner
Morelli described that through the ICGov.org express form. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that would
work fine, or staff can be emailed directly.
Moved by Serenda, seconded by Morelli, to recommend movine forward with the 2024-
2028 Parks & Recreation CEP as presented. Motion Passed 8-0. _..
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 5 of 12
REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF
Director of Parks & Recreation —Juli Seydell Johnson
Cemetery: Dir. Seydell Johnson announces that there are 30 trees to be planted in Oakland
Cemetery in partnership with the Heritage Tree Foundation. Seydell Johnson adds that the trees
will likely be planted in Spring 2024.
Recreation: Seydell Johnson announces that the Recreation Division has 9 different themed
Halloween events in October. Seydell Johnson explains that one of the newer series is Sensory
Saturdays at Robert A. Lee Rec Center, aimed at provided play spaces and opportunities to use
the pool, the gymnasium, and the craft room for people that would like to have less sensory
exposure for their kids and for themselves.
Ped Mall Playground. Seydell Johnson refers to concerns from the prior Commission meeting
about the cleaning of the Ped Mall Playground. Seydell Johnson announces that Parks staff have
tried around 6 different methods to clean and have been in contact with the playground company
several times. While not a perfect solution, Parks staff found that vinegar worked the best to
clean the statues but ends stripping the paint. Seydell Johnson concludes saying that staff will
continue to be in contact with the playground company but assures that the playground is clean.
Parlrr and Recreation Commission: Seydell Johnsons says that the City Council will be looking
at filling the vacant seat on the commission at the Sept 19 City Council meeting. Seydell Johnson
explains that there are 14 applications for the seat and that it is does not have to be specifically
male or female for balance.
City Park Pool Project: Seydell Johnson gives an update on the City Park Pool project, explain
that there is no agenda item as nothing has happened since the September 5 City Council
meeting. Seydell Johnson says that the City Council had a few questions after the City Park Pool
condition report from the consultants and overwhelmingly chose to go forward with replacement
of the pool. Seydell Johnsons says that staff will be meeting with the consultants next week to set
out a plan for the next phase of public input, hoping to have the large public input open house
type meeting happening at the end of October in conjunction with the Halloween Carnival at
RAL Rec Center. Seydell Johnson adds that there will be a session earlier in the day for people
to have an opportunity for input without the worry of parking in the crowd of the Halloween
Carnival.
Seydell Johnsons says that after the input sessions, the project will move into the focus group
phase, having up to 14 focus groups, all of which have not been defined yet. Seydell Johnson
explains that the focus groups will be chosen through an online form that interested individuals
can apply through. Each individual will be asked a number of questions on if they would like to
be included on certain focus groups. Seydell Johnsons says that staff plan to have a focus group
which includes people with disabilities. The online form will ask interested applicants if they
have a disability and if they would like to be included in such a focus group. Seydell Johnson
adds that individuals are not required to answer yes or no to these questions, but they would need
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 6 of 12
to answer yes if they would like to be considered for that that particular focus group. Seydell
Johnsons says that there will be a prompt for if the individual has a swim pass or what their
primary activity in the pool is, to make focus groups dedicated to lap swimmers, aqua-
fitness/water-walkers, or other such groups. Seydell Johnson clarifies that the people who choose
the makeup of the focus groups will not see any names attached to the people on the list. They
focus groups would be made based on the answers to questions which people self-selected and
then randomly selected from those specific criteria. Seydell Johnson says that this way of making
the focus groups is influenced by the City's goals for equity and diversity, making a quiet space
for folks like non -users and historically underserved groups to have a place to meet with
consultants and talk about their needs openly without influence from other groups. This input
gathered will be published afterwards.
Seydell Johnsons say that the after the focus group work is done, the consultants will create 3
concepts for the pool with the only known factors being, to remain with the original fence line,
no additional parking, and trees will be preserved. These designs will be based on the input from
focus groups and public input surveys, and once completed will be shown to the City Council for
a decision. Seydell Johnson clarifies that this process is not yet set in stone as staff still must
meet with the consultants to finalize the plan.
Commissioner Morelli asks if there are set in stone parameters for the focus groups yet referring
to past discussions among the commission on different groups to include. Seydell Johnsons says
that staff have suggested a list of 10 groups to the consultants that they believe would be
appropriate for the community, but that the actual groups would be decided after meeting with
the consultants. Seydell Johnson adds that the Parks and Recreation Commission is one of 14
focus groups and will be the only publicly open focus group. Seydell Johnsons says that 2 groups
will be left undecided until the makeup of the focus group applicants is looked over.
Commissioner McPherson comments appreciation at the inclusion of a staff focus group, saying
that it is important for the process.
Vice -Chair Moore appreciates that the focus groups will have privacy as some times when some
folks have trouble finding confidence when talking a in a big group or might have a legitimate
concern that is very close to them.
Dir. Seydell Johnson explains that the information on the process is not fully known yet, as the
decision to replace the pool was only made the week prior. The process had a framework but is
actually being written now. Seydell Johnson adds that the largest hurdle will be getting the word
out to take part in the focus groups and asks the Commission to spread the word.
Commissioner Stanton says that the Consultants are getting input from the focus groups but asks
if they are being privy to general emailslcalls that the coming in regarding the pool. Dir. Seydell
Johnson responds that this will likely be the case between now and the actual focus groups,
adding that the consultants have seen all the information that was gathered during the rec
masterplan, including all the emails that had come into the Council and Commission.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 7 of 12
Commissioner Broege asks if there will be any feedback/consulting with the public after the
three proposed designs are created. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that there is one more public open
house meeting that will after the designs are shown, as well as a meeting for the Commission and
the Council each.
Commissioner Forbes asks if there was a different name established for what would be senior
citizens in the focus groups. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that Older Adults may be the title for the
age group but adds that date -of -birth will be on the online form to ensure a good mix of all ages
in the focus groups. Commissioner McPherson adds on that in the terns of diversity and equity,
she believes that senior citizens are overlooked and a marginalized group and should be at least
considered for a potential focus group.
Parks & Forestry Superintendent —Tvler Baird
Tree Planting Projects: Supt. Tyler Baird announces that the division has received a $5000
Community Forestry Grant which will go towards a planting of a variety of trees with Kiwanis
group and their affiliates groups in Hunter's Run Park at 10 a.m. on Sept. 23, 2023. Baird
expects 47 trees to be planted in the park.
Baird talks about the CIP Tree Planting saying that it is about to kickoff for planting. Baird
details that trees will be planted near the south-east side of town, in neighbors surrounding
Whispering Meadows Wetland Park. Baird explains that the area is lacking a tree canopy
coverage. Baird notes that the infill planting project, part of the operation budget is combining
some funds to see a large stretch of trees on Friendship Street, near Court Hill Park, as well as
more all around the city based on the regular requests through the year.
Baird says that there is a smaller tree planting project in Benton Hill Park. The project will see
10 trees planted, as requested by the neighborhood. Baird explains that Dir. Seydell Johnson and
himself met with the neighborhood during Spring 2023, looking at spots could use more
vegetation and are expected to be planted later this fall.
Projects: Baird announces the playground for Happy Hollow Park has arrived and that staff are
waiting for the park's contract order to be completed before the playground can be installed by
in-house staff. Baird is hoping for the playground to be installed later this Fall, after the
contractors complete their work.
Commissioner Broege asks which park is having the tree planting next week. Supt. Baird
answers that the tree planting will be at Hunter's Run Park.
.f
*IRS REPORT:
None
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 8 of 12
COMMISSION TIME/SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioner Forbes asks to review the pool counts and to have a refresher on why it started in
the first place. Dir. Seydell Johnson asks Forbes for clarification on if she is asking for an agenda
item or just a question. Forbes says that she is asking as a question. Seydell Johnson explains that
the process started about a year prior when the Recreation Masterplan had come out with some
counts in it. Seydell Johnson says that there are residents counting every day to report their
numbers and adds that the Commission had used their numbers as part of their decision -making
process for the hours in a previous meeting. Seydell Johnson says that the staff & resident
numbers do not match for a number of reasons. Some of the reasons being, city staff in the water
are not counted, swim lessons are counted separately. Seydell Johnson says that staff do not
dispute the resident numbers but are saying that they are counting differently than staff is, which
is why when a recommendation is made regarding the numbers, the Commission is provided
with both sets of numbers before a decision is made between the two. Forbes asks if there are a
lot of staff being devoted to the process. Seydell Johnson answers yes, saying that she does not
know the exact total amount of hours put towards it, but that there is a number of Recreation and
Admin staff involved, all putting hours towards the process each month. Forbes wonders if there
is a more efficient use of department staff s time, saying that the staff have done a really good
job showing everything that they are involved in and asks if it's an option to table the process for
a bit. Seydell Johnson responds that the City Council directed that we keep the numbers between
now and the end of the City Park Pool project.
Commissioner Stanton thanks Dir. Seydell Johnson, the City Council, and the consultants for the
presentation at the Sept 5 Council meeting. Stanton says that presentation was very interesting
and helped hm to understand the project a lot more in the context of City Park Pool.
Commissioner Morelli says that there are lots of Parks and Rec events happening and asks if it is
possible to include as part of the packet, what events are relevant to the Commission for the next
month. Dir. Seydell Johnson replies that there is a list of events in the staff report and says that
Rec staff could mark the events that could be good for the Commission to attend. Supt. Baird
says that historically, tree plantings have not been included on the staff report, but that if desired
could be included.
Commissioner Morelli says that he has noticed at the dog park a QR code to register your dog
online, as well as the option to pay for dog park admission through the city parking app. Dir.
Seydell Johnson says that the move to paying through the app came about because the cash box
at the dog park was getting broken into often.
Commissioner Morelli details having gone through City Park to count the facilities. Morelli had
noticed that the park bathrooms are locked a lot of the time and was unsure if there are certain
hours of operation. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that is a new electric lock system which is
supposed to open them in the opening and close them at night, which has been great as a staff
member used to have to drive around every morning and night to open and the close the
restrooms. An issue has risen where in certain parks, members of the public have figured out
how to lock them mid -day, or they lock them accidently when leaving. Seydell Johnson explains
that unless someone calls the department to say that the restroom has been locked mid -day, staff
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 9 of 12
don't know to go out and unlock it. Supt. Baird adds that staff are in the process of fixing that
problem piece, but that can cost several thousand dollars for each door to change the system to
work differently. Baird says that the department is one of the first ones anywhere to use this kind
of system for outdoor restrooms in a recreation setting, explaining that it's good to be the first but
that it can come with growing pains. Baird details another problem found, where especially
during the recent summer, excessive heat can overheat and blank the system, requiring staff to go
in and reset it. Baird adds that staff are problem solving the issue, but that it can be difficult
when the restroom structures are not heated/cooled. Seydell Johnson says that if a restroom is
vandalized, it's not uncommon for staff to keep the restroom locked for a day until it can be
repaired/cleaned.
Commissioner Morelli leaves the meeting at 6:05 p.m.
Commissioner Serenda refers to a prior Commission meeting when City Councilor, Megan Alter
gave a presentation on the City's Strategic Plan 2023-2028. Serenda recalls seeing the Iowa
River mentioned on a slide and investigated it, seeing that there was a bullet point under the
economy strategies about strengthening the Iowa Rivers role as a signature Community amenity
and tourism generator and is curious if that would involve Parks and Recreation and how it
would contribute to the strategic point. Dir. Seydel I Johnson says that immediately following the
Strategic Plan being enacted by the Council, it was used as a guiding force for the large grant
applicant, done alongside Coralville and the County. Unfortunately, the grant was not awarded,
but it did look at several additions to the river area including multiple boat ramps, the skate park
& roller area, and Riverside Festival stage which are still being funded with the 2 boat ramps
being included in the CIP. Because these are part of the strategic plan, funding will be looked for
in other grant applications.
Commissioner McPherson says that there are lots of wonderful events for Parks and Rec and
wondering if there can be signage promoting the events in the facilities, for folks who don't use
their computers, phones, or emails. McPherson says that consistent branding can help associate
the events with the department, recalling Prairie Lights' Writer's Workshop Readings which
have the layout and picture of the presenter to be instantly recognized as signage for a reading.
McPherson says that adding a bulletin board to the lobby can help bring awareness to the events
for both adults and youth. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that Michelle W iegand of Recreation staff
works on that exactly and recommends McPherson to look over the bulletin board in the lobby at
the end of the hall. Seydell Johnson says staff would love to hear that feedback on material
moving forward.
Commissioner McPherson says that she had spoken with an African American person who was a
swimmer, asking if he had been using the RAL Rec Center Pool. This person had said he won't
use it on general principle because they demand an ID Card and back in the day this was not a
requirement. He felt that it felt it was un-community like to have to present an ID card to get into
the Parks and Rec just as a public library does not require an ID to enter the library but only to
check out material. He said that as a child during swim -meets he would see homeless people
taking showers and now as an adult sees that as a good thing. McPherson says that as a public
place, anyone should be able to at least enter, but questions if this is due to security. Dir. Seydell
Johnson explains the while a person would have to register to receive a Facility Pass used for
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 10 of 12
entrance, there is not fee attached with obtaining a Facility Pass. Seydell Johnson says that is part
of the overall security and safety of the facility, knowing who is in the building, and if there is a
safety need, staff can know how many people are present in the building. Seydell Johnson adds
that when there are patron issues, from minor -to -major, it is very useful to have the names and
pictures of patrons. Seydell Johnson explains that this process was in place as long as she has
been working for the department, so she is not exactly sure of what originally prompted/started
the process. McPherson says that this person said he was demanded to present two forms of ID
and asks if this is not the case anymore. Admin Coordinator Gotera says that he had been
working for Recreation customer service since at least early 2019 so while the process may have
been different at some point earlier, he can give input for recent years. Gotera says that he can
only think of staff asking for an ID to ensure that information like someone's name is entered
accurately, but by no means is an ID required to be registered. McPherson asks if a home address
is required for registry. Gotera explains that a home address is required to complete the
registration process to get a Facility Pass, but proof of an address (i.e., Driver's License, Utility
Bill, Official Mail) is not required whatsoever. Gotera adds that patrons who are unhoused are
allowed to use the shelter house as a stand-in address and that many unhoused individuals use the
facility everyday whether to take a shower, use the gymnasium/fitness room, or just sit in the
lobby.
Commissioner Broege says that he participates in a soccer club in the community, which
commonly use the University of Iowa soccer fields through reservation but that to his
understanding, the Kicker's field is generally for private use for the Kicker's group. Broege
understands that there is field maintenance so it might not be ideal for having lots of people
tearing up the field but is curious if there is any kind of park or land that could be allotted
towards a public space that be used for soccer that is not controlled by the University of Iowa or
controlled mainly by Iowa City Kickers. Dir. Seydell Johnson clarifies that the Kicker's field is
not controlled by Iowa City Kickers but that it is used a lot by the partner group. Seydell
Johnson says that the Kicker's field is available for private rental but that is it just not available
very often between Iowa City Kickers and other rentals. Seydell Johnson adds that there are large
groups that play in Wetherby Park, while not an official field, has soccer poles up. Seydell
Johnson says that there are many who play in the open field at Happy Hollow Park for pickup
games, it is can not be officially reserved. Supt. Baird adds that there are permeant goals with no
nets up at Fair Meadows Park that can be used informally for pickup games.
Vice -Chair Moore asks about the Riverside Crossing Park Stage and asks if it's a space that
bands can use. Dir. Seydell Johnson confirms that that was the plan, and that there was a kickoff
event when the park opened, included a large concert. Unfortunately, the concert got rained out
and was soon followed COVID-19, causing the marketing for the venue space to not be as
successful as desired. Seydell Johnsons confirms that there have been some initial talks with the
Summer of the Arts for using the space as a concert venue in years to come. Seydell Johnson
adds the factor that with the trees in the park still young, there is little shade.
Vice -Chair Moore says in regard to the City Park Pool Focus Groups, that there has been many
voices heard from those who use the pool but wants to ensure that voices are heard from those
that don't use the pool due to barriers, such as caretakers of those with disabilities and it's not
accessible, or parents of small children who are too busy to get out to the pool or the focus
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 11 of 12
groups. Dir. Seydell Johnson says that staff are looking to have a focus group for caretakers and
to provide child-care for the focus groups, to remove as many barriers as possible for giving
input. Chair Hachtman asks when further details be known regarding the City Park Pool project.
Dir. Seydell Johnson responds that still will be meeting with the consultants next week to have
future dates nailed down. Hachtman asks if it is possible for the commission to be told when that
information is decided. Seydell Johnson says that can be arranged.
Chairman Hachtman calls the meeting to adjourn at 6:19 p.m.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
September 13, 2023
Page 12 of 12
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
NAME
en
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
TERM
N
"
O�
o
7
.
00
00
N
O
7
.
N
,
O,
o
-
enEXPIRES
O
Aaron
12/31/24
*
*
*
*
*
*
X
NM
X
X
X
Broe e
Missie
12/31/25
X
X
NM
X
O/E
LQ
X
X
NM
O/E
X
X
Forbes
Alex
12/31/24
X
X
NM
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
X
X
X
Hachtman
Rachel
12/31/26
*
*
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
X
X
X
McPherson
Doloris
12/31/26
*
*
*
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
*
*
X
Mixon
Connie
12/31/25
X
X
NM
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
O/E
X
X
Moore
Brian
12/31/25
X
X
NM
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
X
X
X
Morelli
Melissa
12/31/23
X
X
NM
X
X
LQ
X
X
NM
X
X
X
Serenda
Alex
12/31/23
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
X
X
Stanton
KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting
LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member during this meeting
Item Number: 5.e.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Planning & Zoning Commission: August 16 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Planning & Zoning Commission: August 16 [See Recommendation]
r
�`„® CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 7, 2023
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its August 16, 2023 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ23-0006, an application to
designate 715 North Dodge Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark.
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
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 16, 2023-6:OOPM— FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Scott
Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Cecile Kuenzli, Ginalie Swaim, Kevin Boyd, Susan Shullaw, Karen
Kubby, Regina Bailey Jim Throgmorton, Sharon DeGraw, Linda
McGuire, Jared Knote
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends approval of REZ23-0006, an application to
designate 715 North Dodge Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark.
By a vote of 6-1 (Padron dissenting) the Commission recommends deferral of REZ23-0005 until
the second meeting in October.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM and introduced new Commission member
Quellhorst.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
Cecile Kuenzli (705 S. Summit St.) has served two terms as the first president of the Longfellow
Neighborhood Association and recently completed two terms on the Historic Preservation
Commission. In reference to the proposed zoning amendment changes, she has a question. In
the last 20 years, the City has supported neighborhood stabilization programs such as the
UniverCity program and create a design review process for new infill properties. Kuenzli is
wondering why the plan that P&Z voted on August 2 was approved after one reading without
consultation or communication or input from neighborhood associations or the Historic
Preservation Commission, because those amendments affect particularly the older
neighborhoods and everyone in these older neighborhoods completely, but yet there was no
information about it. Kuenzli stated also the proposed zoning amendments speak very little to
historic districts and what the impact on them might be from these zoning changes. To quote
Marla Svensson, who was hired by Iowa City several times to survey neighborhoods to see if
they qualified to become designated historic districts, "historic preservation begins with zoning.
You don't have anything without that". So again, Kuenzli's question is why the Historic
Preservation Commission wasn't asked for input or consultation and why were none of the
neighborhood associations informed either.
Hensch thanked Kuenzli for her comments and noted the Commission could only take comments
and not answer questions at this time and directed her to contact staff.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 2 of 18
{Padron joined the meeting}
REZONING ITEMS:
CASE NO. REZ23-0006:
Location: 715 N. Dodge Street
An application for a rezoning from Medium Density Single -Family Residential with a Historic
District Overlay (OHD/RS-8) to OHD/RS-8 to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic
Landmark.
Russett began the staff report showing a map of the location of the property. This property is
already within a Historic District and is a contributing property to the Brown Street Historic
District. It is zoned RS-8 with a Historic District Overlay. This property is being proposed as a
Local Historic Landmark because it was the original location of the Emma Goldman Clinic.
Russett showed some pictures of the property from the 1970s when the property was operating
as the Emma Goldman Clinic. She explained that even though the property is already protected
because it's within a local Historic District, the purpose of this landmark designation is to share
the story of feminist healthcare and the history of the Emma Goldman Clinic as they are going to
be celebrating a 50th anniversary this year. The home is a craftsman style catalog home and
again is a contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District. Russett reiterated this
designation relates to the mid-70s feminist healthcare movement in the United States as it was
the fourth feminist healthcare clinic in the nation, the first three were located in California.
