The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-05-05 ResolutionPrepared by: Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. 15-131 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST TO THE PARTIAL RELEASE OF A MORTGAGE HELD BY IOWA CITY TO SECURE A LOAN FOR THE COST TO CONSTRUCT CAMP CARDINAL ROAD. WHEREAS, the City has a mortgage securing the loan made to Southgate Construction Company for its portion of the cost to construct Camp Cardinal Road in Iowa City. Monthly payments are current and the loan will be paid in full no later than February 28, 2017; and WHEREAS, the current owner of the property proposes to transfer Auditor's Parcel 2014108, which includes less than two acres of land subject to said mortgage; WHEREAS, the loan agreement requires additional payments only if there is a sale of more than 5 acres of property subject to the mortgage; and, WHEREAS, the City should execute a partial release of the mortgage releasing Auditor's parcel 2014108 from said mortgage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The Mayor Pro Tem is authorized to sign and the City Clerk to attest the attached Partial Release of Mortgage, whereby the City does releases Auditor's parcel 2014108 from the lien of the mortgage recorded in the records of the office of the Recorder of Johnson County, State of Iowa in Book 3877, Pages 419-428. Passed and approved this 5th day of May 2015. P MA OR PRO TEM -- P roved by ATTEST: r/ e, 2 C, el 30' %5 CITY RK City Attorney's 's Office Resolution leo. )Page 2 15-131 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton Prepared by and return to Joe Holland P.O. Box 2820 Iowa City Iowa 52244 319-354-0331 PARTIAL RELEASE OF MORTGAGE The undersigned, the present owner of the Mortgage hereinafter described, for valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby acknowledge that the following described real estate situated in Johnson County, Iowa: Auditors Parcel 2014108, being a portion of the S 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 1, and a portion of the N 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 12, all in Township 79 North, Range 7 West of the 5th P.M., Johnson County, Iowa, in accordance with the Plat of Survey recorded in Book 59, Page 110, Plat Records of Johnson County, Iowa, is hereby released from the lien of the real estate mortgage executed by Southgate Development Company, Inc. and Clear Creek LLC, recorded in the records of the Office of the Recorder of Johnson County, State of Iowa in Book 3877, Pages 419-428. Dated the 5th of May 2015 Susan Mims, Mayo Pro Tem ATTES'h"c Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Approved by: City Attorney STATE OF IOWA ) SS JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument acknowledged before me this day of M �4� , 2015, by Susan Mims and Marian K. Karr, as the Mayor Pro Tem and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. KELLIE K. TUTTLE _ /� aw< Comimss;cn Number221819 Notary Public in and for said State w �� B1y Com issi Expires 5d(2) Marian Karr From: Bartoski, Patrick J <patrick-bartoski@uiowa.edu> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 11:51 AM To: Marian Karr Cc: McCarthy, Evan F; Neal, Nicole Subject: UISG City Council Appointment Good Morning, Marian. My name is Patrick Bartoski and I am currently the UISG President. Please find my nomination letter for Nicki Neal to serve as the next UISG City Council Liaison below. The University of Iowa Student Government is pleased to recommend Nicole Neal to serve as the City Council Liaison for the 2015-2016 academic year. Nicki will be a junior at the University of Iowa from Dubuque, Iowa. UISG looks forward to continuing to work together with the City of Iowa City through both the City and the Vice City Council Liaison positions and is happy to have open and numerous channels of communication between the two governing bodies. Thanks for your time, and all of your help. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Best, Patrick Bartoski UISG President Prepared by: Robert Miklo, Senior Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5240 (SU1315-00002) RESOLUTION NO 05-05-15 5d(3) RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF CHURCHILL MEADOWS, IOWA CITY, IOWA. WHEREAS, the owner, GRD Green Bay LLC, filed with the City rk the final plat of Churchill Meadows, Iowa City, Iowa, Johnson County, Iowa; and WHEREAS, said subdivision located on the following-describ real estate in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, to wit: Commencing at the North Quartlo r Corner of Section 7, T nship 79 North, Range 5 West, of the Fifth Principal Meridian, Iowa Cit Johnson County, to a; Thence S00"43'54"E, along the West Line of the Northwest Quarter of the ortheast to the Southwest Corner of the Tract o Land 1044, at Page 128 of the Records of th o BEGINNING; Thence N89052'36"E, along th Thence S81'35'33"E, along said South Line, Line, 868.99 feet, to the Southeast Corner of of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast East Line, 1231.49 feet, to the Southeast Quarter; Thence S89"27'46"W, along the S luarte of said Section 7, a distance of 53.82 feet, )ndened for Right -of -Way, as recorded in Book hnson ounty Recorder's Office, and the POINT OF Sou Line of said Condemned Tract, 348.41 feet; 1 2 feet; Thence N89°52'36"E, along said South s Condemned Tract, and a Point on the East Line art r of Section 7; Thence S00°31'43"E, along said orner said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast uth Line o said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, 1312.82 feet, to the SouthwesCorner of s 'd Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; Thence N00°4354"W, along th West Line of sa Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, 1256.01 feet, to the Point of eginning. Said Trac of Land contains 37.46 Acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions record. WHEREAS, the Department of Neigh orhood and Developmen Services and the Public Works Department examined the proposed fin I plat and subdivision, and r ommended approval; and WHEREAS, a dedication has been lade to the public, and the subdi ion has been made with the free consent and in accordance/withhe desires of the owners and propr\THE d WHEREAS, said final plat andivision are found to conform with 354, Code of Iowa (2015) and all other state and tquirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF Y OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The said final plat an subdivision located on the above-described real este be and the same are hereby app ved. 2. The City accepts t dedication of the str easements as provided by law and specifically sets asid portions oft dkcated land, namely streets, as not being open for public access at the t e o rding for public safety reasons. Resolution No. Page 2 3. The Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, are hereby authorized and directed, upon approval by the City Attorney, to ..execute all le all documents relating to said subdivision, and to certify a copy of thissolution, which sha be affixed to the final plat after passage and approval by law. The Ci Clerk shall record the I gal documents and the plat at the office of the County Recorder of hnson County, Iowa at t e expense of the owner. Passed and approved this day ATTEST: CITY CLERK It was moved by adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: 20 by f AAA Agi3m-r�,-U& City Attorney's Office 3/3, /s and sedpnc*d by pcd/templates/Final Plat - Resolution (3).doc.doc NT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton the Resolution be Q - 5d(4) Prepared by: Sara Hektoen, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING A 28E PROJECT AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA AND THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO A PORTION OF HERBERT HOOVER HIGHWAY FOR THE CHURCHILL MEADOWS SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, oth the City of Iowa City ("the City") and Johnson unty ("the County") are public agencies as fined by Section 28E.2 of the Code of Iowa (2 5); and WHEREAS, the andthe County recognize that the rtion of Herbert Hoover Highway SE located in NorthQuarter we of Section 7-79-5 of Joh on County, Iowa presently sits in part on County right-of-way a d in part on City right-of-way, d further that it connects two non- contiguous parts of the ity; and WHEREAS, Herbert Hoo* Highway SE is wi in the growth boundary of the City, and serves as a collector street within thVobjec* em; and WHEREAS, the City wishesilities inside the existing right-of-way and, possibly, to improve the roadway by inlk along the south side; and WHEREAS, the County has aid improvements; and WHEREAS, the City and the Coty ish to enter into an agreement whereby the County formally grants the City permissio to ma a said improvements to and within the right-of-way of Herbert Hoover Highway SE, at expens to the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R SOLVED BY T CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The attached 28 Agreement for improv ments to a portion of Herbert Hoover Highway SE be een the City of Iowa Cit Iowa and Johnson County, Iowa is hereby approv d and the Mayor is hereby uthorized to execute and the City Clerk to attest to the attached 28E Agreement. 