The current zoning designation is RS-8 with a Historic District Overlay and the proposed zoning
is RS-8 with a Historic District Overlay so the zoning is not changing. The Commission's role in
this review is to demonstrate that a landmark designation is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. Russett explained there are goals and objectives within the Central District Plan and within
the Historic Preservation Plan that speak to the importance of protecting historic buildings,
identifying historic resources significant to the community's past, and identifying and pursuing
landmark designations for those properties.
Staff did receive two pieces of late correspondence related to this request, both in support of the
landmark designation. Russett shared those with the Commission members.
Staff recommends approval of REZ23-0006, an application to designate 715 North Dodge Street
as an Iowa City Historic Landmark.
Russett noted last week at the Historic Preservation Commission meeting they unanimously
recommended approval of this landmark designation so after the Planning and Zoning
Commission makes its recommendation tonight it will move forward to City Council.
Quellhorst asked what the practical difference between a Historic District Overlay and
designation as a Historic Landmark is and does that impose additional obligations on the owner
of the property or what's the practical impact of that classification. Russett explained because
this is a contributing property in the Brown Street Historic District there is no difference in how
the building is regulated in terms of exterior modifications, those are the same with the landmark
designation and they would be required as they are today to go through historic review for
exterior modifications and they would be subject to the same guidelines that the property is
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 3 of 18
today, the landmark designation is largely symbolic
Hensch opened the public hearing
Ginalie Swaim (Iowa City) started this is a big thing to her, it is symbolic but more than that it is
really historically significant as a local example, and a midwestern example, of an enormous
movement in American social culture and healthcare. In the early 1970s there was a whole crop
of nonprofits that sprung up in Iowa City dealing with teenagers, with medical care and many
other things, it was a very rich and fertile and vital time. Emma Goldman was one of the major
movers in that and one thing that often alerts preservation to people is when a building is really
the crux of local history and helps tell a local story and how it fits into a national context. Here is
a very local story and many may have had experiences here and know about the excellent care
and the pioneering spirit of this entity, but it fits into this national movement of a whole new way
of delivering healthcare, and particularly women's healthcare. Swaim is excited about it receiving
a landmark designation, which, besides a symbolic sense of it, it shows a special honor and
recognition and significance of an individual building that really says something about the
community and about the national history.
Kevin Boyd (Iowa City) is the former chair of the Historic Preservation Commission but is no
longer on the Commission. At his last meeting in June, he talked about the importance of telling
a more full history of Iowa City and making sure that they preserve and share parts of Iowa City's
history that reflect the values and the community as it is today. One of the historic preservation
work plan goals is identifying opportunities to highlight Iowa City's history as a leader on social
justice, racial equity and human rights and preserve the stories and structures that helped to
define that history. This nomination fits that objective as well as the others that have been
highlighted. This is a project that got started before he left the Commission, it's an opportunity to
add a unique story. The story of these founders, radical college age feminist badasses, who 50
years ago this month were preparing to open the Emma Goldman Clinic to shift the power
dynamic in healthcare. As Boyd researched the history of the Emma Goldman Clinic for this
project, he was really in awe of these founders and what they were able to accomplish together
and how radical it really was, and yet how relevant that this fight for women's healthcare remains
today. These founders' story, along with the property at 715 North Dodge, which is now a
residential home again, is so much a part of the history and deserves to be among the properties
listed on the list of Iowa City local landmarks. Boyd urges the Commission to support this
landmark nomination. He also wants to thank the property owners, Jennifer and Benton for their
open mindedness and supportive sharing their property's history.
Susan Shuliaw (Iowa City) is representing the Northside Neighborhood Association Steering
Committee and they heartily endorse this recommendation and want to thank both the Historic
Preservation Commission, this Commission and all those involved in the nomination. They are
extremely proud that this landmark is located on the Northside and are very pleased that the
property owners also joined in endorsing this recommendation. Shullaw stated it's indeed a
major piece of history and they hope that people can remember it for many decades to come.
Karen Kubby (Iowa City) lives in the Mark Twain neighborhood and shares a lot of history with
the Emma Goldman Clinic. She started volunteering there in 1983 when there were threats of fire
bombings. That was a time when the anti -choice community was not interested in hurting people
but destroying property and disrupting the provision of services in that way, so as a younger
woman she would stay up all night at the clinic and move around a lot so they could see that
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 4 of 18
there were people inside. The Clinic is really at this point a very important landmark nationally
because now it is the oldest feminist clinic in the country. Some of those California clinics are no
longer providing services. There is that nexus between the local importance of this form of
healthcare and the specifics of the organization that is not only a healthcare provider, but a
public educator, and needs to do a lot of political education as well. Kubby was very privileged to
be the director there for 10 years and stated there's going to be a reunion in September with
many community events available (panel discussions and movies at Film Scene). The property
owners are supporting this and it clearly meets the criteria that the City has outlined for such a
designation so she hope this Commission will unanimously and heartfeltly support this
nomination.
Regina Bailey (Iowa City) lives in the Goosetown neighborhood and as Boyd and Kubby
mentioned the Clinic is getting ready to celebrate its 50th anniversary which will happen over
Labor Day weekend. Kubby mentioned some public events and one of them will be a movie at
Film Scene, a documentary, at 3:30 on Sunday afternoon. It's called From One Place to Another
and it was made at the 20th anniversary and talks about an organization that starts out as a
collective. Bailey noted they are all probably very familiar with boards of directors of that kind of
organizational structure but think about people getting together, meeting and consensus -based
decision making to start a clinic. They started this shortly after Roe v Wade in 1973 and in
September they opened up the Clinic. With that collective spirit of meetings and getting together
in nine months they launched the fourth feminist clinic in the country so it's real notable history.
Staff mentioned that it's symbolic, but as Swaim says it's more than symbolic, it tells an important
story about feminist healthcare and about women doing something because women's history
weren't the stories that they heard growing up. Iowa City can join together and tell this story by
designating this landmark.
Jim Throamorton (Iowa City) has lived in the Northside Neighborhood for 28 years and lives
about a block and a half away from this building. He never had any idea that the Emma Goldman
Clinic started in that particular building just down the alley from where he lives. It was a real treat
to learn about it and discover that these young women got together back then to create this
Clinic and to do what they did. Throgmorton also discovered that three Molotov cocktails were
thrown at the building at one time, so it shows the power of stories. He stated it's a real joy to be
here and support this, he wanted to praise Kevin Boyd for proposing the idea and to praise the
owners, Jennifer and Benton, for enthusiastically supporting the idea. He wants to praise the
Historic Preservation Commission, and the planning staff for proposing it.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Elliott moved to recommend approval of REZ23-0006, an application to designate 715
North Dodge Street as an Iowa City Historic Landmark.
Craig seconded the motion.
Elliott echoed what everybody who came to the podium said and she appreciates them coming
up and sharing the history and the support.
Craig noted she came to Iowa City in 1970 and her high school counselor cried because she was
coming to this den of iniquity. She wanted her to go to a Christian girls school in Missouri that
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 5 of 18
had 300 people, all women. Anyway, she loves Iowa City for many, many reasons and the
Emma Goldman Clinic is one of them.
Townsend strongly support this but noted on the documentation regarding the landmark
designations it says that the staff does not find that there is enough information to consider the
property meeting criterion F at this time, F is regarding information important to history, why
would that not be. Russett explained that's a criteria that the Historic Preservation Commission
evaluates and determined that F didn't apply because typically F applies to things that are
archaeologically or prehistoric significant.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
CASE NO. REZ23-0005:
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning to reduce the maximum allowable height in
the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone from 35-feet to 27-feet.
Russett stated this is a proposed amendment to the zoning code that started originally with a
meeting with representatives of the Northside Neighborhood. Staff met with them several weeks
ago when they reached out regarding a change that they would like to see in the RNS-12 zone to
reduce the maximum allowable height in that zone. Staff had recommended that they petition
City Council with that proposed change, which they did, and at the June 6 work session City
Council directed staff to prioritize the review of the proposed change. Staffs understanding of
this change was it to be a reduction of the maximum allowable height from 35-feet to 27-feet in
the RNS-12 zone.
Some background on the RNS-12 zone, it was created in 1992 when there was a project that
was proposed to add more than one residential structure to a single lot in the RM-12 zone.
Owners of nearby properties petition City Council due to concerns that allowing more than one
structure per lot in the RM-12 zone would be out of character with the existing neighborhood. In
1993, the City Council adopted the RNS-12 zone to preserve the single-family character of the
neighborhood and prevent new multifamily residential development. In addition to the creation of
that new zoning district, there were also several map amendments that started in 1993. Russett
shared a map showing all the properties that were zoned from a multifamily zoning designation,
whether it was RM-12 or RNC-20 to the RNS-12 zoning designation. The last map amendment
was to a portion of South Governor where there was a proposal to change the zoning from RNS-
12 to RS-8, which was approved by City Council.
In terms of the current regulations, all the City's single-family and multifamily residential zones
have a maximum height limit of 35 feet. The form -based zones do regulate height differently, but
single-family and multifamily residential zones have a maximum height of 35 feet. The RNS-12
Zone allows single family detached units with duplexes allowed midblock duplexes and duplexes
on corner lots. It also allows daycares, religious institutions and educational facilities. It does not
allow new multifamily uses and the maximum height is 35 feet. Russett showed a map of the
properties that are zoned RNS-12 and pointed out the Northside Neighborhood Association
boundary.
Russett also talked about the Historic and Conservation District overlay zones noting properties
within those overlay zones require additional review. Properties are subject to the guidelines
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 6 of 18
adopted in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook and the maximum allowable height
within these overlay zones is 35 feet just as it is in the base zoning district of RNS-12. However,
the handbook does include specific guidelines related to height and mass. Specifically, it states
that new structures must be one and a half or two stories in height in the Northside
Neighborhood. New construction and demolitions must be reviewed and approved by the Historic
Preservation Commission and with new construction, it's reviewed based on the surrounding
neighborhood context, and the mass and scale of adjacent buildings. Demolition in historic
districts is only considered where the building is structurally unsound or irretrievable, so very
uncommon. The overlay zones provide a large degree of protection from future construction,
demolition and development changes.
Russett shared a table showing the breakdown of the properties that are zoned RNS-12 and
whether or not they're located within a historic district or a conservation district overlay. Citywide
75% of the RNS zoned properties are located within either an historic or conservation district
overlay and within the Northside Neighborhood 85% of the properties are within historic or
conservation district overlay. Staff note that importance because there are additional rules and
processes which add a large degree of protection for those properties. Staff also reviewed
demolition permits in the RNS-12 zones since 1992 and there have been 17 demolitions within
RNS-12 zone, an average of one demolition every two years over the past 31 years. The data
suggests that redevelopment pressure in RNS-12 zones has decreased over time and that may
in part be due to the fact that 75% of the properties are either in a historic or conservation district
which would restrict demolitions. Staff also looked at conversions because it seems to be a
concern of the residents of the Northside Neighborhood. Since 1992 there have been 82
conversions from single-family to duplex or duplex to single-family City wide, 38% are single-
family to duplex and 62% are duplex to single-family. This data shows that more of the
conversion is from duplex to single-family than the other way around. For property zoned RNS-
12 there were 10 conversions from single-family to duplex or duplex to single-family. 70% of
them were from duplexes to single-family and again, Russett stated the RNS-12 zone does not
allow conversions to new multifamily. Russett stated even though staff looked at conversions,
height limits will have no impact on future conversions within this zone since conversions are
dealing with existing structures and not new structures.
Staff also did some field work and until they received the recent correspondence yesterday from
the neighborhood association, they weren't aware that the Northside Neighborhoods intent was
to only apply the 27-foot requirement to new buildings, specifically new single-family and duplex
uses. Based on Council's direction staff was concerned with the creation of non -conforming
structures and discussed this with the Northside representatives. Due to concerns about
creating non -conforming situations staff estimated building height using the best tool that they
had available and Russett shared a table showing the results of that work. Based on the
estimate, some buildings may become non -conforming, however if the Northside Neighborhood
Association wishes to only apply the height standard of 27-foot to new buildings the non-
conforming analysis becomes irrelevant and won't apply to existing structures.
In terms of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan does include a
land use designation for single-family residential stabilization, with the description of preserving
single-family residential character, and preventing further densification and conversion of single-
family residences to multifamily. The land use designation focuses on housing types and density
rather than the scale of development. It maintains single-family neighborhoods and restricts the
number of units by limiting housing types. Russett reiterated in all single-family residential zones
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 7 of 18
the maximum height limit is 35 feet so there's been some determination that this maximum
ensures a complimentary scale within single-family neighborhoods. In terms of staffs
conclusions, again 75% of the properties zoned RNS-12 are located within a historic or
conservation district, which requires additional review processes to ensure that new structures
are not out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood. Based on the demolition data,
redevelopment pressure is limited and staff concluded based on non -conforming situations,
however that may no longer apply as this is only applying to new structures. Again, the purpose
of the RNS-12 zone is to maintain a single-family character which has been interpreted as
preserving single-family uses and preventing new multifamily uses. Height limits don't help
preserve single-family uses or further the intent of the zone and the current height limits are
consistent with other single-family residential zones and therefore consistent with the purpose of
the RNS zone to maintain that predominantly single-family character.
Staff did receive some additional correspondence yesterday from the Northside Neighborhood
Association. They noted in the correspondence that they meant for the change to only apply to
new construction and only single-family and duplex dwellings. Staff hasn't had much time to fully
analyze this as they just received the correspondence yesterday but do have some initial
concerns to highlight. First, if the reduced height limit only applies to new construction, it would
address the concerns related to non -conforming situations, so that's a good thing. The concern is
that the RNS-12 zone allows other uses besides just single-family and duplex structures, such as
daycare uses and religious institutions. If the purpose of height regulations is to promote
reasonable building scale and relationship between buildings, all land uses should be considered
when establishing a height limit. Also, if the maximum allowable height varies between uses, a
governmental purpose for that variation would need to be established. The second concern is
complexity and challenges with implementation. If a governmental purpose could be identified for
having different regulations for different uses, the code becomes even more complicated and
difficult to administer. It not only would have different height requirements for different uses but
uses that would typically be subject to non -conforming provisions would no longer be subject to
them because existing structures would remain conforming. Lastly, regarding affordability, the
Northside Neighborhood document states that reducing the maximum height would reduce the
pressure to demolish older and currently very affordable owner -occupied structures. Height
regulations don't impact the balance of owner and renter properties. Zoning codes do not
regulate whether structures are owned or rented. Russett also noted that in their correspondence
the Neighborhood Association has requested that this item be deferred.
Staff has received two additional pieces of late correspondence which she shared with the
Commissioners via email and handed out this evening, both are in support of the Northside
Neighborhood's proposal in their request.
Staff does not recommend approval of REZ23-0005, a proposal to change the maximum
allowable building height from 35-feet to 27-feet in the Neighborhood Residential Stabilization
(RNS-12) zone. Also, staff has not identified a governmental purpose for the proposal for this
only to apply to new structures and to only single-family and duplex uses. If the Commission
wants to recommend approval, they will need to identify what that governmental purpose is
because it is regulating height differently for different uses. Staff would also not recommend
approval of a proposed change to the maximum allowable building height for new single-family
and duplex structures in the RNS-12 zone to 27-feet.
In terms of next steps, after a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission this
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 8 of 18
would go before City Council.
Hensch asked if the request for deferral had a particular reason requested other than the obvious
to give staff time to come up with a governmental purpose and application of that. Russett replied
she believes they wanted staff to change their analysis and to reflect on their request that it is
new construction only.
Hensch noted the 35-foot limit would only apply to new construction future requests, which won't
result in any non -conforming status of existing buildings. Russett confirmed that was correct.
Hensch noted in the South District, the form -based code that they previously passed, the height
limit for that is 27 feet, correct. Russett explained the limit there is two and a half stories but
there's also a feet maximum as well.
Hensch stated regarding the historic district and conservation district height limits, the limit is 35-
feet but the handbook guidelines they want to have one or two stories for new construction and
that seems incongruent. Has there ever been thoughts about making those two things match up
better. Russett stated no because a guideline clearly carries no force of law, it's just a
recommendation and within the zoning code 35-feet is the maximum. There are other
requirements in the zoning code such as maximum density, for example, but each property isn't
always going to get to that maximum density, that's why it's maximum, it's just the cap.
Hensch noted it seems that the 35-foot limitation mainly was instituted to address grade issues
on site. Russett replied that's what the former senior planner noted in his correspondence, the
City has had this 35-foot height limit since the 1930s. She noted walk -outs may have not been a
popular housing style in the 1930s but that 35-foot maximum has been around for decades.
Hensch asked in the RNS-12 zoning areas, how are those heights determined because it doesn't
include steeples or spires. Russett explained typically there's an average grade that would be
calculated based on elevations five feet from the proposed structure. They calculate an average
grade and then measure from that all the way up to the midpoint of the roof, and in most roof
types that would be the midpoint between the eaves and the peak.
Quellhorst noted one of the Association's concerns is that the Historic Preservation handbook is
just guidelines and are not binding, so he is curious to know what the process is for deviating
from those guidelines and how often that happens. Russett stated while they are guidelines, the
language in the guidelines is pretty strong, they use words like shall and must, and the guidelines
are also adopted by reference within the zoning code. The guidelines include exceptions that can
be considered for certain proposals within historic districts so it could be possible that the Historic
Preservation Commission maybe would allow something more than two and a half stories based
on the building type proposed. However, based on how the guidelines are implemented, and the
Historic Preservation Program, the guidelines carry a lot of weight and are used heavily in the
evaluation of the proposals for new construction, demolition or even just exterior modifications to
buildings. The decision to deviate from the guidelines is determined by the Historic Preservation
Commission.
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 9 of 18
Quellhorst asked if Russett is aware of any incidents where the Commission approved a
substantial deviation from the guidelines. Russett explained there's exceptions within the
guidelines that the Historic Preservation Commission can consider so they are limited to the
exceptions outlined in the in the guidelines.
Quellhorst noted one of the Association's main concerns is the potential to build incongruent
really tall homes and in the analysis of structures that are 27-feet currently, is there any sense of
how many of those are single-family homes. Russett is not sure but noted that could be
determined. He asked how many existing single-family homes are in the conservation overlay
that exceed 27-feet. Again, Russett is not sure but could find out.
Elliott noted one of the issues is the different heights for different uses, could there just be a rule
that says 27-feet is the maximum height in RNS-12 and not specify the use, and what would be
the implications of doing that. Russett said yes, they could implement that rule, and that was
staffs original concern, because they thought the original request was for a 27-foot requirement,
and the concern would be the creation of non -conforming situations. Elliott asked if the height
requirement was just for new buildings, what would be the concern. Russett stated then the
concern is related to the complexity of how they regulate height and it only applying to new
structures and only applying at certain points in time, if the ordinance is adopted that new
structures are now 27-feet then previous ones would be conforming. It gets trickier to implement.
Padron noted some RNS-12 could be churches so someone could build a church but if they say
no more than 27-feet for everybody then the church would not be able to be taller than 27-feet.
Russett confirmed that was correct.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Susan Shull aw spoke again as a member of the steering committee of the Northside
Neighborhood Association. She thanked everyone for taking some time in reading their initial
proposal but just wanted to refresh their memories of some of the main points. The initial
proposal had made clear that this was for new residential structures, this is really about new infill
in RNS-12 districts, and specifically the Northside, which they really support as long as that infill
feels appropriate, and particularly today when this is a hot topic for all when it can create
affordable housing. However, they also want to preserve and strengthen the character of these
neighborhoods and to quote the Plans "infill development that is compatible and complimentary
to surrounding neighborhood and creates a healthy balance of rental and owner -occupied
housing in all neighborhoods". Shullaw showed images of the beautiful structures in the
Northside and addressed their first objection to the 35-foot height. It was their understanding
that this height limit was initially designed for structures on slopes and for walkout basements,
but there are a few, if any, sloping lots in the Northside. This and the other RNS-12 districts are
in older and flatter areas of town, so it's a moot point and raises the question of why 35-feet is
allowed in these neighborhoods. They believe that this negatively impacts affordable housing
because it gives an incentive to developers to convert existing single-family structures and
demolish them and replace them with larger structures with larger occupants. They've seen this
happening before and have some examples in the Northside of smaller, older houses being
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 10 of 18
replaced with large single-family unable to sell and they become rentals. They are concerned
about that development pressure. Shullaw acknowledged even though it's true what staff found
in their research about the number of demolitions that have happened in recent years, she stated
they all know that past performance is not always a predictor of what happens in the future. So
that's a concern for them. Shullaw, also reiterated some points they've made about driving up
property values and making these neighborhoods less affordable. They believe that the 35-foot
height thwarts the purpose of the zoning, which is to stabilize existing residential neighborhoods
and to promote a reasonable building scale and relationship between buildings and provide
options. She showed an illustration of a very tall building placed next to a very short building in
the Northside. She noted an example of a structure that doesn't really allow for light and air
between buildings. They have done some research on the Northside and its clear buildings in the
Northside are overwhelmingly one and a half, two, and two and a half stories, they couldn't find
any three story buildings on the Northside, and few of the buildings approach that 35-foot limit.
Therefore, 35-foot buildings would be an aberration in this part of town and out of character of
the neighborhood. It may also make the neighborhood less attractive at a time when the City is
hoping to bring more people in and to patronize schools like Horace Mann. Shullaw stated they
also believe that this 35-foot height limit in new construction of residential violates many of what
the City is saying in its Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Plan about wanting to preserve
central neighborhoods and the character of those neighborhoods.
Jim Throgmorton stated he wanted to focus attention on the staffs report and their response to it
because they have several concerns. The report makes a few key mistakes and misjudgments
which leads to inappropriate conclusions. First, the Northside Neighborhood Association did not
petition the City Council to consider reducing the maximum building heights in the RNS-12 zone
from 35-feet to 27-feet. Those numbers are all correct, but that's not exactly what they petitioned.
Their requests focused exclusively on reducing the maximum allowable height for single-family
and duplex residential structures in that zone. Had the staff invited them to consult before writing
their report this distinction could have been clarified and any errors corrected. Second influenced
by this error, the staff reports that 117 or more properties currently exceed the proposed 27-foot
height limit. They correctly observed there are 500 properties in the RNS-12 districts, 313 of
which are within the Northside, but instead of using the total numbers when determining how
many properties currently exceed the proposed height limit, staff should have used the number
of single-family and duplex properties when counting. In their petition the Northside
Neighborhood Association reported that only 188 of the 313 parcels located in the Northside are
occupied by single-family structures, two family conversions or duplexes. Even a three, four and
five family conversions are included. None of the 213, that is 188 plus 25, structures are greater
than two and a half stories, so in their judgment, the non-conformance issue goes away.
Throgmorton acknowledged staff presented some new information tonight, which they would
want to take into account and might influence the collective judgment about what to do. He also
wanted to note that there's a property inventory viewer available through the City Assessor's
office that he has been going through in great detail and it identifies every single-family/owner-
occupied property in the Northside Neighborhood and other parts of the City. The odd thing is it
identifies them as single-family/owner-occupied when a large proportion of them are not
occupied by owners but are occupied by renters, it's really quite puzzling. Third, the staff
estimated building heights using 2021 pictometry data from Connect Explorer, which
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 11 of 18
Throgmorton admitted he has no experience with whatsoever, but volunteers from the Northside
actually measured the taller buildings. They walked or biked by every property in all the RNS-12
zones, including those outside of the Northside and identified the taller houses and duplexes.
After measuring some apartment buildings for comparison's sake, they then went back to the
taller buildings with a laser measure and determined the height from the grade to the midpoint of
the roof pitch. These volunteers knocked on the door of each house to tell residents the
volunteers were doing research on houses in the neighborhood and asked if they could take
some measurements. Every resident they asked granted permission. The volunteers then placed
the laser device next to the house to obtain accurate measurements. Fourth, the staff
emphasizes that 85% of all properties in the Northside are located in historic and conservation
overlay zones and the guidelines in the Historic Preservation Handbook state that "new
structures must be one and a half or two stories in height". Throgmorton emphasized however,
that these guidelines do not have the force of the zoning code which is what matters when it
comes to heights. He also noted it is important for the guidelines and zoning law to be consistent
with one another to avoid having two different height limits in the same zone. Fifth, the staff
reports there have been only 17 residential demolitions in the RNS-12 zones over the past 30
years. He acknowledged that is correct, however 14 of those structures were single-family and
14 out of 151 is 10% of the neighborhood's current stock of single-family properties. Moreover,
the relative paucity of demolitions does not necessarily reveal a lack of development pressure.
Over the years 25 properties have been converted from single-family to three, four or five family
structures. The staff also emphasizes that the Historic Preservation Handbook allows demolitions
only when a building is structurally unsound and irretrievable. Years of neglect and disinvestment
can make a building unsound and irretrievable and the staff essentially dismisses the concern for
the small, inexpensive, single-family structures located in the southeastern part of the Northside
Neighborhood, ones that are outside of the historic preservation and conservation districts. Even
more important, the past does not necessarily predict the future, relying too heavily on past
trends is like looking in the rearview mirror to know where you are headed. Just two weeks ago,
this Commission approved staff proposed amendments to the zoning code which are explicitly
designed to increase the supply of housing by making it easier and more profitable to build new
structures. So, if in the past there's not been a large amount of development pressure, this
Commission just voted to increase the pressure and need to take that into account. Throgmorton
noted it is especially important to look at the mix of owners of the 363 residential properties
located in the Northside Neighborhoods in RNS-12 district, plus the part that extends out on the
southeastern part of the Northside. 42% are owned by 66 or more limited liability companies and
other incorporated entities. One LLC owns 13% of the 363 residential properties. One family
owns at least 17 of the RNS-12 residential properties and a third entity owns another 16.
Together these three owners possess 23% of all the residential properties in the Northside areas
RNS-12 district and they are likely to have considerable influence over what gets repaired, what
gets demolished and what gets built in the RNS-12 districts. The next point, sixth, is the staff
indicates it is not aware of any evidence that the proposed height limitation would increase
housing affordability, the Northside Association never ever said it would, what they did say is that
reducing the maximum permitted height of new single-family and duplex structures would reduce
the pressure to demolish older and currently very affordable owner -occupied structures. A new
structure will be far less affordable than an existing structure. Seventh, the staff states that the
existing 35-foot maximum height is consistent with all single family and multifamily residential
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 12 of 18
zones in Iowa City. This is not true. The form -based code for the South District limits heights to
two and a half stories, or 30-feet at the peak of the roof, essentially 27-feet to the midpoint of a
sloped roof, which is what they're asking for. Staff states "it has already been determined that
35-feet is a height that ensures a complimentary scale for the RNS-12 district", they disagree.
The RNS-12 zone was specifically drafted to preserve the existing single-family character of
certain neighborhoods. Section 14-2A-1 E further stipulates that the maximum height standards in
the code are intended to "discourage buildings that visually dominate other buildings in the
vicinity". The current 35-foot height limit encourages redevelopment without a scale building that
can have harmful effects on neighboring properties. It therefore undermines the purpose of the
RNS-12 zone. Permitting new infill structures at that height would make it more difficult for RNS-
12 neighborhoods to retain a healthy balance of affordable rental and owner -occupied housing
without compromising the character of the neighborhoods. It goes to the heart of the purpose of
the RNS-12 district. Given these facts, Throgmorton stated the Northside Neighborhood
Association is asking the Commission to approve the request to reduce the maximum permitted
height of single-family and duplex structures from 35-feet to 27-feet. However, if the Commission
feels uncertain at this very moment, they urge them to defer voting to instruct staff to correct its
report and to finish considering this proposal at the next meeting or maybe the one after that.
Throgmorton stated the Northside Neighborhood Association would be eager to work with staff to
ensure that both parties agree about the fact for that matter.
Sharon DeGraw (Iowa City) stated in response to the height change request staff expressed
concerned about creating non -conforming situations. DeGraw shared some images to illustrate
why they believe non-conformance is not an issue. The device that they used to measure houses
was a Bosch laser measure, and it's a high precision device. They can set this on the ground
and point it up at something and it sends a laser and measures. There was a question earlier on
how height is measured for a building so DeGraw demonstrated how they spotted the apex of
the building, the highest point, and whatever that measurement is in length they divide that in half
and shows the midpoint that represents the height of a building. She noted when there is a flat
top roof, it is even more evident to see how much taller a 35-foot flat top roof structure would be
than a typical one and a half to two and a half story structure like is found in the Northside and
RNS-12 single-family or duplex structures. She showed some images that if 27-feet seems
constricting there are very many tall buildings that are single-family or duplexes that already
existing in the Northside. DeGraw reiterated their proposal is just to talk about single-family and
duplex for infill. She showed an image of a duplex on the 900 block of Jefferson Street, its
relatively new construction, and it's about 27-feet at the midpoint. If the basement level was sunk
a little more, the structure would fit better with its neighbors. The picture also demonstrates that
under the current 35-foot height limit, this building would be much taller compared to its neighbor.
Next, she showed 225 East Fairchild noting this historic house on Fairchild is one of the tallest
that they could find in the RNS-12 zone. The main part of the house is 27-feet tall to the midpoint
of the gables on the front, the back and sides of the house but there is a pure middle shape roof
that goes up a bit higher, so the house would likely exceed the proposed 27-foot height limit.
However, this is not an issue regarding nonconformity, as the zoning code allows historic
structures to be rebuilt to the previous design, even if they are totally destroyed. She next
showed a single-family house on South Lucas that has a large addition that slightly exceeds the
proposed 27-foot height limit. Even so, it's not clear that this would be non -conforming because
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 13 of 18
height is measured based on average grade. Regardless, they ask if this would fit into a RNS-12
neighborhood or a neighborhood you'd want to live in. The duplex on Fairchild Street is quite
large compared to its neighbors, which itself is a large house. It is 35-feet tall at the peak but less
tall at the midpoint. Because of the odd roofline it's difficult to give an exact height for the zoning
purposes but it appears that even this large structure complies or comes close to the 27-feet
proposed height limit. Next, she showed a house at 911 Washington Street, it's one of the tallest
structures that they could find in the RNS-12 zone and because its multifamily it would be
exempt from the request that they have. Finally, she showed 112 and 114 North Governor, this is
new construction that conforms with the height request of 27-feet and it looks good and is
appropriate for Northside and RNS-12 zones. DeGraw stated they respectfully request Council to
amend the zoning code by reducing the maximum building height for new single-family and
duplex structures in the RNS-12 zones from 35-feet to 27-feet.
Linda McGuire (Iowa City) stated she is almost a 50-year resident of the Northside and the
Northside Neighborhood Association got started when they successfully prevented a heli-a-pad
from being on Mercy Hospital in 1989, and they're hoping they don't have to fight that one again.
She wanted to point out that this was a request from the Northside Neighborhood Association,
directly to City government, to engage in planning for their neighborhood. They really appreciate
the staff having to step up and do it on an expedited schedule. She wants to make two points.
First, the objective measure of 27-feet is really good considering that many of the lots in the
Northside are 40 feet wide. So what they're asking is that especially in the middle of the block
that they don't put up needle structures. The other consideration is what they call single-family.
The City cannot put occupancy limits on houses but what are called single-family houses in the
Northside are packed with as many renters as possible, which drives up the value of the lot.
Therefore, if they're demolished, there is a connection to affordability. McGuire noted it's a
complication that is way beyond what they're talking about right now, but the main point is the
failsafe that staff has said is that they already have existing processes to regulate heights in
neighborhoods is insufficient and painful and expensive. If every time there is a proposal to put
something in to fight the height requirement of 35 feet because it doesn't fit in the character of
the neighborhood, that's an expensive process for neighbors, for staff and for Commission's.
She did a fight like that next door and had to go to the Historic Preservation Commission to keep
a demolition from happening at 319 North Van Buren Street. McGuire stated what they're asking
is the beginning of a form -based code in the Northside with height requirements and that the
Commission would support the Northside Neighborhood Association's proposal for height
requirement. If they must defer, please understand that they are approaching the Commission to
come up with some approach for planning for the inevitable development in the Northside
neighborhood that preserves affordability, walkability, access for elders, families, whatever.
Ginalie Swaim stated for several years she was a member of the Historic Preservation
Commission which has participated in the City's past planning efforts regarding Downtown and
Central Planning Districts. Tonight she is representing as a board member of the local nonprofit
Friends of Historic Preservation and they encourage the Commission to support the Northside
Neighborhood's proposal to amend the height standards for RNS-12. Historic Preservation is not
about preserving every historic building, it is also about preserving the character of Iowa City
neighborhoods. Even preservationists acknowledge that not all buildings can be saved, repaired
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 14 of 18
or salvageable, and may be replaced with newer structures. However, when that happens the
new buildings should be compatible with their neighbors. New buildings should not be so tall as
to lord over the existing streetscape. Swaim noted they have all seen in many places, streets in
neighborhoods, where a new building lords over the streetscape and where a taller building
sticks out like a sore thumb. Taller buildings interrupt the rhythm and the scale of nearby houses
that are a consistent height and they diminish the sense of time and place that appeals to so
many people. The height incentive to build taller buildings opens the door to developers willing
and able to invest in tear down and build up 37-feet because taller buildings mean more units
and bigger rental income or higher purchase prices. In turn such a strategy decreases the
number of smaller houses that are affordable to owners. Where then does this leave the
residents who call these neighborhoods home, the residents who choose not to or can't afford to
tear down and build bigger, who appreciate the consistent scale, who depend on a good supply
of older housing stock, and who enjoyed the natural light that could be blocked by taller
buildings. As stated, the City established RNS-12 to conserve an area for folks who want to live
within walking distance to downtown, the City has other areas, South Gilbert and South
Burlington for taller structures. The Northside, whether the parts in a district or those that are not
in historical district, is the largest older neighborhood in Iowa City and many consider it the core
of older Iowa City. Why not then be proactive about protecting this older neighborhood whether
it's in a historic district or not. Additionally, don't properties in neighborhoods in the Northside that
are not in a district still deserve the same considerations for quality of life to those that are in
districts that are subject guidelines. Perhaps they've heard the expression, the greenest building
is the one that's already built. A building 60-70 or more years older is better was built by lumber
from old growth forests, it's denser and more durable. Tearing down houses means that this still
valuable old growth lumber ends up in the landfill. Hardly a climate action goal.
Jared Knot e (1021 E. Market Street) lives in a section that's not in the Northside District and is a
relatively new resident and has been here since 2020. What he was most compelled about with
this particular proposal was less about the character in terms of the physical character in
neighborhoods, sure that's important to some people, but for him it's really about the community
and the character of the place. One of the things that's so attractive to him about this particular
space is that there are so many different types of people and family settings and communities.
Part of the ability to preserve that community and equity is to have these diverse, sometimes
littler buildings that allow people to find a place that is affordable. Families and people's
situations change, as an example people have divorces or perhaps they get widowed, and
finding space within that same community so kids can stay in schools is an important part about
having a vibrant, diverse community. That makes Iowa City so special and makes that
neighborhood so special. Some of the addendums that were made and submitted do a beautiful
job of is providing nuance that perhaps was not in the initial request nor were in staff work,
were affordability. He respects that best practice might be that height restrictions aren't great for
affordability, there's a reasonableness to that, but there's also reasonableness to allowing for the
diverse type of housing stock to being preserved and part of a way of making that preserved, as
others have said more eloquently said, is to reduce an incentive to redevelop in a way that is not
going to force folks out because they can no longer afford to rent a home that has either multiple
rental folks in it, and so forth. Knote acknowledged the Commission is doing the hard work of
contemplating this pretty complex item, it seems relatively simple in some ways, but in some
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 15 of 18
ways there's a lot of complexity. He just asks that maybe as they're figuring out think about what
would be helpful to preserve some of the diversity of the community and sustainability of the
community. Consider perhaps how this height restriction might disincentivize the type of
redevelopment that might force folks out who might otherwise want to stay in that community.
Kevin Boyd stated he loves local history and is going to talk about history for a second. Tonight
they meet in Emma J. Harvat Hall, many know that she was the first woman to become mayor of
Iowa City but what they may not know is it took 37 years for a second woman to become mayor
again. Thelma Lewis was the first mayor to govern in this chamber, so she sat right where they
are and wielded the gavel for the first time. Thelma, more than anyone else in our history, is the
reason they have professional city staff, rather than political appointees, she co-chaired the
campaign, and Boyd suspects she did most of the work to get the referendum passed to get the
council/manager form of government and secured professional staff here in Iowa City. Lewis
was ready to retire from her term on Council but the anti-Council/manager forces were running a
slate of candidates and at that time her seat would be the critical seat on the Council overriding
the referendum. Thelma knew that she was a strong enough candidate to win again, and she did,
securing for a second time the professionalization of staff and the council/manager form of
government. At the end of her term on Council, Thelma gave a bit of a farewell address to the
Pilots' Club in the ballroom at the Hotel Jefferson and she made several accurate predictions
about issues that Iowa City would face over the next decades, it's really remarkable to read.
She shared a vision for how staff and the City would work with this new kind of professional staff
that was growing in size. She believed it was important for citizen groups, neighborhood
associations, groups who cared about things in the community would come together with a
thoughtful proposal, bring it to the City staff and City Council and partner with the City staff to find
a workable solution. That was her vision, the vision of the woman who was responsible for
having professional staff here. She, in that ballroom, reminded future decision makers in Iowa
City that they, the decision makers, should listen to civic organizations, neighborhood groups,
and to encourage City staff to find workable ways to try to accommodate what they're trying to
achieve. So tonight, here in Emma J Harvat Hall, where Thelma Lewis once wielded her gavel,
Boyd encourages the Commission to channel Thelma Lewis and support the citizen -led groups.
If they are concerned that there's some details in here that still need to be worked out, channel
Thelma Lewis some more and encourage staff and the neighborhood association to come
together to find a reasonable solution and defer until that time could come.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Elliott moved to defer this item until the second meeting in October. Townsend seconded
the motion.
Quellhorst wanted to make a couple of points, maybe some things to consider during the deferral
process. First, he'd really like to thank everybody because it's clear that they have thought very
hard about this issue, staff put together a very detailed and conscientious report and the
neighborhood association also obviously put a great deal of effort into their submissions. It's
evident that they care very deeply about historic preservation, which is something that's very
important in the Strategic Plan, as well as the Central District Plan. He noted one thing that
would be helpful to him is to understand how effectively the historic and conservation overlays
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 16 of 18
currently function. He has some concerns about carving out a unique height limit that is
applicable to a unique and limited zone and is inconsistent with height limits in other residential
zones. Again, historic preservation and preserving the integrity of Iowa City neighborhoods is
also vitally important and is a priority in the Strategic Plan so to that end it'd be helpful to
understand both how effectively the current historic preservation scheme is, as well as whether
there are any alternatives to this they might consider that would get them all to the same place.
The two things that he would have in mind would be strengthening the provisions that underlie
the historic conservation overlay zones, or perhaps adding additional properties to those zones,
if they feel it's appropriate.
Wade appreciates everybody coming in and all the correspondence on this item. His position is
he thinks it's demonstrated to this point all the overlays are performing their goal or intent, as
demonstrated by new developments. The new developments are fitting within the goals of the
existing neighborhoods so introducing a new complication or new special consideration he just
wants to make sure that overall it makes sense. Also seeking to look in the rearview mirror, he'd
be curious if this lower height restriction was in place generations before, what would the
neighborhoods look like as a result of that. The neighborhoods now might not necessarily be the
same neighborhoods if generations before implemented that.
Padron stated she does not support the deferral and also doesn't support reducing the height.
Staff made a very good point and within the staff report do they show the affect and the human
scale of the neighborhoods. Mainly, when she reads the last point, that the current height
limitation is consistent with other single family residential zones.
Craig shares some of the feelings that others have already expressed that they've heard from
the Northside Neighborhood, but the RNS-12 zone is actually a pretty small part of the of the
Northside, not a small part of a significant part, but certainly not even half of the Northside
Neighborhood and they haven't heard from anybody in an RSN-12 zone that lives outside the
Northside Neighborhood. It appears from the math that there are historic protections on almost
everything in the Northside Neighborhood that is currently zoned RSN-12 so why do they need
this. She wants to know why they need this and she is not compelled that it is necessary to do it
and still preserve the character of the neighborhood, which she is absolutely in favor of.
Hensch stated he will be voting yes on this deferral for two reasons. Number one, since there's a
misunderstanding about the application of this request from the Northside Neighborhood
Association, he thinks that just needs to be clarified to make sure everybody's on same page.
Second, overall, fundamentally, neighborhood integrity and character is a high priority of his and
the whole city can't be taken over by rentals and profit motives, there has to be a place for
people to live who work in this community and plan to stay here and contribute and be good
neighbors over time.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1 (Padron dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 2, 2023:
Planning and Zoning Commission
August 16, 2023
Page 17 of 18
Elliott moved to approve the meeting minutes from August 2, 2023. Craig seconded the motion,
a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett forwarded an email from the Corridor Community Action Network, they're hosting a
community engagement festival on Sunday, August 27 and they invited boards and commissions
to be part of that. If the commission is interested in having a table and talking to other volunteers
in the community let her know.
Hensch noted at the last meeting Craig brought up the AARP and some of the information that
they had on AUDs and today he received an email about a slide presentation that talks about the
benefits and what AUDs are. It's a really a great reference site for people.
I_ 11110111 7kM .
Townsend moved to adjourn, seconded by Elliott and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023.2024
9/7
10119
1112
11116
1217
12121
1/4
1/18
2115
311
415
4119
1 6121
7/5
7/19
8/2
8116
CRAIG, SUSAN
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I X
X
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
NOLTE. MARK
O/E
---
--
--
---
--
--
--
--
--
--
---
--
PADRON, MARIA
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
DUELLHORST, SCOTT
__
_
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
__
._..