2. The City Cle is directed to file a copy of said greement with the Secretary of the State of low , as required by Iowa Code Chap r 28E. Passed and approvedAhis day of .2015. MAYOR ATTEST: k CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office ��d/ Drafted by Andrew B. Chappell, Asst. County Amy; P.O. Box 2450, Iowa City, Iowa 52240, 319-339-6100 28E/Project Agreement Between Johnson Coun , Iowa and the City of Iwa City, Iowa for Improvements to a Tortion of Herbert Hoovet Highway SE WHEREAS, both the City of Iowa City ("the City") and Jonson County ("the County") are public agencies as defined by Section 28E.2 o the Code of Iowa (2015 ; and WHEREAS, the City and the County tecognize that the po ion of Herbert Hoover Highway SE located in Northwest Quarter of Section 7-79- of Johnson County owa presently sits in part on County right-of-way and in part on City right -of --way, a d further that it c ects two non-contiguous parts of the City; and WHEREAS, Herbert Hoover Highway S is within t growth boundary of the City, and serves as a collector street within the City's street system; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to install city to improve the roadway by installing a sidewalk al( WHEREAS, the County has no objection to � inside the existing right-of-way and, possibly, south side; and improvements; and WHEREAS, the City and the County wish formally grants the City permission to ma/for pro e Hoover Highway SE, at no expense to the IT IS NOW AGREED that the CCoui 28E of the Code of Iowa (2015) providiperati said cooperative actions include the follow 1. PURPOSE AND PROJECT formal permission to the City to imp right-of-way from the western bou: boundary of Johnson County par installation of city utilities and, pos i of -way. enter into an agreement whereby the County meats to and within the right-of-way of Herbert enter into an agreement pursuant to Chapter action pursuant to the proposed project and ME: The purpose f this Agreement is for the County to grant e those portions of H Bert Hoover Highway SE lying on County ry of Johnson Count parcel no. 09-07-230-001 to the eastern no. 09-07-201-001. The improvements shall consist of the , the installation of a sid walk within the existing, southerly right - 2. NO SEPARATE LEG, ENTITY: No separate legal entty is created by this Agreement. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors shall administer the County�s duties and responsibilities herein. The City Manager of Iowa Cit shall administer the City's duties and ,esponsibilities herein. 3. CONSIDERATION The mutual consideration herein is undertaking the improvements to Herbert Hoover Highway W. The project costs, in their entirety, will be borne by the City. The County will pay nothing toward thq costs of these improvements. 4. RESPONSIBILITY FOR WORK: The City shall be responsible for obtaining any and all additional easements needed for the improvement project. The City shall have sole and exclusive responsibility for the construction work. 5. MAINTENANCE: Maintenance of the subje portion o Herbert Hoover Highway SE shall continue to be dealt with as set out in the Road Majn'tenance Agr ment previously entered into by the City and the County, and as hereinafter amended./Sidewalk instal ed within the scope of this project in the County, if any, will be cleared and maintain d by the City or t e City's assignee until such time as it is annexed into the City. 6. FINANCING: The City shall bear alycosts associated wi4i this project. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Agre ent shall be effe tive when approved and signed by the Johnson County Board of Supervisors and he City Council of owa City, and filed with the Secretary of State as provided in Chapter 28E.8 of the C de of Iowa (2015 . 8. DURATION: This agreement sh 1 continue in fo ce until final acceptance of the work by the City. Thereafter, the City or the City's ssignee shall ontinue to clear and maintain any sidewalk installed in the County within the scope of t is project un such time as it is annexed into the City. 9. NO THIRD -PARTY BENEFIC County's ultimate responsibility for their party claims. Nor is this 28E Agreement 10. INTERPRETATION AND ENFOF shall be in accordance with Chapter 28E of responsibilities of the political subdivisions. No ing herein is intended to alter the City's and/or 7o way, including liability for or immunity from third - create any third -party benefits. T: Interpretation and enforcement of the agreement of Iowa (2015) and statutes respecting the rights and 11. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: Matter i dispute or subject to interpretation shall be first submitted to the parties for resolution prior to either art pursuing administrative or judicial remedies. In the event such matters must be submitted to the p ies, t ey shall be submitted specifically to the City Manager of the City of Iowa City, as represen tive fo the City, and to the Johnson County Engineer, as representative for the County, who wi both m e a good faith effort to resolve the dispute. JOHNSON COUNTY This agreement was approved by official official session on the Slav of ATTEST: County Auditor/Designee of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors in 20 Patrick Harney, Chairperson Johnson County Board of Supervisors CITY OF IOWA CITY This agreement was approv d by official action/of the City Council of Iowa City in official session on the day of , 20 ATTEST: City Clerk/Designee //ir+o�wtd 8y CIfy Attorney's Offices�,� Matt Hayek, Mayor City of Iowa City Prepared by: Robert Miklo, Senior RESOL MACKINAW WHEREAS, the owner, Advant< Mackinaw Village - Part Six, Iowa a� 0 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA OLUTION NO. BION APPROVING FINAL P LLAGE - PART SIX, IOWA Custom Builders, filed , Iowa, Johnson County, 05-05-15 5d(5) (319) 356-5240 (SUB15-00007) OF ', IOWA. the City Clerk the final plat of ; and WHEREAS, said subdivision is to ed on the following -de ribed real estate in Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa, to wit: THAT PORTION OF OU OT E, MACK AW VILLAGE - PART TWO, IOWA CITY, IOWA, CCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK PAGE 8, THAT IS DESCRIBED AS AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2010 56 ON P AT OF SURVEY RECORDED IN BOOK 55, PAGE 81, PLAT CORDS F JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA. WHEREAS, the Department of Neighlprhoand Development Services and the Public Works Department examined the proposed final lat nd subdivision, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, a dedication has been mad the public, and the subdivision has been made with the free consent and in accordance with the okires of the owners and proprietors; and WHEREAS, certain easements grant96 pu uant to a previous subdivision encumber this property but are no longer necessary as ar ult of is final plat and therefore such easements should be released; WHEREAS, said final plat and #Gbdivision ar found to conform with Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2013) and all other state and to I requirement NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT,RESOLVED BY TH CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The said final plo and subdivision located n the above-described real estate be and the same are hereby`approved. 