__
__..
X
SIGN%MARK
X
X
O/E
OIE
X
X
X
X
0/E
O/E
X
----
---
----
----
----
--
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
WADE, CHAD
X
OtE
X
X
X
0/E
X
I X
X
X
I X
X
X
I X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.f.
I i CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Planning & Zoning Commission: October 4 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Planning & Zoning Commission: October 4 [See Recommendation]
-.® CITY OF IOWA CITY
,�,� MEMORANDUM
Date: November 16, 2023
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its October 4, 2023 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 4-3 (Craig, Ouellhorst, Padron dissenting) the Commission recommends approval
of Title 14 zoning be amended with elimination of the standard that the owner is not required to
live on -site and that where accessory apartment is in the zoning code be replaced with the term
accessory dwelling unit.
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
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 4, 2023-6:OOPM—FORMAL MEETING
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Scott
Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Hektoen, Kirk Lehmann, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Throgmorton, William Gorman, Phoebe Martin, Deanna
Thomann, Andy Martin, Jared Knote, Sharon DeGraw, Jonathan
Melba, Lorraine Bowans, Alex Lewis, Kelcey Patrick Ferree
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 4-3 (Craig, Quellhorst, Padron dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of
Title 14 zoning be amended with elimination of the standard that the owner is not required to live
on -site and that where accessory apartment is in the zoning code be replaced with the term
accessory dwelling unit.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NO. REZ23-0001:
(continued discussion of accessory apartments from 812)
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning, to improve housing choice, increase housing
supply, and encourage affordability.
Lehmann began the staff report with some general background reminding the Commissioners
this is part of a package of proposed amendments with a goal of increasing flexibility for a range
of housing types, modifying design standards, providing additional flexibility to enhance the
supply of housing, creating regulatory incentives for affordable housing, and also addressing fair
housing. This package came back before the Commission on August 2 and the Commission did
recommend approval of those items with the exception of the changes related to accessory
apartments. At that time, staff was directed to solicit more public feedback regarding those
changes.
In terms of the public feedback staff solicited, they held two open houses for an opportunity for
the community to learn more about the proposed changes, ask questions and talk with staff
about the changes and then also provide feedback in a survey to indicate what concerns there
were. The open houses were held on September 13, from 5:00 — 7:00 pm and from September
14 from 5:00 — 7:00 pm at two different locations in different parts of town. 58 folks signed in and
there were some others who attended but did not sign it. Staff also received 51 surveys, both
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 2 of 22
through a combination of folks that were in the public meetings and then also online as well. A
majority of survey respondents were concerned about allowing accessory apartments on rental
properties which is one of the proposed changes. The majority of the survey respondents were
not concerned with most of the other changes but the second most proposed change that
provoked concern was not requiring a parking space for the accessory apartments. That was at
45% concern versus a 53% who were not concerned.
With regards to the proposed amendments, Lehmann reiterated this is part of the section on
providing additional flexibility to enhance the supply of housing, specifically as they relate to
modifying the standards for accessory apartments. In terms of the proposed changes, there are
quite a few of them so he will go into detail on those as a refresher. One of the changes is
allowing accessory uses to be in places that are currently not allowed, such as allowing them to
be accessory to single-family or duplex uses instead of only having it be allowed with detached
single family uses. Second, allowing them in any zone that allows residential uses instead of
specified zones. Third is that the owner not be required to live on the site, which they currently
are. Lehmann noted again that was the item that was flagged as the most concern for folks.
Fourth is no longer requiring an off-street parking space for accessory apartments, currently
there is a standard where one space must be provided. Fifth, no longer having an additional
restriction on bedrooms and occupants other than what would be required from a rental permit
for single family and duplex uses. In this case, that means that no more than 35% of the floor
area could be bedrooms, changing the size limitations somewhat such that it'd be the lesser of
1000 square feet or 50% of the floor area of the main building. That's a change from a smaller
amount that was previously required. Lehmann also stated that it used to be for a detached
accessory apartment it could only be a portion of a detached accessory structure which meant
that one couldn't have a standalone accessory apartment but with these changes to the way that
sizes would be regulated, it'd be based off the principal use and one could have a standalone
accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or could also have an attached accessory dwelling unit that would
be added in an addition to a building. Finally, with regards to the design standards there currently
is a standard that accessory apartments have to be entered from the side or rear lot line and this
change would say that no entrance locations are dictated in the way it's designed. He also
mentioned that staff are continuing to recommend the owner occupancy requirement primarily
because their understanding of Council's goals with these proposed amendments are tied to
increasing housing supply and housing diversity of housing types.
In terms of an analysis of what the proposed changes might cause Lehmann explained currently
with the existing situation the City hasn't seen much ADU development in the last 30 years,
they've only seen about 52 units out of approximately 10,000 eligible properties. He noted part of
the reason for that is that the current standards appear to be a barrier to construction of
accessory dwelling units so as a result in the 2022 Affordable Housing Action Plan it
recommended promoting ADUs and allowing them in more situations. The Plan also
recommended looking at the owner occupancy requirement as well and this does come to a
special head now as more and more households are single person households where smaller
units are something that are required, essentially. In terms of impacts, the parcels that are
currently eligible will remain eligible, and an additional 13,000 will be eligible because that would
include any properties that currently have a rental permit that are single family since that can
change at any time whether it's rental or owner occupied. In addition, it would expand the
number of parcels which ADUs would be allowed and up to 1400 new units would be allowed by
expanding the zones and uses to which the accessory, an additional 3100 new units could
potentially accommodate ADUs by removing the owner occupancy requirement as well. In
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 3 of 22
addition, staff would expect more property owners to take advantage of accessory dwelling units
by trying to remove some of those other barriers such as the parking requirement, trying to
increase size, trying to allow as a standalone use, and all the different things that they've heard
about that act as barriers. In addition, staff does see trying to encourage accessory dwelling units
as being especially compatible with the City's sustainability goals since these would be added
with existing buildings, for the most part, and would tend to be in more walkable areas of the
City. Therefore, staff see it as pairing nicely with some of the standards such as trying to
encourage alternative modes of transportation and the free two-year transit trial the City currently
has in effect.
Lehmann showed a map of the parcels that would potentially be affected, noting the areas that
would currently allow an ADU if they are owner occupied and the proposed amendments would
continue to allow these if they're owner occupied, but it would also mean that they could have an
ADU if they're renter occupied as well. He then showed the new areas that would allow ADUs
that currently do not, in some cases these are zones that previously hadn't allowed them and in
other cases there are areas where there are more duplexes or other uses that currently don't
allow an ADU.
Staff did it also look at other comparable communities and information regarding those were
provided in the agenda packet. The examples of different communities are both in Iowa and are
other college towns. Lehmann noted many communities have recently reevaluated their ADU
regulations and have removed things like owner occupancy requirements, off street parking
requirements, increasing allowable sizes, and modifying what ADUs can be accessory to. He
explained part of the reason for this is that all of America is experiencing the housing crisis that
Iowa City is also currently experiencing and accessory dwelling units are a way to really integrate
new density while still maintaining the character of the neighborhoods as well. That being said,
each community does have unique set of regulations and are all a little different. Some require
owner occupancy, some don't. Some require parking, some don't. Some have more strict design
requirements; it all really depends on the community. However, that being said Iowa City's
proposed changes are in line with other communities that are in similar situations.
Staff also looked at best practices when looking at accessory dwelling units. The American
Planning Association (APA) produces an equity and zoning policy guide that Iowa City uses and
within that policy guide it really recommends allowing a broader range of building forms, lot sizes
and a lot widths and residential types, specifically in low density residential neighborhoods. It
also recommends allowing ADUs without a public hearing and only using conditions that are
needed to mitigate potential impacts on neighboring properties within that community, but all of
these are based on national best practices. Staff really reviewed the APA guide and what works
and what doesn't work in different communities and how can they further equity through the
zoning code.
Staff also relied on the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), which produces lots of
content about accessory dwelling units, and the proposed changes that staff brought before this
Commission were really the product of recommendations made by the Johnson County Livable
Communities Housing Action Group. Lehmann noted that's a group that includes lots of folks, is
staffed by a person from the County, and the goal is to try and make sure that Johnson County
communities are livable for folks as they age within that community. Accessory dwelling units are
really seen as a key component of allowing people to age in place. In terms of best practices
they recommend things like allowing these uses in all zones that allow single family residential
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 4 of 22
uses, only requiring those conditions needed to mitigate potential impacts, treating them like
they're a valid use within this zone rather than some sort of a use that is an undesirable use
within the zone. Treating it like other uses is looking at owner occupancy requirements and if
that's not regulated in the zoning code then they would recommend not regulating that for
accessory dwelling units. They also talk about things like parking requirements which can make
accessory dwelling units challenging, and limiting design requirements that can increase the cost
of constructing ADUs.
In addition, Lehmann stated the push towards encouraging ADUs is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Within the City's vision statement it talks about creating attractive and
affordable housing for all people and housing that is the foundation of healthy, safe and diverse
neighborhoods throughout Iowa City. Again, those relevant strategies and goals are things like
mixing housing types throughout neighborhoods to provide household options for all types of
households, whether they be singles, families, retirees, etc., ensuring a balance of housing
types, promoting small lot infill development, and especially supporting that infill development in
areas where services and infrastructure are already in place. It also does support other policy
documents that the City has adopted over the past several years including the Affordable
Housing Action Plan, which was first adopted in 2016, and then updated in 2022. That Plan does
talk about increasing the allowable number and type of dwelling units in single family zoning
districts and specifically calls out ADUs. The Plan also specifically calls out considering ADUs
associated with rental housing as something to consider. In addition the 2019 Fair Housing
Study talks about exploring ways to increase density and exploring the types of housing that are
allowed, especially in those low density, single family zones.
In terms of public's correspondence, staff received several pieces of correspondence that have
been forwarded to the Commissioners or included in the agenda packet. Lehmann noted the
latest piece of correspondence that was submitted very recently has just now been provided to
the Commission for consideration as well.
In terms of staff recommendation, staff does recommend that Title 14, Zoning, be amended as
illustrated in Attachment Four of the staff report. Lehmann noted it's similar to what was
proposed before with a few small changes, but nothing substantive. Again, the goal is improving
housing choice, increasing housing supply, and encouraging housing affordability.
Lehmann added there is one more part of that staff recommendation that he did not include in
this presentation, which is they currently call accessory dwelling units, accessory apartments,
and that has been a confusing term for many. Staff has gotten lots of calls about what exactly is
meant by an accessory apartment so staff would also propose changing the terminology to ADU
which is also consistent with the rental code, which calls them ADUs. There could be a separate
motion for that, or it could be included in the motion tonight, staff does intend on updating the
motion before they bring it to Council, so the ordinance that goes before Council would reflect
that language change.
In terms of next steps, upon recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, staff
would expect it to be scheduled for consideration by Council. The earliest it would go to Council
is November 6, that would be the public hearing, and then there would be two additional readings
by Council at the second meeting in November and at the first meeting in December, which
would be December 12. Therefore, December 12 would be the earliest that something would be
considered for adoption by Council.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 5 of 22
Quellhorst thanked staff for the thorough and thoughtful presentation and especially appreciated
the comparison to regulations in comparable communities. It was mentioned that some of those
communities have recently eliminated the owner occupancy requirement, so he was just
wondering if they know anything about the experience of those communities and whether it was
positive or negative, or a kind of mixed bag. Lehmann replied that a lot of these changes are
pretty fresh in a lot of communities. When he talks about best practices that have led to or that
have been incorporated in a lot of these documents, those are based on communities that made
similar changes and found that it increased their development of accessory dwelling units within
that community. Within the specifical comparable communities that he provided he is not sure if
they have outcome data from that yet.
Quellhorst asked if anybody has recently gone the other way and adopted an owner occupancy
requirement when they didn't previously have one. Russett clarified Iowa City's current
regulations require that the owner live on -site and what staff is proposing is that owner
occupancy requirement be removed so the owner would no longer need to live on -site and both
units could be rented. Quellhorst wondered if there has been a community that's had an inverse
situation where they did not have an owner -occupied requirement and then adopted one.
Lehmann is not aware of any, most of them have been similar changes to what Iowa City is
recommending.
Townsend asked with an ADU and there being two units on the property, if the owner decides to
sell, are those sold separately, and if so, how do they decide what goes and what the lot line
should be. Lehmann explained there's a standard in the code currently that requires both units
on the lot be under common ownership so they can't sell an accessory apartment and not sell
the principal use, they have to be under the same ownership. Staff is not proposing to change
that standard and it would continue to be in effect. Townsend stated then, the owner doesn't
have to live on the property, but whoever buys the new property has to buy both units. Lehmann
confirmed that is correct. Hekteon clarified if the lot was split there'd be a subdivision and that
would be a different process and in the realm of the subdivision regulations. For planning
regulations as long as the units are on the same lot, then it's considered an accessory dwelling
unit. Lehmann added if there was a subdivision that would have to follow all regulations within
the code including street frontage, so they couldn't have a situation where there was a unit in the
front and back but they're not on an alley and they split it down the middle, that's not something
that would be allowed under the subdivision code. Presumably, one could have a corner lot
where both units meet minimum lot size requirements and everything and that could be split.
Padron noted then if there was a subdivision it wouldn't be an ADU anymore it would become a
principal use. Lehmann confirmed that is correct.
Townsend asked how these units would help large families, these are all smaller units that
they're talking about so it's really not going to help the affordable housing problem families have.
Lehmann stated for large families the way that accessory dwelling units are often used is where
the parents would live in the in-law suite and have the kids live in the main unit, or vice versa, if
you have young kids, he stated that's how it would be used to support larger families. Townsenc
stated she would not call that affordable housing, she would call that convenience for someone
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 6 of 22
with means enough to build a separate unit for in-laws, and that would not be in that affordable
housing realm. Lehmann noted in the sense that an accessory dwelling unit is up to 1000
square feet, which is a relatively small unit that could be built under IRC code standards, it is
more affordable than building under multifamily standards and is a more affordable housing
product. Townsend stated for a single person or for two people, but not for a family, because it's
not big enough for a family of four.
Russett noted what Lehmann is trying to say is that with if there is a multi -generational
household where there are grandparents, parents, and children, it can provide additional room
for those families. Or if someone is taking care of a family member who has a disability, or who
has an illness, they could be nearby and be on -site. Then in terms of the affordability concern,
there's a couple of ways that they're thinking about affordability with these amendments and with
the amendments to accessory dwelling units they're really thinking about it in terms of supply and
ways to increase the housing supply in the community. Right now the supply is not keeping up
with the demand and it's impacting price. It's also a way to encourage different types of housing.
Accessory dwelling units are smaller, they're going to cost less, the price point is going to be
lower than the typical detached single-family home.
Wade noted one of the proposed changes is actually to remove the occupancy limit, right now
only two people can live in an ADU and conceivably under these regulations they could have
three people or even a potentially small family live in one. Lehmann confirmed that.
Hensch noted in the packet it says that the occupancy is determined by the rental permit, can
staff just discuss that briefly. Lehmann explained in single family and duplex uses to which
accessory dwelling units could be accessory to under the proposed amendments there's a
requirement that no more than 35% of a unit may be bedrooms, which acts as a de facto
occupancy limit. There are also additional occupancy limits based on the square footage of the
unit. So presumably, a three -bedroom accessory dwelling unit under the proposed standards
with that 35% standard accounting for minimum bedroom sizes that are allowed.
Wade noted in Fayetteville and Cedar Rapids it looks like they allow two ADUs for a lot, and
Iowa City's recommendation just a single, correct. Lehmann confirmed they are recommending
a single with a duplex. In some cases, they may see where it's single family and they allow two
accessory dwelling units. In the case of States that have preempted local jurisdiction's ability to
regulate ADUs there are situations where it's a duplex and two ADUs. There is a variety of
different ways that people allow them but staff is recommending one ADU per lot.
Wade acknowledged that's how the current administration will control it, with the building permit
and with a change of ownership of the property and such but what's the long-term administration
look like on having that restriction. Lehmann did agree it can be challenging. In some cases, a
family might purchase a house that has an ADU with it and they use the ADU for storage and
they don't rent it out. Staff will check in to make sure that it doesn't become occupied at some
point, because once it's occupied then it needs a rental permit. There are challenges where
houses are sold and then the main house is rented out and there's still an ADU on the property.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 7 of 22
That can be an administrative challenge and he doesn't know the exact answer about how they
deal with it but presumes that it just doesn't count towards the occupancy of that rental permit.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Jim Throamorton (co-chair of the Northside Neighborhood Association Steering Committee)
comes before the Commission tonight to ask that they amend item 3C-2 in the staffs August 2
memo for properties located within the University Impact Area (UTA). They urge the Commission
to continue requiring ADUs to be built only on owner -occupied properties. They further
recommend the Commission carve out an exception to permit nonprofit providers of income -
restricted housing to build ADUs on properties within the UTA. Two months ago this Commission
deferred action on the ADU provisions and Throamorton thanked them for doing that. As
Lehmann stated, City staff conducted two open houses pertaining to the ADUs and several
Northside Neighborhood neighbors attended and some had stimulating conversations with
individual staff members. But the conversations did not enable shared learning on the part of all
attendees. Many attendees looked puzzled as they were studying the posters and appeared to
be wondering what do the ADU amendments mean for their neighborhood. The first challenge
residents face when trying to answer that question is to understand the staff's reports and that is
no easy task, partly because the technical language of zoning is unfamiliar to most people.
Adding to the difficulty is that the proposed changes vary by zoning category. His own
neighborhood contains at least 12 different types of zones, plus three historical overlay districts
and one overlay conservation district. The second challenge is to determine how the changes
might affect neighborhoods on the ground. This is a daunting task that exceeds the capabilities
of normal people trying to live their lives. It calls for collaboration and dialogue between
neighborhood leaders and the City planning staff. To help Northsiders understand how the
amendments might affect their neighborhood they focused their attention on the medium density
residential that is the RS-8 areas that lie outside the historic preservation districts. Zooming in
they studied one block in Goosetown, it's the long block that currently contains 31 properties,
one of which is vacant. All but one of the main buildings were built in the first half of the last
century, they are all one to two stories in height, and the assessed value of this block of 30 single
family properties average a modest $216,000. Being in the UTA the entire block is affected by
the demand for off -campus student housing. 9 of the 31 properties are owned by incorporated
entities, and 14 of the 31 properties are rentals. The amendments pertaining to the ADUs could,
when combined with the amendments permitting duplexes and attached single family structures,
cause some speculative investors to think of Goosetown and other neighborhoods in the UTA as
major opportunities for financial gain. In this scenario, market competition would drive the cost of
land up when properties go on sale, investors would outbid potential owner occupants and they
would very likely demolish older, lower cost owner -occupied structures and replace them with the
largest possible rental duplexes or attached single family structures coupled with rentable ADUs.
All of this would make it extremely difficult for anyone to buy starter homes in these
neighborhoods. Staff tells him that seven of the lots on this block could potentially be
redeveloped with duplexes and that 24 of the lots could potentially have ADUs. If they look more
closely at two lots in the southwestern corner of the block, one is currently vacant, whereas the
other is occupied by a one and a half story single family structure. Picture an investor building a
new structure and ADU on the vacant lot. While that investor or perhaps another one, purchases
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 8 of 22
the existing structure on the adjacent lot and builds a new ADU in the back. Picture all of the
structures being rentals and this being replicated throughout Goosetown and other
neighborhoods in the UTA. The ADU amendments might increase the supply of housing in this
and similar neighborhoods, but the supply of affordable owner -occupied housing would shrink
and while diversifying housing choices this amendment could result in the neighborhoods
becoming more dominated by investor -owned rental structures. Throgmorton requests they
retain the owner -occupied requirements for properties in the UTA and carve out an exception for
nonprofits.
William Gorman (Chair of the Housing Action Team of the Johnson County Livable Community
for Successful Aging Policy Board) stated last November they held a forum on ADUs and invited
all 11 cities in Johnson County to attend. They invited the City Councils and the Mayors as well
as home builders and realtors. They focused on the benefits of ADUs to help seniors age in
place, as well as the need for affordable housing for people of all ages. One month later, in
December, they submitted to all 11 cities in Johnson County what he would describe as a white
paper, providing recommendations on the elements of a potential ADU zoning code. To be clear,
they reached out to Iowa City and the other cities in Johnson County, the cities did not reach out
to them. However, they do appreciate the fact that the city of Iowa City staff took their
recommendations seriously and at this Commission's direction from the previous meeting, the
staff did reach out to the community to solicit additional input, including looking at how other
university towns have addressed ADUs. The results show that university towns have utilized a
variety of strategies, some university towns do not require owner occupancy, some do. Gorman
stated they continue to support the staff recommendations with one caveat. Clearly many
residents have expressed genuine concerns regarding the proposed removal of the owner
occupancy requirement. Even though they believe removing the owner occupancy requirement is
best practice and removing the owner occupancy requirement is likely to more significantly
increase the number of ADUs that could be developed he acknowledged it is very difficult to
forecast how many developers will field their sufficient profit margin to purchase homes and then
add on ADUs in order to rent out both dwellings. Kirk Lehmann's October 4 letter on page seven
notes the following "ADUs may support the stability of existing neighborhoods by accommodating
extended families or creating an opportunity to generate revenue from the tenants but it may be
necessary to limit them to properties where their primary dwelling unit is the owners primary
residence to avoid speculative investment, particularly when used as short-term rentals". On top
of that, since Iowa law does not allow cities to prohibit short-term rentals in the abundance of
caution, Gorman states they now recommend that Iowa City keep the owner occupancy
requirement indicating that the lot owner must reside in the primary residence or the ADU and
then suggest that the City revisit this issue in two to four years to see if the requirement can be
dropped. Give it some time, monitor it and then see if they can remove that requirement later.
Lastly, they encourage the City to review its permitting process to look for ways to simplify the
application process, decrease fees and eliminate any regulations that may hinder ADU
development.
Phoebe Martin (Iowa City) stated she is speaking personally and not for all realtors but wanted to
thank everyone for bringing this whole thing up, she is very excited about it. She noted she works
with a lot of different types of clients and has a few different people that have been keeping an
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 9 of 22
eye on all of this, one of which is a family that has a son that cannot afford to buy their own
house on their own lot. They could potentially afford to build an ADU in their backyard, but it does
not have an alley, it would need to, it'd be weird to be on the side and make more sense sort of
like a little compound. It's also significantly cheaper than then bringing in external care to them
renting something else. So even though that seems kind of frivolous, it actually would really help
them in terms of affordability. She also has a lot of clients that are looking to rent tiny houses,
which is something that Iowa City has not always been a huge fan of. Every tiny house she has
sold, and oddly enough she has sold quite a few of them, they go immediately and more of that
would be even better, because then they're also reducing the carbon footprint a little bit. Not all
people want yards, she is seeing lots of clients that are looking for studio, office and
homeschooling space. The idea of owner occupied or not, she thinks it would be just fine to not
have that requirement, but has also seen a lot of people, one of which is on Davenport Street,
who bought their house thinking that was going to be there forever investment and would love to
have an ADU on there so that they could rent out both and that's their retirement fund but they
don't want to live there anymore.
Deanna Thomann (208 Fairchild Street) lives in the Northside Neighborhood and tonight is just
here to read a letter Ann Freerks as she couldn't make it tonight. "Dear Planning and Zoning
Commissioners, I'm writing to urge you to vote against the proposal that would allow rental
properties to have accessory dwelling units in all residential zones, including the RNS-12 zone. I
have lived in a near downtown Iowa City neighborhood for over 30 years. During this time, I have
worked to create stable housing for all. I am not a NIMBY, there is a 12-Plex in my backyard,
duplexes, triplexes and lots of multifamily houses in my neighborhood, but there are also single-
family homes that are key to the balance and fabric of the community. These are some of the
most fragile portions of our neighborhoods and this proposal would threaten that balance. I spent
over 15 years on the Planning and Zoning Commission here in Iowa City, many of those as
chair. I did this to create positive change and a healthy community. I have worked through
Comprehensive Plan updates, re -drafts of the zoning code and subdivision regulations, I have
been part of the Neighborhood Housing Relations Task Force and clearly understand the
concerns this will cause the University Impact Zone. Iowa City has committed a great deal of
time and money to reduce density in this area through the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership.
When the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan it recognized this concern and created the
UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership to help level the playing field. I and other residents of older
neighborhoods are concerned the proposed changes will further tip the scale in favor of
investment companies and may actually lead to the displacement of affordable housing. The goal
should always be finding zoning tools that will promote the creation as well as the preservation of
affordable housing. There are endless solutions to every issue and this one does not work for
the long-term benefit of Iowa City. It should never be about warehousing people. People need
basic amenities, green space and community. This recommendation does not take into account
the damage that will be done in the Neighborhood Impact Zone. The near downtown
neighborhoods are already very dense and lack parking. I would ask that at the very least you
remove the University Impact zone and the RNS-12 zone from this proposal." Thomann noted
Freerks signed it as community member and former Planning and Zoning chair.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 10 of 22
Thomann want to just say a little bit about her situation as well, again she lives in the 200 block
of Fairchild and that's just right down the way from Pagliai's Pizza. Its a great neighborhood and
her house is in the Northside Historic District. She also serves on the Historic Preservation
Commission representing the Northside Neighborhood. She agrees with what Ann Freerks has
to say in her letter. Her block is unique in that she is in a historic home and a lot of her neighbors
are in the District with her, but across the street they have the RNS-12 houses that could really
affect the look and feel of their neighborhood. It is already dense, it's already diverse, her
backyard borders a four-plex and on the other side there are multifamily houses that run along
Dubuque Street. There are a lot of people there and she feels like they're doing their part as a
community in just those few blocks there of creating a diverse and dense living environment.
Andy Martin, (member HBA and president of the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) is
a remodeler in town and a member of some organizations but is not speaking for those bodies.
Today he is just speaking personally. He stated ADUs are something that's near and dear to him
as he has had many people ask him to build ADUs over the years. Typically, the reason is
because they have a family member that they'd like to have close, he has never had a rental
person ask to build one. What usually happens is that they end up not building the ADU
because it's too expensive and the reason is the restrictions. Martin does think if they did change
the code a little bit private individuals may be able to do more ADUs, particularly with elderly
parents or disabled people, and not having to have that extra space for a detached unit will be a
big help because the traditional way that's done is a carriage house with the garage below and
the building above. One would have to have a really big lot in order to do a side by side. But the
carriage house type doesn't work for a disabled or elderly persons, climbing a full flight of stairs
to get to their apartment, that just doesn't fly. Martin thinks if they can loosen these restrictions
they will end up seeing that more and in that case it is truly affordable housing because it's a lot
less expensive than other options such as the assisted living as those are 1000s of dollars a
month. He appreciates the City looking for a way to reduce costs and in a bigger picture they're
looking at choices for the future. One of the things he loves about Iowa City is that it is
consistently growing every year and the traditional form of growth is out in the cornfields and this
is looking at the idea of becoming more dense which he thinks is the way of the future as it is the
sustainable way and the smart way to go, there's no reason to go out when they can go up or go
more dense. Traditionally more dense is having huge multifamily buildings, because that's the
only way it can be done under current code and if they allow a little bit more flexibility here they
will see a way to gain density without getting monolithic density. Martin also stated he
understands the concerns with students, because he has lived in Iowa City for 30 years, but they
have the same choice with students as well, they're either going to grow more dense in the area
that they're allowed, or they're going to spread out. Again if they can make the requirements
more flexible and make them more inviting to people, he believes they will see an uptick in ADUs
but as pointed out they've had 52 in the past 30 years, so they're not likely going to see 52 next
month, it's not going to be that kind of rapid growth.
Hensch asked what the price range would be to construct a 1000-foot standalone unit for an
ADU. Martin stated the last ADU they built was about $180,000 and about 35% to 40% of that
cost was the garage. He noted if they could knock that way down, then it's roughly about half the
price of a new home. Hensch stated then without a garage it would be a range of $100,000 to
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 11 of 22
$150,000. Martin confirmed and stated that is a half or a third of the price of a new home but is it
truly affordable in the definition of affordable housing, where it's going to appeal to people who
are making 60% or less of median income, probably not, it's probably not that type of affordable
housing but is it useful and more affordable than traditional building, yes.
Jared Knote (1021 E. Market Street) asks that they maintain the owner occupancy requirement
on ADUs. He lives in a RNS-12 stabilization zone and when he thinks about stabilization, it's not
necessarily that there's no historic overlay, it's not about character, it's a recognition that a
neighborhood was really in a situation where it's acknowledging that the diversity of the
neighborhood, and the equity of the neighborhood, was being flattened out by monoculture, and
frankly by a price insensitive monoculture. Frankly, it's students who are price insensitive and it's
one type of people taking over that neighborhood, as well as doing a stable, diverse
neighborhood. He is caring about how long can he stay in this neighborhood, he's at midlife and
would like to stay there but if they open it up it to the extent of free development, which is the
auspices of this report and if they just free the market, the market will crowd supply. They may
think when they crowd supply, it'll fix everything and prices will fall. Good examples of where that
doesn't work is in health care and it also doesn't work in housing. Last week the Federal
Reserve, certainly not a socialist body, had an excellent presentation about three hours long that
he would recommend everyone watch, it showed what the data said about what actually drives
affordable housing and they actually do need requirements and mandates, that's what actually
drives affordable housing, it's not the market and crowding in with supply. Knote also stated at
one of the City Council meetings where people were speculating and imagining the wonderful
things that the market will provide but they don't necessarily have to imagine what the market
provides, because they have exact examples. He lives in a neighborhood but looking at
maps.google.com. they can check out some of these examples and that framework was really
helpful. The feedback from the mayor was really helpful because he gave first principles. What
do they care about in Iowa City? It's not character, it's not necessarily historical stuff, its
affordability, diversity, and environmental impact. If those are reasonable frameworks and
reasonable guidance he used those as he walked around his neighborhood concerns him. For
example, to focus on that 900 block of Jefferson, 942 & 944 is a duplex that was put in brand
new where there once was an old home and it takes up the almost the entire lot. Did it affect
affordability or prices of those rental units, it didn't and now there's three of them in a row. That's
a lot of additional housing supply so presumably it should have some impact as the market is
crowded but it had no impact on affordability. What did it impact, well the culture is now
monoculture, there's no more diversity, it's all students on that that particular area of the block.
That may be what they want but he doesn't think that creates a thriving neighborhood where
people are investing in the community and in keeping this an alive and generative community.
Also, what do they have in terms of environmental impact, are people really not using their cars
to get around, well around the corner there are no more trees, no cover, just a heat sink that's
really become a concrete jungle and that drives up air conditioning in the summer. Also on his
block, at 923 Market Street, a cute little house was torn down in the middle of the block and he
doesn't know what is going to go in there but can speculate that it might be another very, very
large duplex. He doesn't think that will have an appreciable impact on affordability nor in terms of
the environmental impact. Things will get hotter, fewer trees, more parking spaces, people are
still using their cars, less diversity, so again, no real measurable impact on affordability.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 12 of 22
Sharon DeGraw (Northside Neighborhood Member) stated from where she lives she is most
concerned about the University Impact Zone. She has a survey of streetscapes with what it looks
like parking wise in the Northside Neighborhood, some on South Lucas Street, and it's really in
the University Impact Zone the role that parking plays. Therefore, she is concerned about the
waiver of the parking aspect of the ADUs. She showed an image that's the 400 block of North
Gilbert Street and there are cars on the correct side of the street that they can park on all day
from eight o'clock to five o'clock but once it turns five o'clock cars start showing up on the other
side of the street and even though they are only supposed to park on one side, there are errant
cars parking on the wrong side of the street and they just accept the ticket. She next showed the
500 block of Gilbert Street and noted these streets are not terribly wide and it's hard for a
delivery driver parking a truck to go run food or packages to a house with cars just piling up on
either side for about five minutes and people start to get testy because they can't back up and
they're just stuck until the delivery person finds the right residence and recipient. DeGraw is
imagining if they start to add ADUs to some of these lots, and don't have the parking
requirement, people are still going to bring their cars and this situation is going to get worse. She
next showed an area closer into the downtown, noting plenty of lots where on the alley side with
very little green spaces left and are virtual parking lots. They're not supposed to be doing that as
much anymore, but one can see how densely packed in the parking is. She doesn't know that
these could be converted to have an ADU, but if they did where would the cars go, and students
are going to bring their cars. At the ADU open house DeGraw expressed her concern about the
parking waiver for ADUs and the response staff said is students will learn to leave their vehicles
at home but that's not really going to happen. In addition, thinking about the AARP aspect of the
recommendation for ADUs in the University Impact Zone there's really not going to be a lot of
seniors looking for an accessory dwelling unit in the back of a downtown rental house. It's
illogical that Iowa City will see an increase in seniors living in ADUs in the University Impact
Zone, very close to the downtown. DeGraw next showed an image of after she drops her kids off
at school she will often go see a friend on South Lucas Street and has been stuck behind maybe
the same garbage truck many times. The image shows there's a car on the other side that can't
make it through so already the streets are very packed with automobiles and the streets are
narrow. If they increase the density at this point, she doesn't think that they're going to convince
the students to leave their cars at home and this car did a three-point turn to get out of the way
and turn around. She has been in situations where it took five minutes for people to figure out to
dive into a driveway, back up or do a three-point turn to get back around. Next she showed the
300 block of North Linn Street where she actually used to live when she first moved to Iowa City
as a young professional. She would strategically drive her car down to the end of the block and
use that as her jogging exercise. Every morning she would try to get out there to fetch her car
and try to find a new parking spot for it. She was from California and didn't have parents where
she could leave a car somewhere else and then get it occasionally. She would prepay parking
tickets because she knew that was the best rate and just put down $100 every month or so.
Jonathan Melba (South Van Buren) wanted to add a different perspective to this conversation,
which is the perspective of a student and especially as relates to the parking aspect. Just to echo
the sentiments of what was just said, if the ADUs are targeted as an affordable housing
mechanism for students, the basic reality with the students is that there's an expectation that
they will have a car here and that whatever adverse parking requirements come from that they're
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 13 of 22
going to have their car here one way or another. For that reason, he thinks that the requirement
of a parking spot per ADU should stay. Melba noted they can have an increase in density
without an increase of set aside parking spots but they're still going to see the same increase in
cars, provided this is being targeted towards students. If it's being targeted towards elderly
residents or for extended families in a singular unit, in that case he thinks the owner occupancy
requirements should probably stay. If it's the case that they're looking for affordable housing for
different family situations to incorporate it onto the same house, then there's no reason to
remove the owner occupancy requirement and what that does is help to prevent some of these
concerns have already been expressed, and also helps to remove any possibility of the sort of
speculative real estate investment from happening and keep the homes concentrated in local
residents and local companies rather than allowing it to be a source of investment speculation.
Melba stated depending on what the intended or imagined goal of loosening some of the
restrictions from the ADU would be, it seems as though either the owner occupancy requirement
should stay up and/or the parking requirements should stay.
Lorraine Bowans (South Governor Street) had lived in her home for over 30 years, it's an old
house built in 1884 and she is very passionate about the historic homes, the older
neighborhoods and everything. Her house was a duplex when they moved in and they converted
it back to a single family and built a garage at the back of the property. They put frost footings so
they could build an addition up thinking at the time her parents would come to live with them.
She is also on the Board of Johnson County Livable Communities, is a realtor and also works
with helping seniors find services. She is becoming very active politically for seniors and living
with dignity in aging. She is also an active volunteer and advocate for AARP, she is a firm
believer but where she differentiates from AARP in this town is they need to keep it owner -
occupied to preserve what little housing stock they have left that's historic, they don't have a lot
and ADUs do not have to be an extra building. On South Governor Street, when they lived there,
there was probably nine houses that used to be rooming houses or duplexes or triplexes that
were converted to single family. They could be converted back. The lots were 190 feet so a
small unit could be put in the back and still have a good neighborhood. With the historic and
conservation districts they have to stay blended so they're not going to have an ugly thing. Right
now real estate is not that great, the interest rates are high, building is expensive so they don't
see as much development, taking down old homes, to build a lot of new stuff. That could change
in the future but right now that's not the case. She noted trying to find housing for someone who
has no money is heartbreaking and this is an opportunity for seniors or young family people that
want to live in their neighborhood. For seniors to age in place, they can't live in the two-story
house where the only bathroom may be on the second floor, they could but it may not be safe.
Bowans noted they could build an addition on to their house, as an example on Governor Street
the house caddy corner from them, they could no longer do the stairs so they built an addition of
a master suite onto their home and that did not detract from the neighborhood, there is still plenty
of room for parking and everything like that. Bowans stated they need to have design standards
that really preserve some of the lot and the integrity of older homes. She noted they are in the
infant stages now of trying to find out a way where seniors could stay in their neighborhoods and
in their homes. Maybe build a smaller unit in the back, where they could either move into and
rent the big house to a larger family and have them provide services for them. Or for them to stay
in their home, have a small unit, either attached or separate, where they could have a student
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 14 of 22
who has been vetted, has background checks and everything, move in. It's a win win for both,
less student debt for the student and services for the senior. Iowa is closing nursing homes like
crazy. She has been to several meetings with the head of the Department of Human Services,
the director of Medicaid services, and the director of Aging and Disability Services, and there's a
lot of things going on, nothing's been set in stone, but they're shutting nursing homes because
they have no care workers, they don't pay enough, Medicaid does not reimburse enough. They
are going to have a crisis of there's no place for people in Iowa with lower incomes to move to so
people are forced to stay in their homes. Bowans looks at this as a whole different perspective, if
they could somehow benefit a teacher who's coming here to work fresh out of college, they're
going to have student loans to pay back, if there is an affordable unit for that teacher to live in
then it's a win win if they can also do some cares for the senior or a family that's coming in. The
State is working on ways to finance ADUs for lower income people, the Iowa Finance Authority is
working on some things, and the State is also going to try and work on some things to get homes
modified for this particular situation. There's a lot of things in the work but people need to think
outside the box.
Alex Lewis stated for some background context he is currently in the middle of a research project
on the way land use can increase affordability so he thought a few statistics might help couch the
conversation. The Council of Economic Advisers recognize there's about 7 million market rate
affordable units in the country, which means that someone at the defined poverty line could
afford the rent at their current salary. Two and a half million of those are being occupied by
people that could afford an up-market unit but don't because there's no supply up-market. That
means that millions of units that could be affordable today aren't on the market. When they talk
about market rate, versus addressing the affordability crisis, that is all the same conversation
about supply. When they talk about what's happening in neighborhoods, how to stop the change
of neighborhoods and where students moving, apparently students are not very well liked. Well
students are going to here, there's a university here, sorry, they're coming, the demand is
constant, and it's going to grow. It's only a question of whether it's inelastic student demand.
Students are coming here with the money to afford any kind of rent, he worked for a few years
and lived in Dallas, when he came to Iowa City his rent money was going to go where he can
afford to live but that doesn't necessarily mean that students are immune to market pressure. If
there's a more dense area that's more amenable to students, they can bike, they can walk,
they're closer to downtown, they can go to bars, that's where they want to be. That brings up the
car issue too, which he will address in a second, but to first address where that supply exists so
that they don't grow out. Someone else made a great point about growing out into cornfields
versus growing up. Students like more dense housing, they like being closer to other people,
ADUs are a way of enabling that and making sure the students are going to stay closer to where
the university is. Because as you all discuss the impact area, that where the students want to be,
if you want to keep people closer to the university, if you want less and less people getting priced
out of those areas, it means making sure that more students can live on one lot. If there's 10
students coming to town, either five of them can live on one lot or two of them can live on five
lots so it seems like for everyone, students, homeowners, the community, it would be better to
have students in more dense areas on less lots. Additionally, it removes the pressure from the
historic districts and other issues like that. The car issue is another big one. The cars are the
problem. Cars and density are inverse, they're against each other. There's a great saying "you're
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 15 of 22
not in traffic, you are the traffic" so when they're looking at pictures of people stuck in traffic and
watching people do three-point turns, you are also the ones sitting behind the garbage truck and
blocking the person in the car. Nobody wants to be in that traffic jam. The way to encourage that
is by getting more people out of their cars, biking, walking to school, which everyone would all
love to do. Cars are expensive, students don't have that much money. There are other policies
like protected bike lanes and things like that which are part of this, but increasing density and
reducing parking makes it overall more attractive. They've heard about the building cost
associated with garages but there's also space constraints, cars are big and if they're requiring a
place for a car on every lot, that pushes the units further out and it reduces the density of the
area and it means people have to have their cars. There's a great statistic from some reform in
Buffalo that showed that for the doubling of housing density, transportation emissions reduced
almost 50% and household heating costs reduced by 40%. That means it's also more affordable
when those units are closer together, especially in an apartment building or a multi -unit situation,
they don't have five exposed sides, they have four exposed sides or three exposed sides, which
means less heating, less cooling costs. All of that makes the situation more affordable. As far as
the investor concerns and owner occupancy concerns even in the most aggressive markets,
New York, San Francisco, LA, only about 8% of units at the high end are being owned by
incorporated entities. Most of these units are local people who are just looking for another stream
of income, ability to monetize their lot to retire, things of that nature, so it's good to keep those
avenues open. They shouldn't be artificially constraining ability to build because that's just going
to harm supply. People talked earlier about why they haven't seen changes in the market, but 52
units over 30 years isn't something anyone is going to notice, especially when the university is
growing and the town is growing. They need to take serious supply side reforms seriously so that
people can respond to that. There is money to be made for people in this community by
monetizing their lots, by increasing density, by taking advantage of students with their inelastic
demand coming here, and spending so it's good to be able to capture that and get rid of the car
requirement.