2. The City accepts the dedication of the stre is and easements as provided by law and specificallyts aside portions of the dedicate land, namely streets, as not being open for public acce s at the time of recording for public afety reasons. 3. The City eleases only those portions of the foil wing easements shown on the final plat as "existin 85.0 utility, storm sewer, sanitary sewer nd water main easement to be released": utility easement recorded at Book ` b age c6 ; b. storm sewer recorded at Book cf� , P ge c. sanitary sewer recorded at Book �- �, age to d. water main easement recorded at Book -1 , Page ioT, all in the records of the Johnson County, Iowa Reco er. 4. The Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Iowa City, to a, are hereby authorized and directed, upon approval by the City Attorney, to execute 611 legal documents relating to said Resolution No. Page 2 subdivision, and to passage and appr( the office of the owner/subdivider. Passed and approved this ATTEST: CITY CLERK It was moved by adopted, and upon roll call there AYES: pcd/templates/Final Plat - Resolution (3).doc.doc a copy of this resolution, which shall be affixed to the final plat after law. The City Clerk shall record the legal documents and the plat at y Recorder of Johnson County, Iowa at the expense of the day of MAYOR �econded by 20 Approved by ,.� � ZA�� City Attorney's Officey S- /?C//, ,YS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton the Resolution be To: City Council Item: SUB15-00007 STAFF REPORT Prepared by: Robert Miklo Date: May 5 GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Advantage Custom Builders 740 Liberty Way, Suite 1 North Liberty, IA 52317 Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Comprehensive Plan: File Date: 60 Day Limitation Period: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Final plat approval An 8 -lot single family residential subdivision West of Mackinaw Drive south of Manitou Trail 4.59 acres Undeveloped North: single-family residential — OPD5 South: single-family residential — OPD5 East: single-family residential — OPD5 West: open space - OPD5 Residential conservation design April 9, 2015 June 8, 2015 The applicant, Advantage Custom Builders, has submitted a final plat for Mackinaw Village — Part Six, an 8 -lot, 4.59 -acre subdivision located west of Mackinaw Drive south of Manitou Trail. The preliminary plat was approved on March 9, 2015. ANALYSIS: The final plat of Mackinaw Village — Part Six is in general compliance with the approved preliminary plat and subdivision regulations. Legal papers and construction drawings are currently being reviewed by staff. It is anticipated that these documents will be approved prior to the May 5 Council Meeting. Neighborhood Open Space: The neighborhood open space requirement for all of Mackinaw Village is 1.77 acres. This requirement was fulfilled during the final plat of Part 2 with the dedication of Outlot C, a 1.8 -acre parcel of open space in the northwest part of Part 2. 2 Infrastructure Fees: Infrastructure fees include $415 per acre for water main extension fees. Payment of these fees should be addressed in the legal papers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SUB15-00007, the final plat of Mackinaw Village — Part Six, an 8 - lot, 4.59 -acre subdivision located west of Mackinaw Drive south of Manitou Trail subject to approval of construction drawings and legal papers by the City Engineer and City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Final plat Approved by: r ' /r John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator, Department of Neighborhood and Development Services PCD\Staff Reports\final plat staff report.docx z a O 2n o wrX< 2�m- w N �d r z z w a �aaU Pill z QWX LLWONwia o _ O W NXwl tea, m -'o V/ a �,z°°Wz zO IU = N U I �� g$eit z — MINIM �1NI a U �Na,oZ04ax Uy zo m�c9w xLL QZQU xSS,.? , . o wZ r < a rn ^ 1 84aZAaLLI 2 —Q � WWO� O�nU'F yif�n pp 4 f0 " as VamF 2>a N=woLLoxw ODOm aamc�oz�s n_ d 6 O - p; d z a O 2n o wrX< 2�m- w OLL m0� \/ a z z w a �aaU Pill z Nab o o _ O W NXwl tea, Z -'o V/ a Y zO IU = N U I �� g$eit z — MINIM �1NI a U -- � 9-Fom_a Y �Q ;�--'--- ---ez�gXi xSS,.? , . S wZ r < fi ^ 1 84aZAaLLI sn B 8Lc � WWO� O�nU'F >> K m gid s as VamF A HOZ O Oa�inz O - a J cn £� Q JLL<z KW ,7 z 0 m FN o aLL _ O 2n o wrX< 2�m- ® g OLL m0� wz'-' o' ,z �3 �aaU NN r_ p ao��..% g��3 a o Z -'o a Y zO IU QaU LU I �� g$eit Z — a U -- � 9-Fom_a Y �Q ;�--'--- ---ez�gXi xSS,.? , . LU m ® fi y� C .1— F ooaxzaapUO,OAH K --, X dw �9H ff O >w�zwa zzwa�w < w o O LL U ooa �J U�OfH/1 UI Hwa •y �+,r p Zap a _� wFroz a �aoaazo >Uu1mFx OpO z 3 Y Co 0 0 W p O0ZN1. 7NZ0m LLOn U� �w,og¢aav� o9oaou=ia� z�0 o:Z V1U Km �O�UpO� ��NpK~~yNj —or wN� ¢~mwz ZO p U >ppa Ow2UKN 3 a� F6 g fi�5% fill; a s ,z �3 'ION l I F6 g ,z �3 o a CL d 3 gid s a = o a £� O lib �z F < I 8 7R� "v€ EL g30 Prepared by: Marian Karr, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5041 5d(6) RESOLUTION NO. 15-132 RESOLUTION APPROVING UNCLASSIFIED SALARY COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 FOR THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY CLERK AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE CONTRACT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ADMENDENT NO.2 TO THE CONTRACT OF THE CITY MANAGER WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City, Iowa, employs the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk subject to solely to the action of the City Council referred to as unclassified personnel; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish salary compensation for the said unclassified personnel. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that the following positions shall receive as salary compensation that amount which is set forth and where said employee shall receive or collect any fees or other compensation from others for services as such employee, the same shall be paid to the City Treasury. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that the following compensation is hereby established effective July 1, 2015: Salary: City Manager - $173,409.60 City Attorney - $139,068.80 City Clerk - $109,720.00 Other: City Manager - Additional 5 days of vacation and 5 days of personal time annually added to contract City Attorney - Additional 5 days of vacation annually added to contract BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that Amendment no. 4 to the City Attorney's Employment Agreement and Amendment No. 2 to the City Manager's Employment Agreement attached hereto are approved and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute said amendments for and on behalf of the City of Iowa City. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 2015. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY RK n6le, ved by: -3u --i)- City Attorney's Office WRE&saladed.doc Resolution No. Page 2 15-132 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: DAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton AMENDMENT No. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT Thomas M. Markus, City Manager of the City of Iowa City, and the City Council of the City of Iowa City do hereby amend the employment agreement between them dated October 11, 2010 and the Amendment to the Contract approved by Resolution No. 13-237 as follows: Section 5 of said Agreement entitled "Vacation, Sick and Military Leave is amended to add additional paragraphs "D" and "E" as follows: D. The Employee shall receive the personal leave provided to administrative employees and shall receive an additional 9 days of personal leave each year. These 9 additional days of personal leave must be used each year and may not be carried over from one year to the next. E. In addition to the vacation leave provided to administrative employees, Employee shall receive an additional 5 days of vacation leave each year. CITY OF IOWA CITY BY: -LA-04 MAYOR ATTEST: 2)4&e� . By: IRK ec_ Ae;�T as M. Marcus oved by Z/ -,30 City Attorney's Office AMENDMENT No. 4 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney of the City of Iowa City, and the City Council of the City of Iowa City do hereby amend the employment agreement between them dated October 12, 1999 as follows: 1. Section 10 of said Agreement entitled "Vacation, Sick and Military Leave is amended to add an additional paragraph "C" as follows: C. In addition to the vacation leave provided to administrative employees, Employee shall receive an additional 5 days of vacation leave each year. CITY OF IOWA CITY BY:^ MAYOR ATTEST: -24 TY CLE C By: 2 Eleanor M. Dilkes CITY OF IOWA CITY 5d(7) CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: April 29, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Re: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Application Introduction: At your May 5, 2015 City Council meeting, the Council will consider an application for Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Funds to acquire up to nine properties in the 100 year floodplain. History/Background: The State of Iowa will receive FEMA disaster funding under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) as a result of Presidential Disaster Declaration DR -4187 for the severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds, and flooding that occurred in Iowa in 2014. The City submitted a Notice of Intent to the State to apply for these funds based on interest from eligible property owners on Normandy Drive, Manor Street, Taft Speedway and along Creekside Park that are within the 100 -year floodplain. The program is completely voluntary. The homeowner can withdraw from the program at any time if they do not wish to proceed with the sale. Based on preliminary correspondence with the Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division, the City anticipates funding based on a total project cost of $1,360,000. The City intends to purchase up to nine eligible properties near Creekside Park (Ralston Creek floodplain) and properties on Normandy Drive, Manor Street and Taft Speedway (Iowa River floodplain). The amount of funding anticipated may not be sufficient for all nine homes. The City prioritized the nine homes and will negotiate sales in order of priority until the funds are depleted. Discussion of Solutions: The City's long term goal is to reduce property damage by floods and eliminate this risk whenever feasible. This program would allow the City to purchase up to nine homes located in a 100 -year floodplain. The homes would be demolished and the land dedicated to green space, thereby eliminating the threat of additional property damage. Financial Impact: Based on a total estimated project cost of $1,360,000, Iowa City would receive $1,020,000 in FEMA funding, $136,000 from the State of Iowa and would provide at least $204,000 in local funds as the City must provide a 15% local match on total project costs. The City anticipates using general fund dollars for the local match. Recommendation: Staff recommends the submittal of the HMGP application to acquire up to nine properties in the 100 -year floodplain. If you have any questions, please contact me at 319.356.5244 or tracy- hightshoe@iowa-city.org. Prepared by: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood Services, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5230 RESOLUTION NO. 15-133 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION TO SUBMIT A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION TO PURCHASE PROPERTY IN THE 100 -YEAR FLOODPLAIN, PROVIDE THE 15% REQUIRED LOCAL MATCH AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AND SIGN ALL CONTRACTS AND AMENDMENTS FOR SAID PROGRAM. WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has prepared an application to submit to the Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division (HSEMD) for funding from the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in the amount of $1,360,000; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City recognizes the fact that this grant is based on a cost share basis with the federal share not exceeding 75%, the state share not exceeding 10% and the local share being a minimum of 15% of the total project cost and that the minimum 15% local share can be either cash or in-kind match; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City anticipates out of a total estimated project cost of $1,360,000, Iowa City would receive $1,020,000 in FEMA funding, $136,000 from the State of Iowa and would provide at least $204,000 in local funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The City of Iowa City shall submit an application for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for the acquisition of up to nine homes in the 100 -year floodplain. 2. The City of Iowa City agrees to provide and make available at least $204,000 of local monies to meet the minimum 15% match requirement for this mitigation grant application. 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to sign the application, to file it with HSEMD for the purpose of obtaining financial assistance under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (PL 93-288, as amended) and the Code of Iowa, Chapter 29C, to sign a grant agreement if the application is approved, and to sign amendments as needed to said grant agreement. The City Manager is further designated as the City's Authorized Representative. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 2015. �.%. _ ,t -M Approved by City Attorney's Office -a�_tc Resolution No. 15-133 Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton April 24, 2015 PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO IOWA CITY'S 2016-2020 CONSOLIDATED PLAN This notice is a correction to the legal publication in the Press Citizen on April 18 titled, "Public Comment Period on Proposed Amendment to Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan." The City Council will hold a public meeting, accept comments, and consider approval of a proposed amendment to Iowa City's 2016- 2020 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS) on May 5, 2015. The meeting will be held at City Hall, Emma Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street at 7:00 p.m. An amendment to Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS) has been proposed to utilize $50,000 in Year One (Fiscal Year 2016) for sidewalk curb cuts in the downtown commercial district to improve accessibility and prevent slum and blight. The Consolidated Plan currently apportioned these funds for building facade improvements and micro -enterprise assistance. This new activity will also be an eligible activity for Year Two to Year Five under the economic development set-aside. Additional information on this proposed amendment is available from the Iowa City Planning and Community Development or by calling 356-5230, TTY 356- 5493. The CITY STEPS plan outlines a range of activities to be undertaken by the City and its sub -recipients to address the housing, jobs, and service needs of low-income citizens. Copies of the CITY STEPS Plan Amendment are available from Neighborhood Services, 410 E. Washington Street; Iowa City Public Library, 123 South Linn Street; or online (www.icgov.org/actionplan) or by calling 319- 356-5230. Comments may be submitted in writing to Neighborhood Services at the address above or by email to Kristopher-Ackerson@Iowa- City.org. If you require special accommodations or language translation please contact Kristopher Ackerson at 356- 5247 or 356-5493 TTY at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO IOWA CITY'S 2016-2020 CONSOLIDATED PLAN An amendment to Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS) has been proposed to utilize $50,000 in Year One (Fiscal Year 2016) for sidewalk curb cuts in the downtown commercial district to improve accessibility and prevent slum and blight. The Consolidated Plan currently apportioned these funds for building fagade improvements and micro -enterprise assistance. This new activity will also be an eligible activity for Year Two to Year Five under the economic development set-aside. Additional information on this proposed amendment is available from the Iowa City Planning and Community Development or by calling 356-5230, TDD 356-5493. Copies of the CITY STEPS Amendment are available from Neighborhood Services, City Hall, 410 East Washington Street, Iowa City, 52240, the Iowa City Public Library, 123 S. Linn Street, Iowa City and online at www.icgov.org/actionplan. Written comments may be submitted to Neighborhood Services. The 30 -day public comment period regarding this CITY STEPS amendment starts with the publication of this notice and ends on May 5, 2015. CITY OF IOWA CITY 5d(8) il-N _WA'1 M E M 0 RA N D U M Date: April 28, 2015 To: Thomas Markus, City Manager From: Kris Ackerson, Community Development Planner Re: Resolution adopting Amendment #1 of 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (aka CITY STEPS) Introduction The Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) recommend an amendment to the 2016-2020 CITY STEPS Plan, the City's "Consolidated Plan for Housing, Jobs and Services for Low Income Residents." This document is used by the Housing and Community Development Commission and the City Council as a guide for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funding recommendations. History/Background The City of Iowa City proposes an amendment to the 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (known as, CITY STEPS) to utilize $50,000 in Year One (Fiscal Year 2016) for sidewalk curb ramps in the downtown commercial district to improve accessibility and prevent slum and blight (Exhibit A). The Consolidated Plan currently apportioned these funds for building facade improvements and micro -enterprise assistance. This new activity will also be an eligible activity from Year Two to Year Five under the economic development set-aside. At their April 16, 2015 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) recommended unanimously in favor of approving this proposed amendment. Discussion of Solution Although the commission does not anticipate allocating significant funds to Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements due to the nature of CDBG funds, access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities is a community need and frequently mentioned as an obstacle for low income residents to achieve their highest degree of self-sufficiency. Also, the Consolidated Plan is a document that other city departments and outside agencies use to document need for projects funded with local, state, or other federal funding sources. Recommendation At your May 5 meeting, we are asking that you consider approval of the CITY STEPS Amendment #1 as recommended by HCDC at their April 16, 2015 meeting. To date, the City has received no written comments from the public concerning this amendment. If you have any questions about the amendment please feel free to contact Kris Ackerson or Tracy Hightshoe at 356-5230 or Kristopher-Ackerson@iowa-city.org or at Tracy- Hightshoe@iowa-city.org. Cc: Rachel Zimmermann Smith, HCDC Chair C:\Users\mkarr\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.OuUook\OV1N9JGE\Council memo for Amend.doc Housing and Community Development Commission April 16, 2015 Page 2 of 5 inclusionary zoning. Byler asked if that was a committee of staff and Hightshoe said it was not. The members are community members including Maryann Dennis of The Housing Fellowship, Tracey Achenbach of Housing Trust Fund, Scott McDonald, Brad Langworth of Hills Bank, Glen Siders formally of Southgate, Chad Kuhn. City staff on the committee includes John Yapp, Doug Boothroy, and Sarah Moeller. Hightshoe said this committee will review the options and then will make recommendations. At that time the HCDC will get involved. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FY16 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN: Ackerson noted that the two agenda times (5 & 6) are related. The Housing Fellowship was awarded $200,000 for a project in FY15 and they were unable to get that project off the ground so the money was returned and those funds were added to the larger pot of money that the HCDC allocated in March. However, because that was FY15 money, it needs to be committed by July and so staff is proposing to amend the FY16 action plan to move up two projects that could be done immediately. Those two projects are the Housing Fellowship's Rehab project and Habitat's two properties on Prairie Du Chien Road. Therefore the Commission will need to approve the FY16 Annual Action Plan without those two projects. Those two projects will be moved to a FY15 Plan amendment. Jacobson asked if Staff has spoken with the two groups regarding the projects timelines. Both projects can be "committed" by the end of July. Hightshoe confirmed they have spoken and confirmed these projects can start immediately and are able to meet HOME's definition of project commitment. Jacobson moved to amend the FY16 Annual Action Plan to remove the Habitat property purchases and Housing Fellowship Rehab projects. Taylor seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FYI ANNUAL ACTION PLAN — AMENDMENT 1: Byler moved to amend the FYI Annual Action Plan to move the Habitat for Humanity property purchases and Housing Fellowship Rehab projects into the action plan. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF THE FY2016-2020 CITY STEPS (CONSOLIDATED PLAN) AMENDMENT #1 Ackerson said this request comes from the City Manager to amend the Consolidated Plan to allow for use of the funds for curb ramps in the downtown area. Taylor moved to approve the amendment to the FY2016-2020 CITY STEPS (Consolidated Plan) to allow funds to be used for curb ramps in the downtown area. Housing and Community Development Commission April 16, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Byler seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. DISCUSSION OF FY15 PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH THE `UNSUCCESSFUL OR DELAYED PROJECTS POLICY' Ackerson said that the one project that has not reached the 50% threshold is part of ARC of Southeast Iowa's project. Staff has received an update and the project is moving ahead they just haven't sent the City invoices. Hightshoe said one invoice has been received, but it does not reach the 51 % threshold. Ackerson noted that Staff is comfortable where this project stands. Zimmermann Smith agreed that HCDC didn't need to be concerned then. It was noted that a recent newspaper article reported over 100 volunteers showed up to work on the project. REVIEW ALLOCATION PROCESS FOR CDBG. HOME, AND AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING AND CONSIDER CREATING SUB -COMMITTEE Zimmermann Smith said there are different allocation processes for HOME and CDBG allocations as well as the Aid to Agencies Funding. Jacobson noted that the process is better than it used to be. He sat on the subcommittee and they had good intentions but did not identify any significant changes. He feels this is a longer term project to review. Zimmermann Smith agreed and said she was less concerned about the CDBG and HOME processes, the questions are in place for those decisions as well as the scoring. She feels the Aid to Agencies Funding has been an issue since it was made part of this Commission's purview and feels it would be great to have some clarity on goals. Hightshoe said previously it was decisions made by a Human Services positon and Council members, but that was changed when the Human Services position was eliminated and Council decided it would be better to have the HCDC review these requests. Aid to Agencies will apply again in August and September and Zimmermann Smith feels it is a process that needs to be reviewed. Jacobson suggested the Commission have an informal meeting to just focus on this issue, review all the ideas, and then have a subcommittee firm up the ideas and make a policy recommendation. Zimmermann Smith asked if HCDC could ask the Council to give them direction of five or so priorities for funding agencies. Persson prefers to ask the agencies what they feel is reasonable and get their input. Lamkins asked if this Aid to Agencies Funding was a similar process to the process of awarding funds that was done last month. Zimmermann Smith said it isn't as concrete and it is a very small pool of money that is used as operating funds for these agencies. It is about $378,000, with Prepared by Kris Ackerson, Community Dev. Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; (319) 356-5230 RESOLUTION NO. 15-134 A RESOLUTION AMENDING IOWA CITY'S 2016-2020 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (AKA CITY STEPS) WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires that the City of Iowa City, Iowa, prepare and submit a Consolidated Plan for the coordinated use of federal, state and local funds to assist lower income residents with housing, jobs and services; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has disseminated information, received no public input, and held a public meeting regarding the proposed amendment to Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan; and WHEREAS, the Housing and Community Development Commission has held a public meeting and recommended amending Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan to utilize $50,000 in Year One (Fiscal Year 2016) for sidewalk curb ramps in the downtown commercial district, which is an additional activity, to improve accessibility and prevent slum and blight (Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, said activity of sidewalk curb ramps in the downtown commercial district will also be an eligible activity from Year Two to Year Five under the economic development set-aside; and WHEREAS, the Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan currently apportioned these funds for building fagade improvements and micro -enterprise assistance; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the public interest will be served by amending Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan as shown herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The Iowa City 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan, as amended, is hereby adopted and approved. 2. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to submit to HUD all necessary documents related to the submission of Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan, as amended. Passed and approved this 5th day of Mav 2015. 44��4kt^ MAYOR Approved . ATTEST:., S:\DEV\CITY STEPS 2016-2020Wmendment 1\Council memo for Amend.doc Resolution No. ]Page 2 15-134 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton CITY CLERK City Attorney's Office EXHIBIT A 2016-2020 CITY STEPS Amendment #1 The City of Iowa City proposes an amendment to the 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (known as, CITY STEPS) to utilize $50,000 in Year One (Fiscal Year 2016) for sidewalk curb cuts in the downtown commercial district to improve accessibility and prevent slum and blight. The Consolidated Plan currently apportioned these funds for building fagade improvements and micro -enterprise assistance. This new activity will also be an eligible activity from Year Two to Year Five under the economic development set-aside. At their April 16, 2015 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) discussed this proposed amendment and made a recommendation to adopt. Although the commission does not anticipate allocating significant funds to Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements due to the nature of CDBG funds, access for pedestrians and persons with disabilities is a community need and frequently mentioned as an obstacle for low income residents to achieve their highest degree of self-sufficiency. Also, the Consolidated Plan is a document that other city departments and outside agencies use to document need for projects funded with local, state, or other federal funding sources. Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements 03K Street Improvements Plan to Fund: Yes Funds Source: CDBG C:\Users\sdulek\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\UHPVW8HN\Council memo for Amend.doc April 24, 2015 PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE FY16 Annual Action Plan The City Council will hold a public meeting, accept comments and consider approval of Iowa City's FY16 Annual Action Plan on May 5, 2015. The meeting will be held at City Hall, Emma Harvat Hall, 410 E. Washington Street at 7:00 p.m. The Annual Action Plan is a portion of Iowa City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS). The Annual Action Plan includes information on the proposed use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) funds for housing, jobs, and services for low - moderate income persons. The FY16 Annual Action Plan will outline proposed activities and their budgets. Copies of the FY16 Annual Action Plan and additional information are available from Neighborhood Services, 410 E. Washington Street; Iowa City Public Library, 123 South Linn Street; or online (www.icgov.org/actionplan) or by calling 319- 356-5230. Comments may be submitted in writing to Neighborhood Services at the address above or by email to Kristopher-Ackerson@Iowa- City.org. If you require special accommodations or language translation please contact Kristopher Ackerson at 356- 5247 or 356-5493 TTY at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. r Ub-Ub-1 15 CITY OF IOWA CITY 5d(9) MEMORANDUM Date: April 22, 2015 To: Thomas Markus, City Manager From: Kris Ackerson Re: Consider a resolution adopting the FY16 Annual Action Plan Introduction The City receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds annually from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). A draft copy of the FY16 Annual Action Plan is enclosed for your reference. At the time of this memo, the City has not received any public comment. A public meeting and resolution considering approval of the FY16 Annual Action Plan, which formally allocates the City's CDBG and HOME funds, will be held at the City Council meeting on May 5. History/Background The City anticipates it will have approximately $1,555,386 in CDBG and HOME funds available for allocation to eligible projects or entities that provide housing, jobs, and/or services to low -moderate income residents. Applications for CDBG and HOME funds were due on January 16, 2015. The Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) held a question/answer session with the applicants on February 19, ranked the projects, and met on March 12 to formulate funding recommendations. Discussion of Solution CDBG and HOME funding recommendations have been made by Housing and Community Development Commission for several years. The City Council has the option of revising these allocations or approving the plan (includes the FY16 CDBG/HOME budget) as presented. Recommendation At the May 5 meeting, staff recommends that Council consider approval of the FY16 Annual Action Plan, as recommended by Housing and Community Development Commission with the following changes to projects' funding source — HOME funds as opposed to CDBG: CHARM Homes and Systems Unlimited projects. Two projects originally approved by HCDC were removed from the FY16 Annual Action Plan and placed in the FY15 Annual Action Plan Amendment to be considered by council on June 2. The two projects, Habitat for Humanity and The Housing Fellowship rental rehab were moved to FY15 because they could immediately proceed after council approval. This helps the City remain in compliance with HUD HOME commitment requirements. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and allocation outlined in Exhibit A. If needed, amendments or changes to this plan may be considered. If changes are made to the FY16 Annual Action Plan, Council could approve the plan, as amended, that evening. The plan must be submitted to HUD by May 15, 2015. C:\Users\mkarr\AppData\Local\Microsoft\windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\OVIN9JGE\Resolution and Memo Approving the Action Plan.doc Fiscal Impact The City budgeted $1,555,386 in the FY16 budget for eligible CDBG and HOME projects. These funds represent HOME and CDBG entitlement funds, program income, and uncommitted or returned CDBG and HOME funds from prior projects that did not proceed. If you have any questions about the draft FY16 Annual Action Plan or the proposed projects please feel free to contact me at 356-5230 or at Kristopher-Ackerson@Iowa-City.org. Enclosed: Draft FY2016 Annual Action Plan Housing and Community Development Commission April 16, 2015 Page 2 of 5 inclusionary zoning. Byler asked if that was a committee of staff and Hightshoe said it was not. The members are community members including Maryann Dennis of The Housing Fellowship, Tracey Achenbach of Housing Trust Fund, Scott McDonald, Brad Langworth of Hills Bank, Glen Siders formally of Southgate, Chad Kuhn. City staff on the committee includes John Yapp, Doug Boothroy, and Sarah Moeller. Hightshoe said this committee will review the options and then will make recommendations. At that time the HCDC will get involved. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FY16 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN: Ackerson noted that the two agenda times (5 & 6) are related. The Housing Fellowship was awarded $200,000 for a project in FY15 and they were unable to get that project off the ground so the money was returned and those funds were added to the larger pot of money that the HCDC allocated in March. However, because that was FY15 money, it needs to be committed by July and so staff is proposing to amend the FY16 action plan to move up two projects that could be done immediately. Those two projects are the Housing Fellowship's Rehab project and Habitat's two properties on Prairie Du Chien Road. Therefore the Commission will need to approve the FY16 Annual Action Plan without those two projects. Those two projects will be moved to a FY15 Plan amendment. Jacobson asked if Staff has spoken with the two groups regarding the projects timelines. Both projects can be "committed" by the end of July. Hightshoe confirmed they have spoken and confirmed these projects can start immediately and are able to meet HOME's definition of project commitment. Jacobson moved to amend the FY16 Annual Action Plan to remove the Habitat property purchases and Housing Fellowship Rehab projects. Taylor seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF FY15 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN — AMENDMENT 1: Byler moved to amend the FYI Annual Action Plan to move the Habitat for Humanity property purchases and Housing Fellowship Rehab projects into the action plan. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF THE FY2016-2020 CITY STEPS (CONSOLIDATED PLAN) AMENDMENT #1 Ackerson said this request comes from the City Manager to amend the Consolidated Plan to allow for use of the funds for curb ramps in the downtown area. Taylor moved to approve the amendment to the FY2016-2020 CITY STEPS (Consolidated Plan) to allow funds to be used for curb ramps in the downtown area. Housing and Community Development Commission April 16, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Byler seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. DISCUSSION OF FY15 PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH THE `UNSUCCESSFUL OR DELAYED PROJECTS POLICY' Ackerson said that the one project that has not reached the 50% threshold is part of ARC of Southeast Iowa's project. Staff has received an update and the project is moving ahead they just haven't sent the City invoices. Hightshoe said one invoice has been received, but it does not reach the 51 % threshold. Ackerson noted that Staff is comfortable where this project stands. Zimmermann Smith agreed that HCDC didn't need to be concerned then. It was noted that a recent newspaper article reported over 100 volunteers showed up to work on the project. REVIEW ALLOCATION PROCESS FOR CDBG, HOME, AND AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING AND CONSIDER CREATING SUB -COMMITTEE Zimmermann Smith said there are different allocation processes for HOME and CDBG allocations as well as the Aid to Agencies Funding. Jacobson noted that the process is better than it used to be. He sat on the subcommittee and they had good intentions but did not identify any significant changes. He feels this is a longer term project to review. Zimmermann Smith agreed and said she was less concerned about the CDBG and HOME processes, the questions are in place for those decisions as well as the scoring. She feels the Aid to Agencies Funding has been an issue since it was made part of this Commission's purview and feels it would be great to have some clarity on goals. Hightshoe said previously it was decisions made by a Human Services positon and Council members, but that was changed when the Human Services position was eliminated and Council decided it would be better to have the HCDC review these requests. Aid to Agencies will apply again in August and September and Zimmermann Smith feels it is a process that needs to be reviewed. Jacobson suggested the Commission have an informal meeting to just focus on this issue, review all the ideas, and then have a subcommittee firm up the ideas and make a policy recommendation. Zimmermann Smith asked if HCDC could ask the Council to give them direction of five or so priorities for funding agencies. Persson prefers to ask the agencies what they feel is reasonable and get their input. Lamkins asked if this Aid to Agencies Funding was a similar process to the process of awarding funds that was done last month. Zimmermann Smith said it isn't as concrete and it is a very small pool of money that is used as operating funds for these agencies. It is about $378,000, with Prepared by: Kristopher Ackerson, Neighborhood Services, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5230 RESOLUTION NO. 15-135 RESOLUTION ADOPTING IOWA CITY'S FY16 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN WHICH IS A SUB -PART OF IOWA CITY'S 2016-2020 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (CITY STEPS) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID PLAN AND ALL NECESSARY CERTIFICATIONS TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE AUTHORIZED CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to prepare and submit the FY16 Annual Action Plan as part of the City's 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (CITY STEPS) to plan the use of federal funds to assist lower income residents with housing, jobs, and services; and WHEREAS, the Iowa City Housing and Community Development Commission has held a series of meetings regarding the use of federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds for City of Iowa City fiscal year 2016; and WHEREAS, the City has disseminated information, received public input and held a public meeting on the FY16 Annual Action Plan; and WHEREAS, the FY16 Annual Action Plan contains the allocation of CDBG and HOME funds attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Iowa City Housing and Community Development Commission has recommended that Exhibit A be approved; and WHEREAS, adoption of the FY16 Annual Action Plan will make Iowa City eligible for federal and state funds administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the public interest will be served by the adoption of the FY16 Annual Action Plan and submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The City of Iowa City FY16 Annual Action Plan, containing the allocation of CDBG and HOME funds attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved and adopted. 