Kelcev Patrick -Ferree (Sandusky Drive) lives in the South District and is here because she
supports these proposed changes to the zoning code to increase the availability and diversity of
housing in Iowa City. She supports all of the changes that City staff have has proposed, she
appreciates the students who are in the room tonight pointing out that they do need housing and
it's better for them to have housing closer to the university, they've got walking opportunities.
Personally, ideally, she'd love to have a few more grocery stores in that area so they don't have
to be driving out to get food. She thinks if some of the homeowners who have come to object to
these changes would add ADUs to their homes and rent to students some of them might find that
actually like having students around more than they realize. She noted they rented a room in
their house to a student a few years ago, for a brief period of time, and a few weeks ago her
husband officiated at his wedding. He's a dear friend and he's part of their lives now. But all of
that said, as she has listened to all of these concerns that have been raised and read all of the
reports and everything, she thinks that one potential solution for the University Impact Zone
presents itself. Part of it is what Jim Throgmorton mentioned before which is only allowing ADUs
to be built on properties that are owner occupied, except for also allowing ADUs of nonprofits
too. But then the second part of that is to divorce that ownership requirement from future
ownership of the property. Reading through the packet, her understanding from some of the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 16 of 22
things that were in there that the staff said is that the owner occupancy requirement presents a
big problem for future uses of that dwelling unit, both the main house and the dwelling unit.
Patrick -Ferree thinks that if they can separate those two requirements, the building requirement
and the renting requirement, that would be a good way forward just within the University Impact
Zone. What that could look like is either a general lack of requirement of owner occupancy to get
a rental permit for an ADU or it can be a provision that says that once the house plus ADU has
been sold to someone else, or otherwise transferred, like a transfer on death deed, the owner
occupancy requirement no longer applies to that property. Patrick thinks that would solve a lot of
the problems that they're seeing raised here today. However, she wants to be clear, this isn't
actually what she's advocating for, she likes the City staff s recommendations, she just wanted to
put that out there because it might be helpful if they need to find a compromise position.
Jared Knote wanted to make a point of clarification, he doesn't think anyone wants this being a
false antagonism, which he doesn't think is generative, nor is it representative, he thinks what
anyone is saying here is they want stable communities that are diverse, that are affordable, and
that are environmentally responsible and that is what might be unlocked by having ADUs
available to owner -occupied buildings, where they could have as opposed to having hollowing
out diverse communities, and rebuilding a monoculture. They have existing examples of where
that happens, in particular in the stabilization area of RNS-12 as one example. Other areas of
the University Impact Zone might also be relevant here. He thinks a false antagonism or an
interpretation of antagonism is not representative, many of the opinions are those principles, of
affordability, diversity and environmental and having a generative community.
Jim Throgmorton clarified that nothing he or anyone else affiliated within Northside
Neighborhood Association has said should be understood as being opposed to rental units in the
neighborhood. As noted from previous presentations a very large proportion of the housing in the
Northside Neighborhood already is rental, apartment buildings, rooming houses, single family
structures that have been converted to 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9 family structures. The problem for
many people in the Northside is not that there are renters in the neighborhood, it's that pressure
exists and the amendments they're considering would increase the pressure exist to convert
pretty much all of the Northside to rental units. The challenge is to make it possible for owner -
occupants to actually live in the neighborhood instead of feeling pressured by market forces to
move out. It's not hostility toward renters, not hostility towards students.
Andy Martin wanted to talk quickly about the parking requirement. He was talking to a guy who
lives in Solon and apparently they have regressed in their parking requirements there and they're
requiring more parking or something. Martin doesn't know the details but basically they're
requiring more parking per unit now and are the only town in the country that is trying to create
more rights for cars. He noted if they've got a street, that's where the car belongs, put the car on
the street, they don't need to create more parking lots for cars. Martin thinks that's something
they should consider that they want to build for people and not for cars. That's the way they've
kind of been heading in the last few years and he thinks it's great. When they went to two lanes
on Mormon Trek he thought it was crazy but now loves it. So, he would encourage them not to
try and build to allow more room for cars in the future.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 17 of 22
Sharon DeGraw added that she does love where she lives because of the number of students
that live all around, it's just the density is quite great and she is not sure how much more they
can go. There was a report that Jerry Anthony help compiled along with graduate students, and
it has an interesting statistic about tax revenue, but then think of tax revenue translated as
density. For the Northside they have 91 cents per square foot of tax revenue created out of the
Northside Neighborhood and that's translated as density. For the Weber neighborhood, it's 31
cents per square foot of space. And for Windsor Ridge, it is 24 cents. So if other areas took on a
little density, and if the ADU component works well outside the University Impact Zone, with or
without parking requirement, with or without landlord or owner -occupied, she sees more
possibility there. But just within the University Impact Area they're doing quite well right now.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Elliott moved that Title 14 zoning be amended with elimination of the standard that the
owner is not required to live on -site and that where accessory apartment is in the zoning
code be replaced with the term accessory dwelling unit.
Craig asked if the motion will limit the owner occupancy to the University Impact Zone. Elliott
replied she is not.
Elliott appreciates the extra work that the staff has gone to and the people who came to the
forum and the people here tonight. She does believe that loosening the current regulations on
ADUs will contribute to the strategic goal of attractive affordable housing for all people. Her
concern is with a proposed standard to eliminate the requirement for owner occupancy, the
majority of attendees at the forum and tonight had concerns about removing the owner -occupied
requirement. Removing the requirement places a greater burden on the University Impact Zone
and also likely the Longfellow zone, which is not in the University Impact Zone, but are older
neighborhoods where there are more rental units in the area. If one of the goals is to stabilize
and preserve the character of older neighborhoods, than allowing for ADUs with the owner on -
site helps to preserve the character of those neighborhoods.
Hensch stated he is a big fan of ADUs because he believes strongly in intergenerational housing
and that's why he supports ADUs. Interestingly, in the last issue of Planning magazine that just
came out, there was a discussion, as was referenced in the presentation, AARP and the
American Planning Association have collaborated to come up with these standards and they
issued a report for that. He found it interesting in this article that the main justification they give
for these new standards actually validate what the motion is, and to quote it says "we can point
out that by creating an accessory dwelling unit ordinance in your town might allow you to build a
unit in the backyard of your mother's house for a caregiver if you need care, or can act as an
income generating source for you". So in their own justifications they're saying that the reason
you should have these ADUs is because you're occupying that place and this is for caregivers for
you or intergenerational housing, or for income generation for you. He found it interesting that
they specifically in their recommendations say there shouldn't be requirement about the owner
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 18 of 22
on -site, but their justification says that's exactly what it actually should be. There should be an
owner on -site and he agrees 100% with that.
Quellhorst stated he would generally be in favor of removing the owner occupancy requirement
because doing that encourages investment in ADUs, which does a really nice job of balancing
these concerns of bringing down the cost of housing while also avoiding excessive density.
When they talk about people creating ADUs on their property, one thing that staff noted is these
folks are having trouble getting financing because they go to the bank and the bank says they're
not going to give a mortgage because if something were to happen to them they wouldn't
necessarily or their successor wouldn't be able to continue to rent out this ADU. He thinks that
removing owner occupancy requirements is in the best interest not only of developers, but also in
the interest of normal people that would want to build ADUs on their property but might not have
the funds to do so.
Padron is also in favor of removing the requirement and would support the motion with all of
these recommendations.
Craig is in favor of removing the requirement too but as a compromise could support a position
that left that requirement in the University Impact Zone and removed it elsewhere.
Hensch understands that the impetus for a lot of this is to decrease the cost of housing and he
honestly don't think this will have anything other than a marginal impact, even if they allowed
unrestricted ADU growth. That's not the driver of the housing costs in Iowa City.
Criag stated she doesn't think growth of ADUs is going to run rampant in any case, in any
neighborhood, in the next two years, but it's hard to predict the future.
Hensch noted it's a pretty strong statistic that in the last 30 years there has been 52 units, which
is 1.7 ADUs per year. He understands there's more restrictions on that but as Mr. Martin stated
at $100,000 to $150,000 for an ADU, a very limited number of people that have affordability for
that. His fear is that limited number of people are in the investor class, or people who are not
going to live in the neighborhood but will spend the money because they know they can rent that
out for the next 40 years so they can afford to build that ADU. He is really concerned about
neighborhood integrity.
Townsend stated her concern is when she thinks of affordable housing she thinks of housing for
families that are going to remain in the communities. She thinks the ADU is a good idea for
seniors and for people who want to keep their families together but would like to see that
uncoupled from calling it affordable housing because it's a whole different entity than just
affordable housing. If they take out that owner occupancy piece it just becomes another
moneymaker for whoever, they're going to rent out the big unit and rent out the small unit. What's
it going to do to the neighborhood. Townsend stated she lives up from the Mayflower and there's
lots of big yards in that area but it's still a community, it's a nice neighborhood. She can see
building ADUs that are not on the land with the owner becoming just rentals and there are a lot of
rental homes in that neighborhood, but their owners live across the street. So they've bought
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 14 of 22
units on the other side of the street and they're kept up. But she has also seen properties in the
Iowa City area where that's not happening, especially around the University where some of those
places are just run-down and they tack them up just enough to get students in and then they're
falling apart. Therefore she thinks they need to keep the owner -occupied piece in there.
Wade stated the reason he seconded the motion with the owner occupancy requirement is really
an incremental approach to it. He has the same concerns he raised last time, it does become an
opportunity for a private owner on premises to make that property more affordable as their
ownership for creating a rental unit to help supplement the cost of the house. As everyone is
aware the cost of housing is expensive right now and anything to help that or level the playing
field is good. However, he has the same concerns that requirement is not going to get them any
closer to walkability from being close to downtown as far as getting more housing on the market.
If this doesn't promote or show results in increased utilization or development of ADUs then he
would look to revisit that requirement after a year to see if that needs to be lifted.
Padron asked staff if she wanted to rent a property for her family with an ADU for her parents, for
example, she couldn't do that because she wouldn't be the owner. Lehmann confirmed she could
not do that, if she bought the property with the ADU then it would be okay.
Quellhorst stated he is supportive of ADUs and looking at the statistics that staff presented, he
thought was pretty compelling in terms of just how few of these properties have been
constructed. Therefore, to the extent they favor an incremental approach, eliminating the owner
occupancy requirement isn't likely to result in dozens or hundreds of ADUs overnight. He thinks
that's a process that would happen fairly slowly. He also thinks that ADUs are still subject to
other zoning requirements so they're not just packing places onto tiny lots that are not suitable
for them. They still have to meet setback requirements and there's still a variety of provisions in
the zoning code that ensure that ADUs are consistent with the character of the community. He
strongly supports ADUs and thinks that they can eliminate the owner occupancy requirements
and wouldn't see drastic change. And in the very unlikely event that they did start seeing diverse
impact the community there's nothing stopping them from coming back and revisiting that
regulation and making further recommendations to Council.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3 (Craig, Quellhorst, Padron dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: AUGUST 16, 2023:
Craig moved to approve the meeting minutes from August 16, 2023. Quellhorst seconded the
motion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
Russett gave an updated on a few development projects. First the rezoning across from the fire
station on Dodge and Scott with the proposed coffee shop/mixed-use building and townhomes
was recently subdivided and approved by Council and the site plan was also recently approved.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 20 of 22
Second is out on Melrose and Slothower, the annexation, rezoning and subdivision, they came
back for a re -subdivision and are proposing some additional lots and streets and that was pre -
approved by Council at the last meeting. Also approved by Council last night was the local
landmark rezoning of the original Emma Goldman Clinic. Regarding the rest of the Zoning Code
Amendments related to housing, the first reading passed at Council last night and they deferred
the second consideration to the next meeting and staff will be preparing some additional
information for Council. Lastly, Russett mentioned staff are working on grant application to HUD
for pro -housing. Lehmann stated the goal is to address barriers to housing choice and it's a lot of
the similar things that they've see in the amendments that they've been proposing. Staff has
prepared a grant application that will go before Council at their next meeting, it would request
$5.6 million in federal funds, and the staff is proposing that the City would match it with $2.85
million. The activities that they're proposing are a continuation of a lot of things that they've
already been able to move forward over the last several years, including trying to expand the
scope of the Comprehensive Plan update, specifically looking at the housing element and a
regional housing study, but also looking at a land use element that really does reflect the desires
of the community. They've also had parking as something to look at as a long-term barrier to
affordable housing and they would want to do a parking study and possibly bring proposed
changes to the parking standards. Staff is also looking at if the City can directly develop
affordable housing rather than using RFPs to develop affordable housing. Lehmann clarified it
would be income -restricted affordable housing and include funding for a pilot project that would
hopefully be able to produce 24 dwelling units that would be affordable and kickstart a City
development arm or housing authority development arm. Staff is also looking at other activities
that address more immediate needs such as an emergency assistance fund that would help with
rent for folks who might become unhoused otherwise, look at security deposits for folks that can't
find housing, and also doing housing counseling as part of the Housing Authority. There is a
comment period right now available online at ICgov.org/action plan or from the main page there
is a news article that will link to the pro -housing grant application. Lehmann encourages the
Commissioners to take a look at it and provide feedback. Staff will review all the
comments/feedback and that'll all be provided to Council. Lehmann added there would also be
an accessory dwelling unit program and provide funds to produce accessory dwelling units that
would help homeowners.
Townsend noted she heard on the news this week that they are going to start to charge for the
electric charging stations so how will that affect building when they're putting in those units now.
Lehmann explained that residential properties are exempted, his understanding is that it applies
to commercial and public properties. He also noted the EV standards are something that staff
still intends to bring back to this Commission and they will probably recommend that it only be
required for residential properties then because of that change there should be grant funds that
are available to help with that.
Hensch noted because he has less than a year and a half left on this Commission there are two
items he'd like them to discuss sometime in the future. One is the borders of the University
Impact Area need to be looked at as they just don't seem correct to him and wonders when the
last time they were updated, but if it's truly a University Impact Zone they should really make sure
that it's accurate. The other thing, and it is a minor thing, but it drives him crazy, is throughout
town there's flood detention areas a mostly they're the responsibility of HOAs to maintain but
they don't maintain them, they just abandon them. Perhaps this would be an opportunity to
maybe to restore those detention areas and if they had a pollinator requirement for prairie
restoration, because they don't need maintenance other than burn it or mow at once every five
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 4, 2023
Page 21 of 22
years. The HOAs do not maintain them and they get overgrown with shrubs. He would like to
discuss that sometime.
Russett noted they all are members of the American Planning Association and should be getting
their emails and the Planning magazine. Lehmann stated they do have to opt in for a paper
version.
Craig stated a recent email from the APA was interesting to her, it was about zoning for home
occupation and how that world has changed so much in the last 10, let alone 20 years, because
so many people are working from home, and what kind of work are they doing, it's not always
obvious, even to their neighbors, that they could be running a business out of their home, so she
is wondering what the zoning regulations for home occupation are. Russett replied they actually
don't deal with home occupations, even though it is in the zoning code they have other staff that
deal with home occupation permits for home -based business, the planning staff doesn't
implement that section of the code.
Townsend asked how that differs from people that now work at home, they're part of a company.
Russett replied the State actually preempted cities to some extent on how they regulate home -
based business. If someone works at home via zoom or whatever all day that is a no impact
home -based business per the State Code and cities can't require a permit. The State Code has
this thing called No Impact Home- Based Business which is if any business doesn't create traffic
or that the neighbors can't visually see the business, cities can't require a permit for it.
Craig asked what if someone converted their three -season room into a hair cutting business and
there was a hairdryer and washing station and that's what she did that the whole time. Russett
stated the current code has prohibited uses and that's not one of them. Additionally, even now
with some of these things that the zoning code actually prohibits, like a restaurant, if it can be
demonstrated that it's no impact they could potentially operate without a permit.
Finally, Russett wanted to mention the local HUD region seven has been following Iowa City's
proposed zoning code changes and they're very interested in what the City is doing here and
requested to meet with staff so staff will be meeting with HUD next month.
Townsend asked staff to suggest to them that they revisit the formula for affordable housing
because one of the housing members thinks it's too damn high.
ADJOURNMENT:
Elliott moved to adjourn, seconded by Townsend and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
10/19
1112
11116
1217
12/21
114
1/18
2115
3/1
4/5
4119
6121
7/5
7/19
8/2
8116
1014
:RAID, SUSAN
X
X
X
OJE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1ENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
'ADRON, MARIA
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
2UELLHORST, SCOTT
__
__ __
_ __
__ _
_ __
__ _
__ _
_ __
__ _
_ __
__ _
__ __
__ _
_ _
__ _
X
X
SIGNS, MARK
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
rOWNSEND, BILLIE
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
OJE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OIE
X
X
WADE, CHAD
X
O/E
X
X
X
OJE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.g.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Planning & Zoning Commission: October 18 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Planning & Zoning Commission: October 18 [See Recommendation]
CITY OF IOWA CITY
, ,45`1 MEMORANDUM
Date: November 16, 2023
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner
Re: Recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission
At its October 18, 2023 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission have the following
recommendations to the City Council:
By a vote of 4-3 (Townsend, Hench and Elliott dissenting) the Commission recommends
maintaining 35-feet as the maximum allowable height in the Neighborhood Stabilization
Residential (RNS-12) zones.
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
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 18, 2023-6:OOPM—FORMAL MEETING
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Mike Hensch, Maria Padron, Scott
Quellhorst, Billie Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Hektoen, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Throgmorton, Wally Plahutnik, Susan Shullaw, Nancy Carlson,
Sharon DeGraw, Charlie Thomas, Deanna Thomann, Dave Moore,
Spencer Blackwell, Jared Knote
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 4-3 (Townsend, Hench and Elliott dissenting) the Commission recommends
maintaining 35-feet as the maximum allowable height in the Neighborhood Stabilization
Residential (RNS-12) zones.
CALL TO ORDER:
Hensch called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ITEMS
CASE NO. REZ23-0005:
(continued discussion from 8116)
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning, to reduce the maximum allowable height in
the Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zone from 35-feet to 27-feet.
Russett began the staff report with background information. At the August 16 meeting the
Northside Neighborhood Association requested to reduce the height to 27-feet for new single
family and duplex structures. Staff did not support that recommendation and the Commission
deferred the item to tonight and requested that staff meet with the Neighborhood Association
again, which they did on September 6. Russett noted a couple of the main concerns that the
Neighborhood Association representatives mentioned to staff were that the 35-foot height
maximum acts as a financial incentive for investors to demolish older, affordable owner -occupied
structures and that the 35-foot height maximum encourages redevelopment of out of scale
buildings that will harm neighboring properties. The example given by the Neighborhood
Association was the single-family home proposed at 319 North Van Buren Street and at the
meeting they were requesting the reduction in height to 27-feet for new single family and duplex
structures. Staff continues to recommend retaining the current height maximum of 35-feet in the
RNS-12 zone.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 2 of 14
Russett stated for the purpose of this presentation she was going to try to focus on new
information and not the information that was presented on August 16. One item that was briefly
discussed at the August 16 meeting was a justification for having varying height limits for varying
land uses. She noted if there's an interest in modifying the height only for single-family and
duplex structures, justification must be identified why those lower intensity residential uses need
a lower height maximum. The main concern that's outlined in the staff report is the applicability of
this only to new single-family and duplex structures which would require varying standards for
varying uses as existing single-family and duplex uses would be subject to the 35-feet rule and
new single-family and duplexes would be 27-feet and all other land uses would be 35-feet. This
would also require staff to implement different height requirements for different uses built at
different points in time. Russett noted recent correspondence from Jim Throgmorton of the
Northside Neighborhood Association agrees with staff on this point and recommends applying
the 27-foot height maximum to both existing and new single-family and duplex uses.
Russett showed a map of all of the properties that are zoned RNS-12 in the City noting there's
approximately 500 properties City-wide that are zoned RNS-12. 75% of those are within historic
districts or conservation districts, and staff provided additional detail on the City's historic
preservation program in the written staff report. A few highlights of key points about those
districts are that they are regulated differently and are subject to historic preservation guidelines,
and exterior modifications require regulated permits which require historic review. Although some
modifications in the historic and conservation districts to homes can be reviewed by staff, any
major changes have to go to the Historic Preservation Commission and that includes demolition
and new construction. Russett validated that the City has a very robust Historic Preservation
Program and those overlays add a large degree of protection from future construction, demolition
and development changes. She reiterated 75% of the RNS-12 properties City-wide are in one of
those overlays. Within the Northside Neighborhood specifically, 85% of those properties are in
historic or conservation district overlay. Staff updated the demolition analysis that was previously
presented to the Commission and since 1992 there have been 17 residential demolitions in the
RNS-12 zone. The data suggests that redevelopment is not increasing, although that can change
in the future. Staff believes that part of the reason there haven't been a lot of demolitions is
because of the historic preservation program and those historic and conservation districts which
restrict demolition. Russett also noted that six of the 17 demolitions occurred prior to the land
being rezoned to RNS-12 so those properties were demolished and redeveloped when it was a
multifamily zoning district. Staff also looked at height for a few of those redevelopment projects,
they were able to find height for 11 of the 17 residential demos and two of the 11 were above 27-
feet and both of those were multifamily. Nine of the 11 were 27-feet or less, which suggests that
the 35-foot height maximum is not an incentive for redevelopment otherwise they would be
seeing those buildings constructed at 35-feet or higher than 27-feet.
In conclusion, Russett stated the purpose of the RNS-12 zone is to maintain a single-family
character, which has been interpreted as preserving single-family uses and restricting multifamily
residential. The current height limitation is consistent with other single-family residential zones.
Again, there's a need to justify why the City would have a different height limit for lower intensity
residential uses, as opposed to other uses within that zone, and staff was concerned with
implementation. Again, in recent correspondence from Mr. Throgmorton they're okay with
applying this to both existing and new single-family and duplex structures. But again, 75% of the
properties are regulated within historic and conservation district overlays, which ensure new
structures are not out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood. Lastly, the data staff looked at
showing the residential demolitions that have occurred over time do not suggest 35-foot
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 3 of 14
redevelopment.
Staff has received several pieces of correspondence and all of them are in support of reduction
to 27-feet. All correspondence was emailed to the Commissioners and are also printed out
before them at their seats.
Staffs recommendation is to continue to keep the 35-foot height max in the RNS-12 zone. If the
Commission wants to move forward with an amendment staff would recommend a couple of
things, one that the amendment apply to both new and existing single-family and duplex
structures and that a public purpose justification has identified why single-family and duplex uses
need a different height limit than other uses.
In teRNS of next steps, if the Commission makes a recommendation tonight City Council will
likely hold their public hearing on November 21.
Hensch opened the public hearing.
Jim Throgmorton (814 Ronalds Street) is speaking as co-chair of the Northside Neighborhood
Association Steering Committee and stated one month ago this Commission urged City staff to
meet with them to revise their earlier report and to provide this Commission with
recommendations for tonight's meeting. Three of them on the Northside Steering Committee met
with City staff members Tracy Hightshoe and Anne Russett on September 6. They found it to be
an enlightening and constructive conversation and he appreciated that very much. During the
meeting staff asked them to clarify what the specific concerns were, and how the proposed
height reduction addressed them. In its revised report City staff recommends against the
proposed change and they offer several reasons. The one reason that stands out is the staff
could not identify a governmental purpose for having the maximum allowable height vary based
on use. Throgmorton wanted to call attention to and remove one of the obstacles off the table as
already referred to this in the September 6 meeting, look for a mutually acceptable compromise.
The Northside Neighborhood Association floated the idea of applying the change only to new
single-family structures and duplexes and not to existing structures. However, the staff report
persuaded them that applying a different standard to new and existing houses would produce
unnecessary complications. Consequently, the Northside Neighborhood Association agreed with
staff that the height amendment should apply both to existing and new single-family and duplex
structures. Doing so is actually consistent with their original petition which they have not changed
in writing. Therefore, it's not as if they're actually changing something here and this should
eliminate staffs concern about this aspect of the proposed amendment. Throgmorton stated
what led them to propose the change in maximum allowable height, put concisely is the current
read 35-foot limit encourages redevelopment without of scale buildings that can have harmful
effects on neighboring properties. The existing height limit provides a financial incentive for
investors to demolish older and currently very affordable owner -occupied structures and makes it
less likely that appropriately sized affordable new structures will be built. This financial incentive
stems from the fact that the RNS-12 zones are located in the University Impact Area and
therefore subject to intense demand for off -campus student housing. Throgmorton noted it was
this housing market pressure that led City government to create the RNS-12 district and to give it
a unique public purpose. This unique purpose is "to stabilize certain existing neighborhoods by
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 4 of 14
preserving the predominantly single-family residential character of certain neighborhoods." As
former City planner Bob Miklo states in his detailed advice to this Commission, which the
Northside Neighborhood Association supports and trusts they have read, 'for those who live in
neighborhoods single-family character means all the things that make up quality of life, enough
sunlight to allow gardens, trees and other living landscaping, light shining through windows on a
wintry day, a fresh summer breeze and not having light and air blocked by a 35-foot tall wall a
few feet from one's property". This market pressure also led City government to stipulate as a
matter of public policy in the Central District Plan that the City will "work to achieve a healthy
balance of rental and owner -occupied housing in the district's older neighborhoods" and
continuing to permit new infill structures as tall as 35-feet in RNS-12 districts would make it more
difficult to achieve that objective. The potential that out of scale buildings could have harmful
effects on neighboring properties is also affected by the unique physical characteristics of the
RNS-12 neighborhoods. Single-family and duplex structures comprise the vast majority of
properties in those neighborhoods and very few, if any, of those structures currently exceed two
and a half stories, which is roughly equivalent to 27-feet. Moreover, the compact lots found in the
RNS-12 zones are among the smallest in the City. Consequently, unlike in other residential
zones with large lots and setbacks, 35-foot buildings could easily dominate or cause excessive
shadows on neighboring structures. The existing 35-foot limit therefore runs counter to the
purpose of the RNS-12 zone. Section 14-2A-1 E stipulates that the maximum height standards in
the code are intended "to promote a reasonable building scale and relationship between
buildings to provide options from height, air and privacy and discourage buildings that visually
dominate other buildings in the vicinity." Throgmorton stated furthermore the current 35-foot
maximum was originally adopted to allow walk -out basements on sloping lots. There are very few
sloping lots in the RNS-12 zones and none in the Northside. Therefore, there is no need to
accommodate single-family and duplex structures on sloping lots by permitting 35-foot heights.
Throgmorton next addressed the staffs specific concern about varying maximum heights based
on land use. The Northside Neighborhood Association believes there is a clear rationale for
varying heights. The reason for changing to a 27-foot height limit for single-family and duplex
structures in RNS-12 zones is to preserve the existing quality of life in these neighborhoods by
ensuring that new 35-foot-tall houses on these small lots do not dominate their neighbors and
deny them access to sunlight, breezes and privacy. If the 27-foot height limit is adopted for
single-family and duplex structures, the few nonresidential uses allowed in the zone, schools,
religious institutions and daycares, could still be up to 35-feet but those uses are already subject
to greater setbacks that mitigate against any potential harm. In the end, therefore, there's really
only one question the Commission needs to answer. Will changing the maximum permitted
height of single-family and duplex structures from 35- to 27-feet increase the likelihood that new
infill development will help achieve a healthy balance of affordable rental and owner -occupied
housing while preserving the predominantly single-family residential character of RNS-12
neighborhoods. If the answer is yes then they should vote in favor of the proposed amendment.
Wally Plahutnik (430 N. Gilbert Street) is here to speak for himself as a former person who sat on
this Commission for seven years (2005-2012). During that period they rewrote the entire code
and also redid all the comprehensive plans for each neighborhood. As a commissioner they are
all aware that the Comprehensive Plan should guide their decisions. That's what they told the
people at every meeting they had, and all the different sessions and workshops that they held.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page S of 14
Staffs analysis to the neighborhood's request regarding the Comprehensive Plan focuses on the
land use in that specific map of the residential neighborhood stabilization (RNS-12) district. The
letters RNS is residential, neighborhood stabilization and there's only two that exist in the City,
the rest are residential neighborhoods or IRS. Staff acknowledges that there are many
statements within those comprehensive plans with regard to infill, so a lot of that is already
covered, but it all speaks to ensuring that it's compatible and complimentary to the surrounding
neighborhood. Staff goes on to say that because the maximum allowable height in most
residential zones is 35-feet, it is implied that 35-feet ensures compatibility, that's taken as a given
apparently. One thing Plahutnik would like to make note of, and strongly object to, is that every
time staff refers to the stabilization's wording, they say that this does not interfere with single-
family uses. The stabilization was a district made not to preserve uses, they can use any houses
as a single-family use, it's meant to preserve the single-family character of the neighborhoods,
character and uses, those words aren't interchangeable. Uses certainly come within the broader
heading of character but one can't cram character into the smaller thing of uses. This very
narrow reading of the Comprehensive Plan dismisses qualitative measures of compatibility. It
ignores that there are very few 35-foot houses anywhere in Iowa City. Typically, it's a walkout
basement that adds that third floor, so the street level is less than 35-feet in almost every
instance. Introducing a 35-foot-tall house with a flat roof, which isn't denied in this 35-foot limit, in
the neighborhood of modest one- and two-story houses is certainly not compatible with the
neighborhood's character. An investment company that has purchased several properties with
the intent of redeveloping them has just proposed such a structure. To make it worse, the
building would have a flat roof, making it appear even taller and casting even more of a shadow
over its neighbors. Plahutnik urges the Commission to follow the Comprehensive Plan and really
work through this to preserve the character of the neighborhood, not just the single-family use.
Susan Shullaw (718 N. Johnson Street) would like to read a portion of the letter that was
submitted to the Commission by Anne Freerks on the occasion of this hearing. As they may
know Freerks was part of this Commission for a number of years. "I am writing to ask that you
vote in favor of the Northside Neighborhood's request to reduce the height limit in RNS-12
zones. I live on the far west edge of the Longfellow neighborhood, which is comprised of RNS-12
and RS-8 zones, bordering areas that are entirely occupied by undergraduate students. When
we were a young family just starting out we were attracted to the charming houses of South
Governor Street. We liked the proximity to Longfellow Elementary, and it was also a very
attractive and affordable option. In 1993, we took the plunge and bought 100-year-old house
there. We were welcomed by a number of elderly couples who had raised their families on South
Governor and they were happy that our house had not become a student rental like so many
others in the neighborhood. We didn't know it at the time, but we were helping to stabilize the
neighborhood. In 1999, we were surprised when a charming old house across the alley was torn
down and a large three-story apartment building went up. There was no care given to how the
building fit in a neighborhood. All the beautiful mature oak trees were cut down and every square
inch of the available space was taken up with a new building. Although we enjoy having college
kids as neighbors, we found that as more and more students moved in, their habits can conflict
with working families. There are costs and benefits in every situation. For this reason
neighborhood stability, and an increase in density on these narrow lots has great impact. We
knew little about zoning before the apartment building went up. Several of our neighbors were in
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 6 of 14
the same situation. We talked and then decided to approach the City, which is when we found
out that Lucas and Governor Streets were zoned RM-12 multifamily and more three story
apartment buildings were planned. Investors were actively trying to buy properties. A realtor
called me and said I should get out while I can. In a hurried moment we considered selling but
we thought of the elderly neighbors who had welcomed us and the other young families that
were also making their homes on the western streets of Longfellow. We also knew long term
renters were drawn to the neighborhood for the same reasons we were. They too were
concerned about being displaced by new and more expensive student housing. We decided to
stay and fight for our neighborhood. This experience taught us that zoning can be a powerful tool
affecting our daily lives. We had our neighbors petition the City to rezone our neighborhood to
RNS-12. Investment companies that were buying up houses objected to our request but the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council agreed with us that Iowa City needs some
close -in neighborhoods that are sustainable and attractive to all sorts of households, owner -
occupied families as well as renters, young families, singles and retirees. Recent proposals for a
35-foot-tall houses in the RNS-12 zone have revealed a loophole that is counter to the intent of
the zone to stabilize and preserve existing neighborhoods. I urge the Commission to approve the
Northside Neighborhood's request to bring the allowed building heights in line with existing
houses in the RNS-12 zone. This will not only apply to the northside but will be beneficial to
South Lucas and South Governor Streets as well. We have raised our family on South Governor
Street and at some point we will be ready to move on. We hope to sell to another young family
who will send their kids to Longfellow and walk to their jobs downtown. We hope that you will
support such families with good zoning policy. Thank you for taking the time to read this and for
serving on the Commission."
Nancy Carlson (1002 E. Jefferson Street) is one of the group of neighbors who approached the
City in 1993 who were concerned with a proposed development that they felt would dramatically
change the character of their neighborhood so they asked for help. The City responded by
changing the zoning from RM-12 to RNS-12, that was the solution the City came up with. Over
the years they felt that this was a serious undertaking and knew it would change the course of
their neighborhood. They discussed it, they contacted all of the neighbors, they explained the
differences between the RM-12 zone and the RNS-12 zone and wanted to make sure that
everyone understood and was on board for this change. Their neighborhood was the first, thanks
to the help of the City and over the years other RM-12 zones in the University Impact Zone also
requested to be rezoned to RNS because of the pride and love for their neighborhood. Most of
the homeowners in these neighborhoods are working class, they have worked hard to own their
homes and they are proud of them. At the time of the rezoning to RNS-12 the concepts of
historic districts and conservation areas were foreign to them, they wanted to give new neighbors
the dream of home ownership that they had experienced. They had faith new neighbors would
responsibly respect what was already there and for years that was true. Because of that their
neighborhood is an encyclopedia of housing styles, but all the houses no matter what style have
similar proportions, they are all one to two and a half stories tall. When they first were presented
with this zone, they discussed all these things over and over again because they realized that
this would make a big change in their neighborhood. They looked at the dimensions but were
naive and not as adept as someone in construction to understand what the 35-foot height limit
actually was. They looked around the neighborhood and looked at the height of all the houses in
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 7 of 14
the neighborhood and thought okay, this is a good height. Houses from the 50s and houses from
the 1900s are all pretty much the same amount in height so they did not realize that they had
allowed something to happen that they had no intention of having happened. Right now they
have reached a point where newcomers are interested only in their rights and maximizing their
investment. The investment those of them who live here and have made in creating and
maintaining a neighborhood is of no concern to them. Their properties become dark holes,
sucking the life out of the neighborhood. Everybody has been talking about the Comprehensive
Plan and what this means and how they're supposed to follow it. The zoning code was made up
to enforce the Comprehensive Plan. To quote from the zoning code on the purpose of the zoning
code, "the provisions of this title are intended to implement the city of Iowa's City's
Comprehensive Plan in a manner that promotes the health, safety, order, convenience,
prosperity, and general welfare of the citizens of Iowa City." Carlson is asking the Commission
to amend the height to 27-feet which is what they thought was 35-feet when they did their thing
out of love for their neighborhood. She believes this is needed to continue the investment made
in creating and maintaining their neighborhood.
Sharon DeGraw (519 Brown Street) lives in the Northside Neighborhood and walks a great deal.
In moving to the Northside Neighborhood, it's the whole walkability factor and the experience that
one gets living in the neighborhood. She showed an image not in the Northside Neighborhood
but represents something that is the kind of thing that they would want to avoid in the RNS-12
neighborhoods. The image is an apartment complex on Iowa Avenue. The apartment complex is
gigantic next to the single-family home. If they allow that kind of patterning that is a visual
dissonance, it disrupts the neighborhood, and makes the neighborhood a place that people don't
want to walk by and are less excited to live in. People don't want to live next to tall buildings that
are out of character. She likens it to the experience of when you pull up to an intersection and
someone has music blaring very loud, the first thing you want to do is get out of there and get
away from that car. This height differential in a neighborhood is not what she would want to live
in nor look at and feels other people who invested in their neighborhood and bought property
there would feel the same way. The next image shows a suburban neighborhood and that's
where they would find a 35-foot-tall building because in the back of the house there would be a
walkout basement but the front facades are well under 27-feet. In all the RNS-12 single-family or
duplex houses that are currently in the close to downtown area, the character is mostly one or
two stories, they can have walkout basements that are in the back, even then they're rarely 35-
feet tall for the residential dwellings. The next image shows apartments that are in the RNS-12
next to single-family homes, the ones in RNS-12 zones throughout the City are mostly under 27-
feet, there are very rare instances when they're above that. She next showed four instances
where there are nonresidential businesses, St. Wenceslaus, Preucil School, Bethel AME and a
daycare on Fairchild Street. Only two of them are over 35-feet tall, but they're on properties that
are very large and there's not the issue of keeping light and air away from the neighboring
buildings. The Bethel AME Church is under 27-feet and so is the preschool. In conclusion
DeGraw stated that the overwhelming character of Iowa City's RNS-12 zones consist of one- and
two-story houses and a few apartment buildings with three floors, but even those apartment
buildings are respectful of their neighbors in teRNS of height. There are a couple of taller historic
buildings, but they have generous setbacks and do not harm their neighbors. The intent of the
RNS-12 is to preserve the single-family character and the Comprehensive Plan encourages the
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 8 of 14
infill development to be compatible with the existing character. The requested change in height
from 35-feet to 27-feet is consistent with those goals. The change will help preserve the quality of
life of the neighborhoods and it's a valid zoning code change. DeGraw stated it's very important
because of the consistency that will be brought to developers. If there's the two and a half story
height that is true for historic districts and conservation districts, then if they go to 27-feet high,
which is about two and a half stories tall in the RNS-12 zones that eliminates any confusion for
developers and would be a safe way to proceed.
Char€ie Thomas (100 Currier Hall) is a student at the University and lives in a campus residence
hall. He would like note a brief take on the larger scope of this endeavor. He took a walk to the
northside area yesterday and while it's numerous trees, falling leaves and cozy homes he found
attractive, it's clearly not sustainable. It lives on the border between a growing university and
near the downtown of a city with egregious housing demand. To implement a height restriction
like this legitimizes the economic enclave Northside represents. It is in the Commission's best
interest to code a city that provides for the numerous kinds of people that want to live there and
further cementing these low -density zones directly conflicts with that. There is no indication from
the data of approved demolitions that the current height limit gives an incentive at all to demolish
existing property. The fear of out of scale buildings is mitigated by the already existent and
limiting historic preservation measures and it is simply redundant to give this extra measure.
Deanna Thomann (208 Fairchild Street) stated she has lived in the Northside District for more
than 20 years, her sister Dana and her bought the house when they were in college. The home
was built in 1876 and once belonged to her great great grandparents. Today, her sister teaches
at the University and she works from home as a copy editor. Dana lives upstairs in the old house
and Thomann live downstairs. She likes her home and her neighborhood, she likes the vibrancy
of living near the downtown and the University. From the second floor of her house she is able to
gaze down at the flower beds she keeps in the front yard. Above this she sees a layered horizon
to the south that includes church steeples, as well as tall new structures as the trend in Iowa City
is to build up. That trend makes good sense in the right places, but historic districts are just not
the right place. In 2004, she stood at this same podium and voiced her support for the creation of
the Northside Historic District, a plan which included her block. Some property owners objected
so much that they were left out of the district and therefore several non -protected properties sit
across the alley from her house and two others are across from her on Fairchild Street. The two
properties that are across the street were built in 1890 and 1900, these are solid homes and are
rentals with large backyards. These structures are in the RNS-12 zone but there is no
conservation overlay for these homes. Currently, they could be torn down and replaced with tall,
dwarfing structures surrounding old homes and blocking sunlight and the skyline that her
neighbors and she enjoy. Tall structures would undoubtedly disrupt the scale and the harmony of
her block. As they all know, the RNS-12 was created to stabilize fragile residential areas. In his
August 15, 2023, letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission Robert Miklo, former senior
planner for the city of Iowa City, explained that the height limit of 35-feet was meant to
accommodate walkout basements on sloping lots. However, they now realize few RNS-12
structures sit on sloping lots and his August letter Miklo states the limit of 35-feet is excessive
and should be changed to 27-feet and that would be in keeping with the two and a half story
houses that are commonplace in the neighborhood. Thomann agrees with Miklo and asks that
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 9 of 14
the Commission change the maximum height for houses and duplexes in the RNS-12 zone to
27-feet. This change will further stabilize the RNS-12 zone and protect her neighborhoods quality
of life. Thomann wants to stress she is not resistant to change, she realizes they need to
accommodate the growing population but tearing down good historic structures and sending
materials to the landfill is not the answer. She really hopes they can continue to take pride in
preserving the embodied energy of the older neighborhoods. Furthermore, she encourages City
staff, City Commissioners and City Council to explore ways to shake old properties from the grips
of the large rental companies. Imagine finding a way to make the old housing stock affordable so
that a new wave of various people can live here. She saw this new wave of various people last
night when she watched the City Council meeting. That was a long, emotional meeting, with
immigrants coming to the podium and an interpreter telling about their struggles to find housing
close in. Thomann would hope this new wave of various people would be included within her old
neighborhood, she really would love that. She realizes they don't talk about who lives in the
structures in planning and zoning but if they could integrate people like that and get more
homeowners in the neighborhood, that would be the ultimate stabilization plan.
Dave Moore (425 E. Davenport Street) thanked the Commission for considering the zoning
amendment. He stated the amendment is really simple and it makes sense and it lines things up
with the Comprehensive Plan. Moore thinks this will be good for all neighborhoods, and blocks in
the RNS-12 zone or the residential neighborhood stability zone. More specifically, he's here
today on behalf of himself because of a situation that has impacted his family and the people
living in his immediate neighborhood in the lower north side of Davenport Street and
Bloomington Street. It's an example of what can happen without this amendment. In fact, it is
evidence that the current height limit is an incentive to tear down and build big. What was torn
down was an 1840s Weaver's cottage at 319 North Van Buren. Formerly it was rentable and it
was affordable. The biggest property owner in the Northside, Prestige Properties, has proposed
a full 35-feet house with a nearly flat roof in his backyard. Moore showed images of the proposed
building from the east elevation noting its nearly flat. The north elevation shows the blank wall
would be what he'd be seeing over a small backyard for the next 20 years. It's huge and would
block the view and sunlight from his house. He showed another image capturing the scale of the
first building and then a second building was proposed which was actually taller. If the builder is
successful with this new model, he could build it elsewhere, there are other vacant lots in the
RNS-12 zone, just like the mansard roof apartment became a model for student housing in the
1980s. Back then the City actually created the RNS-12 zone to prevent more of them. Moore
reiterated this particular three-story design is injurious to neighboring properties and is at odds
with the compatibility asked for by the Comprehensive Plan and a bad precedent. At first he was
not sure really how tall 35-feet was but then as he walked around and looked at buildings to get a
sense it became clear this is like a tower, it is crazy and is like a monolith. How high is 35-feet,
the Englert Theater building is 35-feet high. He noted he and his wife have lived in their house for
45 years, somebody called it a century neighborhood and it's a little daunting to think that they've
lived there half the existence of the neighborhood, but apparently many of the houses are like
that. They raised two nice daughters there and do not want to be forced out of their
neighborhood because the quality of life will be diminished by a three-story house that they can
see out their south window, his work room. They don't want to be driven out by someone who's
trying to squeeze every dime out of one of the smallest lots in any core neighborhood.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 10 of 14
Additionally, does anyone recall ever seeing any flat roof three-story houses anywhere else in
Iowa City. The tenants in the house directly north of this property will lose even more sunlight.
The residents on the other side of the busy alley with young grade school children will also be
affected. They appealed this twice to the Board of Adjustments and got letters of support from
every single owner -occupied home within 200 yards. The lower northside is a fairly moderately
income -based neighborhood. The most common complaint was the height. The Board of
Adjustments found that the building official made a mistake when she approved the setback
reduction to allow the 35-foot-tall building to be built two feet closer to the property line.
Spencer Blackwell (25 N. Lucas Street) is a renter and is concerned that this will add more
complexity to the zoning code and will reduce the amount of units being built. Whether it be
duplexes or single-family zoning houses, if less units are being built, everybody's rent starts
going up. This does affect more than just this neighborhood and over the last year most people's
rents have gone up over $100. If they limit the amount of housing they're going to build, they're
going to end up with higher rents and push people further out and away.
Jared Knote (1021 E. Market Street) stated on page four of the agenda packet is an image of the
stabilization area and there's little carve outs relatively gerrymandered around this one little
section of Market and Jefferson, he keeps coming back to it and has asked folks to get on
Google and just look at the 900 block of Jefferson Street and if they look across on Jefferson,
they'll see four squares. If one is familiar with the 1920s type of architecture, you will see lots of
approximately 1000 square foot, single family ranches. The bar chart that showed most of the
recent buildings that were built in 2021, what came down was a farmhouse with a gable on it and
what was replaced there was a duplex. It is on an angled street which would explain the fact that
instead of having human scale where they see their neighbors, the back to the basement is really
a single story, then the second story or third story, which is a second story, but its really quite
elevated. Then they've got to the attic area for more living and it really takes up the entire lot. On
the other side of Jefferson right in the middle of the block is a hole in the ground that used to be
another small tutor style home. The point being that once one of these houses started to go right
next to that duplex that was built is actually another duplex where it's actually two homes on a
single lot. Next, that was another two homes on a single lot. It's not where his block is but if he
looks out his window, and Knote brought images from Google Maps to show the lots are non-
conforming lots, their houses are less than 1000 square feet. He is probably one of the people
who helped stabilize the block, because it was a student rental. He is working on his house every
single weekend and is concerned about destabilizing the neighborhood, in this stabilization zone
where they don't have any protections or overlays. What they've seen is once one house came
down and was replaced by a giant duplex and other builds, they have two houses on a single lot.
His neighborhood and his block is very diverse, by income, by rental status, by type, duplex, non -
duplex, students, nonstudents, families, racially diverse, and then one block over it's now gone
into price insensitive, monoculture, all students and more houses being knocked down
sequentially. Therefore, to say that there's no evidence that on single blocks where they're
seeing houses being taken down and replaced by price insensitive monoculture that it doesn't
destabilize blocks, that's just categorically in this case, not true. Knots thinks there's evidence to
that once that continues there's more and more momentum. Again he asks them to go to that
900 block of Jefferson and walk around the corner, the 900 block of Market and see that these
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 11 of 14
are pretty every type of housing stock, there's so much housing choice in these neighborhoods,
and at lots of different price points and lots of different types of people. But if they provide no
protection to the type of development that can go in these areas or have savvy developers who
can keep within the word, but push the spirit of what is described, they really will lose the stability
of the neighborhood.
Jim Throomorton (814 Ronalds Street) wanted to add the houses at greatest risk from the height
differential are ones located in the southeastern part of the Northside Neighborhood and in the
Court Hill District. Those houses tend be on smaller lots, they tend to be occupied by structures
that are valued in the $100,000s. Anyone who owns a house knows that assessed value in the
$100,000s is something very affordable in this area. It didn't used to be when he first moved
here, but it is now. So it's misguided to say, as a couple of speakers did, that this is sort of an
effort to preserve property rights or something like that in the Northside Neighborhood. The
biggest concern they have is for those properties outside of historic preservation districts and in
the southeastern side of the RNS-12 district.
Wally Plahutnik (430 N. Gilbert Street) wanted to add two points that he didn't get in. The first is
they're talking about the RNS-12 stabilization district itself, not historical districts and overlay. He
keeps hearing 75% of the RNS-12 is covered by historical district and conservation overlay. Well,
25% isn't and don't those people deserve to be spoken for as well. Secondly, this type of thing
has already been done. The South District has a two and a half story limit and so just considering
that this isn't out of the blue, this isn't something completely new, completely different. The South
District already has this type of restriction.
Dave Moore (425 E. Davenport Street) wanted to finish his thoughts about going to the Board of
Adjustments. The Board of Adjustments had found that the building official made a mistake
when she approved a setback reduction to allow the 35-foot-tall building to be built two feet
closer to the property line and that issue prevented the building from being built. The issue that
prevented the building was incorrect setback, but not the height. One of the Board of Adjustment
members said a simple drive by could have cleared this whole thing up months ago, it's obvious
that this doesn't fit in with the neighborhood. They had hoped the developer might come back
with something that was a little bit more reasonable, but he came back with an even taller
building. Once again, the Board found that the building official made a mistake about the front
setback, again about the front setback, it wasn't the height, so the developer could propose
another building that would be injurious to the neighborhood and to the neighbors who live close
by. Its hard to believe that so much time and money was spent by citizens simply to fight off a
building that the Comprehensive Plan and Central District says shouldn't even exist in the first
place. This amendment would put an end to that kind of problem this amendment has broad
support all the owner -occupied homes in the immediate area signed off, many people in the
Northside and other neighborhoods, many organizations and very deeply experienced people
who wrote letters. Moore wanted to thank the volunteers from the Northside Neighborhoods for
walking the streets and doing the real measurements, finding out the real facts and putting this
proposal together.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 12 of 14
Quellhorst moved to maintaining the 35-feet as the maximum allowable height in the
Neighborhood Stabilization Residential (RNS-12) zones. Padron seconded the motion.
Quellhorst noted he lives in Longfellow in an historic home and shares a lot of the concerns that
have been voiced today but this area appears to be well protected by historic and conservation
district overlays. He thinks the appropriate remedy is expanding those overlays rather than
pursuing a niche carve -out to the zoning code. He also doesn't see any indication of a large
influx of tall homes, staff indicated that they don't have any record of homes over a 27-feet being
constructed since the 1990s. Finally, he shares staffs concerns that the proposed amendment
would be inconsistent with that standard in most other residential zones and would result in
varying height limits based on purpose, which isn't a sufficient justification.
Padron stated she read the staff proposal and it makes more sense to her. She has listened to
all the neighbors, and they just don't convince her that their reasons are reason enough to lower
the height.
Townsend stated she can't vote in accordance with this because she thinks the 27-foot is tall
enough in these residential areas. She lives in one of those areas and would hope that they
wouldn't get a 35-footer and in her neighborhood.
Craig asked staff if the building they saw that has galvanized a lot of this reaction, the 35-foot
building, where is it in the approval process, and it isn't part of the approval that it has to fit in
with the neighborhood. Russett replied it needs to meet the standards in the zoning code. Her
understanding is they did have a building permit issued for it but it's not moving forward in terms
of construction. It doesn't have to meet subjective character standards, it just needs to meet the
height, the setbacks, and other zoning standards.
Hektoen cautioned them away from focusing too much on that one example, this is a change to
the text of the code that would apply in multiple situations.
Craig understands but is interested in knowing what protections are in place without changing
the code and if there is a protection that they have to meet some standard and some type of
conformity as in fitting in with a neighborhood, that's what is important to her. Russett replied
that particular property is not in a historic or conservation district so the zoning code doesn't have
any design standards that it needs to meet, there's no design standards or regulations related to
it fitting in with RNS-12.
Craig stated another building that is often brought up as an example is the one on the
Bloomington Street but she drives down that street two or three times a week for 30 years and
doesn't know any big monstrous building there. She looked up the address and the building that
they're talking about looks very much like a single-family home and fits in with the neighborhood.
It did replace a very small decrepit house, but it's got a yard and they built a double car garage
off the alley in the back. She doesn't know why anyone would complain about that being in their
neighborhood. Criag noted the issue is it didn't sell as a single-family house, it's being rented by
the room and so instead of having a five member family in there they have five students.
However, if they had a five -member family in there, she doesn't think anyone would be
Planning and Zoning Commission
October 18, 2023
Page 13 of 14
complaining about it. That's the struggle for her when that is used as an example of what they
don't want in their neighborhood and yet if it had two adults and three children, they'd be happy
to have it in their neighborhood.
Craig also asked staff about why in one neighborhood is the limit defined as two and a half
stories and in another 27-feet or 35-feet. Russett would prefer that it would be in feet and not
stories in this zone.
Elliott stated walking into that neighborhood and can't imagine having a three-story structure, it
just doesn't fit into the character of the neighborhood. She also feels like lowering it to 27-feet
adds to the affordability of the neighborhood and is consistent with the strategic plan.
Wade will be supporting the denial. He hears the concerns and lived up in the Northside
Neighborhood for a long time. He is familiar with the house on Jefferson, also on the corner of
Market and Jefferson, along the alleyway used to be a white house there that was torn down and
replaced with the duplex up on Market Street and Rochester. Also smaller houses that were
replaced with newer houses. None of these became intrusive to their neighborhood and for that
reason can't support lowering it to 27-foot and will support leaving it at 35-feet.
Hensch noted the difficulty always is this question of affordable housing and that's what causes
him the quandary. He is extremely concerned about the proliferation of rentals throughout the
City and that the whole City is just going to become rental. Additionally, he doesn't see any
evidence that more rentals is reducing the price of rent, so that's not the answer to affordability.
He will oppose this motion because it's reasonable and particularly what really stayed with me
him was Robert Miklo's comment that the original 35-feet was just to deal with the slope on some
of the lots and not for any other reason.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3 (Townsend, Hench and Elliott dissenting).
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Russett gave an update from last night's Council meeting. The Council approved the City's
submission for the pro -housing grant to the Housing and Urban Development Department and
matching the leveraging funds of $2.8 million from the City so that application will be submitted
later this month.
Elliott noted there is now a walkway on Riverside Drive which makes it so much safer. Craig
stated that's been on the City's books for many years but the railroad was supposed to move
their things and they refused so ultimately they took the space out of the street.
0oil [oil]aIId141Y A
Townsend moved to adjourn, Elliott seconded by and the motion passed 7-0.
PLANNING R ZONING COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
1112
11116
1217
12121
1/4
1118
2115
311
4/5
4119
6121
715
7119
812
8116
1014
10118
CRAIG, SUSAN
X
X
OfE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ELLIOTT, MAGGIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HENSCH, MIKE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
PADRON,. MARIA
X
CIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
QUELLHORST, SCOTT
--
---
----
----
--
--
--
____
___
__
__
__
__
___
X
X
X
SIGNS, MARK
CIE
O/E
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
----
-- --
--
--
---
--
--
--
TOWNSEND, BILLIE
X
X
X
01E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
WADE, CHAD
X
I O/E
X I
X
X
O/E
X
X
I X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KEY:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = AbsenVExcused
--- = Not a Member
Item Number: 5.11h.
I i CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November21, 2023
Public Art Advisory Committee: September 7
Attachments: Public Art Advisory Committee: September 7
Approved, p.1
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 9/7/2023
Minutes
Public Art Advisory Committee
September 7, 2023
Emma Harvat Hall
Public Art Advisory Committee
Members Present: Scott Sovers, Juli Seydell Johnson, Steve Miller, Andrea Truitt,
Anita Jung, Nate Sullivan
Members Absent: Eddie Boyken, Jenny Gringer, Jeremy Endsley
Staff present: Rachel Kilburg
Public Present: Ray Michels, Ethan Wyatt, Rachael Arnone
Call to Order
Miller called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m.
Introduction of members and public attending the meeting
None.
Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
None.
Consider minutes of the August 3, 2023 PAAC meeting.
Sullivan noted minor typo correction to minutes. Johnson moved and Sovers seconded
that the minutes from the August 3, 2023, meeting be approved. Motion passed (6-0).
South East Junior High Longfellow Tunnel 2023 painting project design
South East Junior High Art Teacher Rachael Arnone introduced herself and one of the
student artists, Graysen, and presented the two student mural designs. Graysen shared
their design was inspired by a pirate-themed Dungeons & Dragons campaign. Arnone
described the project process: the entire class voted upon various designs and selected
the two being presented to be painted on each side of the Longfellow Tunnel at the end
of September by 10 students from the class who will be randomly selected. Johnson
thanked Arnone and the students for their efforts. Jung made a motion to approve the
designs, Sullivan seconded. Motion passed (6-0).
Consider proposal for restoration of three public art works
Kilburg reviewed the memo included in the agenda packet, describing the proposal
submitted by Dave Dennis, Inc. for the restoration of three public art pieces in critical
need of repair: Birds in Flight (Sycamore Greenway), One's Reality (HWY 6 &
Riverside), and the wooden Kovalev Sculptures (Willow Creek Park). Kilburg noted the
cost estimates proposed by Dennis exceed the Art Maintenance budget line, but the
Committee could choose to allocate a portion of unencumbered funds in the budget
towards these restoration projects. Kilburg relayed public correspondence from (1) Jim
Approved, p.2
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 9/7/2023
Doorley, a private resident who donated $1,000 towards the restoration of One's Reality
and wished to thank the Committee for their restoration of the piece; and (2) Howard
Horan, whose family had donated one of the Kovalev sculptures to the City and was
supportive of the restoration project.
The Committee discussed whether to fund all three restoration projects using
unencumbered Public Art budget funds. Kilburg clarified that the unencumbered funding
amount noted in the memo is what remains in the Public Art budget after accounting for
FY23 carryover funding and planned/anticipated FY24 expenditures. Sullivan asked
whether there were any unanticipated opportunities or financial needs the Committee
could foresee. Johnson shared her perspective that the Committee has not historically
used all of their budget and expressed her support for funding the restoration of all three
pieces. Jung noted that there would still be some budget flexibility even if the
Committee chose to fund all three projects. Truitt and Sullivan expressed the
importance of showing a commitment to maintaining the existing inventory in addition to
commissioning new pieces. Staff confirmed that One's Reality would be relocated to the
Iowa City Public Works Campus along S. Gilbert St. & McCollister Blvd following
restoration. Jung made a motion to approve proceeding with a funding agreement for
the restoration of One's Reality, Birds in Flight, and the Kovalev Sculptures, Truitt
seconded. Motion passed (6-0).
South District Bench project update — budget and timeline
Artist Mentor Ray Michels and Emerging Artist Ethan Wyatt presented a status update
on the project. Michels shared his perspective that proceeding with the chosen "hand"
concept does not seem viable due to budget and spacing/setback challenges
discovered through the design process. Michels had also evaluated feasibility of the
second alternative (the "dominoes" concept) and found that was also cost prohibitive.
Michels suggested revisiting the concepting phase using the new information
discovered and soliciting additional public input.
Miller asked the artists about a revised timeline. Michels suggested new concept
options be developed in September, public input in October, a new design
recommendation to the Committee in November, fabrication completed by March, and
installation occurring in May. Michels also acknowledged the prolonged time
commitment this would be asking of Wyatt.
Jung suggested dedicating additional funding towards the project due to the challenges
that have arisen during the process, and Miller voiced support for this suggestion.
Kilburg reminded the Committee the initial budget was $12,000 and $9,400 is remaining
in the project line. Jung, Miller, and Truitt discussed contributing additional funding
towards artist labor and/or hard costs. Michels clarified that trying to proceed with the
initial design may still problematic due to the space constraints and clearance
requirements.
Johnson suggested delaying the conversation for another month and that the artists
return with a revised request. Truitt asked if the Artists could develop a comparison of
the current project as -is, a modified design, and/or other alternative concepts as the
Approved, p.3
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 9/7/2023
artists see fit. Michels shared that an alternative design is more likely to work in the
selected location than the current concept for various reasons. Michels also noted the
bus stop was selected by the South District Neighborhood Association because a
concrete pad already existed there, so they would need to be involved in the
conversation. Michels and Wyatt agreed to revisit the existing concept and prepare
possible options to present to the Committee in October. Committee members
acknowledged economic inflation challenges impacting the project budget and process
and thanked the artists for being patient and flexible in their approach.
Staff Updates
Kilburg shared an update on the Black Hawk Mini Park Project. Per the Committee's
direction, a letter to terminate the agreement was issued to the contracted artist on
August 11th and the contract would officially terminate on September 11th following the
required 30-day curing period. Per the Committee's August meeting discussion, the
remaining $5,137 project balance will be re -allocated to the Lucas Farms public art
project.
Kilburg provided an update on the Lucas Farms Neighborhood indigenous history public
art project. Staff is working with neighborhood leadership to collect historical information
and guidance in order to draft an artist RFQ. The targeted location for the piece is
Highland Park and the proposed timeline is to issue the RFQ in October or November
and complete installation of the project by late Spring/early Summer 2024.
Kilburg shared she will not be present for the October meeting. The Committee
members discussed options and decided to cancel the October meeting and form a
working subcommittee to meet with the South District Bench project artists in early
October instead. Truitt and Jung volunteered to serve on the subcommittee. Staff will
coordinate the subcommittee meeting and continue to make progress on the Lucas
Farms RFQ.
Adjournment
Sovers moved to adjourn at 4:14 pm. Sullivan seconded. Motion passed (6-0).
Approved, p.4
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 91712023
Public Art Advisory Committee
Attendance Record
2022-23
Name
Term
10/13/22
11/3/22
12/1/22
1/5/23
2/2/23
4/6/22
5/4/22
6/6/23
7/6/23
6/3/23
9/7/23
Expires
Ron Knoche
X.
X
X
X
X
X*
X
X
X
X
X*
Juli Seydell-
X
X*
X
X*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Johnson
Steve Miller
12/31/23
X
X
X
X
X
0/E
X
X
X
X
X
Eddie
12/31/24
X
X
X
X
0/E
X
0/E
0/E
0/E
0/E
0
Boyken
Andrea
12/31/25
X
0/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Truitt
Anita Jung
6/30/23
0/E
0/E
0/E
X
X
X
X
X
0/E
0/E
X
Jenny
12/31/23
0/E
X
X
X
X
0/E
0/E
X
X
X
0/E
Gringer
Jeremy
12/31/25
X
0/E
X
X
0/E
0/E
X
X
0/E
X
0
Endsley
Nate
6/30/26
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
Sullivan
Key
X
= Present
X*
= Delegate attended
0
= Absent
O/E
= Absent/Excused
---
= Not a member