2. The City Manager is hereby designated as the Chief Executive Officer and authorized to act on behalf of the City of Iowa City in connection with the FY16 Annual Action Plan. 3. The City Manager of Iowa City is hereby authorized and directed to submit the City of Iowa City FY16 Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and is further authorized and directed to provide all the necessary certifications or documents required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute, terminate, or amend CDBG and HOME Agreements executed in connection with the allocation of public funds with sub -recipients, Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs), or other legal entities. Passed and approved this 5th day of May, 2015. ATTEST: 2W,6,.J 2L 7�L� CITY CLERK ';;� ln�`f-dS _t( - City Attorney's Office Resolution No. .Page 2 15-135 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton Exhibit A rnRG and NAME Ortivitiuc Fv7Mrz Category Activity Requested Allocated CDBG Allocated HOME Units/HH Assisted Persons Served THF CHDO Operations Funds $ 16,000 $ $ 16,000 NA $ CHARM Homes - Property Acquisition $ 61,650 $ - $ 61,650 8 - 1 MYEP Home Project $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ _ 3 Housing Systems Unlimited $ 250,000 $ - $ 184,000 3 THF Sabin Townhomes $ 300,000 $ - $ 300,000 3 CIC Owner Occupied Rehab - CDBG NA $ 235,000 $ - 18 CIC Owner Occupied Rehab - HOME NA $ - $ 90,000 4 Total Housing: $ 967,650 $ 295,000 $ 651,650 43 Econ. Aid toAgencies*: Dev Streetscape Improvements, City -Univ URA NA Persons Served Public Facilities Assisted Public DVIP Shelter Bathroom & Door Rehab $ 116,256 $ 116,256 $ - 1 Facilities Broadway Neighborhood Center Phase 2 $ 94,140 $ 94,140 $ - 1 Total Public Services Streetscape Improvement, Tract 18.01 & 18.02 NA $ 75,000 $ - 1 Total Public Facilities $ 210,396 $ 285,396 $ - 3 Econ. Aid toAgencies*: Dev Streetscape Improvements, City -Univ URA NA Persons Served Public Crisis Center NA $ 40,000 NA 800 Services Neighborhood Centers of Johnson Count NA $ 15,000 NA 400 Domestic Violence Intervention Program NA $ 45,000 NA 225 Total Public Services $ 100,000 $ - 1 1,425 Econ. Iowa City Economic Development Fund*: Entities Assisted Dev Streetscape Improvements, City -Univ URA NA $ 50,0001 NA 1 NA $ 131,210 1 Total Economic Development $ 50,000 $ _ 1 • City Council set-aside Total CDBG $ 861,606 Total HOME $ 693,780 Combined Total $ 1,555,3B6 HOME Program Administration* NA NA$ 42,130 NA Admin. CDBG Program Administration* NA $ 131,210 1 NA NA Total Administration $ 131,210t$ 42,130 • City Council set-aside Total CDBG $ 861,606 Total HOME $ 693,780 Combined Total $ 1,555,3B6 CITY OF IOWA CITY Neighborhood Services 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone: 319.356.5230 www.icgov.org/commdev April 2015 DRAFT Iowa City `FY16 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Neighborhood and Development Services CDBG - Community Development Block Grant HOME - HOME Investment Partnerships Funds F7 bD v N Ul L VI v � � Ul E 1 'a+O u C_ C Ul L bq = E � L bq C GO) L Ul L O L O_ -O O � C c N W [tl N U L J d C .Y C U O C O ate+ w � u O Y � L W L L W L O O. UO (D c u � -0 C 'N Y c � c O' 0 O u bq c LA ttl W L Q N U 'H J r T w U/ O J E L o Y w Q w 0 2 a a n E O v C -O ttl L N m ° � C 3 N w u Q� w 4u a c o2 3 N J y V T O W � w � F7 EO bD C_ C C d C C U O Y N G O. UO (D v N C 'N O' 0 > J L Q L U -6 U U/ O J E J Q Q w 0 2 a a EO O O O O Y O v i 0 Q ti T O O O Y O t O O U1 M O O M N O 2 w N rp E= ro t E- = f0 O 3= c C 0 = v O 3° z v E c s O t C E hq N O d b U bD v w � Y U J U J T O `J y O N CU Q b w M O O � O O Lr O p 00 00 N O O O O O O O O O M O O � N N 0 0 0 O O O O Y O O i 0 Q ti 0- O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O M N N U_ U_ Y U i Q Q 0 0- f0 f0 C f0 0 O C Y 2 f0 'o Q= E= ro t E- = C O 3= c C 0 = v O 3° z E ° z s O t C E U_ U_ Y U i Q Q 0 0- 0 O v Y 2 (7 J w O d N M EO If appropriate, describe publically owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan The City is not involved with land banking and has a limited amount of resources available to acquire, assemble, and dispose of sites for the purpose of expanding affordable housing and employment opportunities. Currently, two parcels may be available for such development Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 133 a -I N M Q Ln W Il W 7 M EO Y c N c c Y O W DY VI +�+ bn U bn N C bn 'yi ,— C J C N in O c O l0 j L O C O N vii ON 5 0 v 2 C T a yi '6 -6 N t t t U LL t N J N Y C N N U) Y U) O J N (p in U in Y p Y p rb _ O _ U1 U1 U1 O N OO 2 z 2 0 2 N z M N z N N H N N rb z in Q Y O Y O Y O O O O O O iy,j O O O O O O C7 vi 0 O o N V u} x u} x u} x u} x u} x u} V cn u} o V u} o V v) - C bn C bn 0 Y in Y C D N C � N C N C C O � N J J J N Q CN bn 'N '6 O bn C .N N -6 O N -6 N O U N O O O 0 Y n n N U) x Q C x Q C Q C In C U C y w v bn 3 v bn 3 bn 3 o S v > c v Z � O v O O rb v v c v bn U) U - O U O - +' O a 5 Q a 5 a 5 d � d CCc 9 d Q d x x w C C bn bn bn bn bn c c c c c J J J J J O O O O O 2 2 2 2 2 O c U) -6 O c O U (D O U N O N z O N rib rib rib rib rib N O x rb Y O U L O O O O E O O E bn - CL C N bn - Q w w w O w w O J U1 O Q J U1 rUb E Q Q Q 2 Q Q 2 d c w Z to d c w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N bn U V _D O p J U Q C O Q > N C U/ E YO — — YO J bn p' VI C y>j Y J Y VI Y N Y (D in U O (D v t vbD v v vW v w N v > > fb '6 > fb '6 VI fb '6 > fb '6 > U > O N O .N O O .N O O in Q C Q O J Q O O O. O J O. -0 0 Q 0 - � 0O - fb L N C m N L CL d a -I N M Q Ln W Il W 7 M EO ti ti vv N N vv N N �a �a N N N N vv vv N N N N N N vv N N vv C C C C J J J J CO CO CO CO O O O O (J O (J O D O D O U v)- U v) - N + + Y C C h0 C N E E Q O U/ N D U .E O O E E Q O (D N D U .E O O N N 6 p Q < c C O C = O = N C 3 0 m C hO C C ._ O X= LJ.I ? 0 N� N O Q O N N 'U U/ N OY) bn C .N J N 0 L H \VI N E w w w 5 a 2 2 C Y N O J O- = E ° UU O O N C Y N O = E ° O O N v O Z U 0 Z U 0 = O O O N N N O O O N N N N N N O O O N N N N U b .� U N O C O N C C E bD ON C v > a U/ -0 CbD ro E O E ( \ \ E � N N O E O t N O t d 0 0 N O1 N N EO Goal Descriptions 1 Goal Name Improve the quality of owner housing Goal Description Rehab of existing owner -occupied units 2 Goal Name Improve access to affordable owner housing Goal Description Assistance for new homeowners 3 Goal Name Improve quality of affordable rental units Goal Description Rehab of existing renter -occupied units 4 Goal Name Increase the supply of affordable rental housing Goal Description Construction of new renter -occupied units 5 Goal Name Improve access to affordable renter housing Goal Description Assistance for renters 6 Goal Name Improve and maintain public facilities Goal Description Upgrading and expansion of public facilities. 7 Goal Name Provide public services Goal Description Increase the effectiveness of physical investments that improve conditions for the elderly, youth, low-income persons, and other special populations. 8 Goal Name Improve/maintain public infrastructure/amenities Goal Description Improving or replacing outdated and deteriorating infrastructure 9 Goal Name Strengthen economic development Goal Description Direct technical and business assistance 30 Goal Name Remove slum and blight Goal Description Facade improvement program 11 Goal Name Provide housing/services to the homeless/at-risk Goal Description Homeless assistance services Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 136 AP -35 Projects - 91.220(d) Introduction The following project information for FY 2016 provides a comprehensive overview on the ranges of CDBG and HOME activities. Projects I CHARM Homes LLC, Affordable Rental Housing 2 DVIP Shelter, Communal Bathroom and Door Rehabilitation 3 Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity, Land Acquisition 4 Mayors Youth Empowerment Program Home Project 5 Broadway Neighborhood Center Improvements, Phase 11 6 Systems Unlimited Inc., 2016 Iowa City Housing Project 7 The Housing Fellowship, CHDO Operation Funds 8 The Housing Fellowship, Affordable Rental Housing 9 The Housing Fellowship, Sabin Townhomes 10 Iowa City Owner -Occupied Rehab I I Crisis Center, Emergency Assistance Program 12 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County 13 Domestic Violence Intervention Program 14 Streetscape Improvements - Tract 18 15 Streetscape Improvements - UniverCity URA Table 32 - Project Information Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs Iowa City is committed to allocating funds that serve the needs of low- to moderate -income (LMI) residents. Households with incomes less than 50% of the area median income (AMI), particularly those with extremely low -incomes (less than 30% of AMI), are higher priorities. The City has also identified special needs individuals as among those who face the greatest challenges and who should receive high priority in the expenditure of federal funds, including at -risk children and youth, low-income families, the homeless and persons threatened with homelessness, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. In order to achieve the greatest impact possible from the limited federal funds available, the City intends to allocate its non -housing community development resources primarily to projects that will have a focused neighborhood impact, as opposed to infrastructure projects of more dispersed expected benefit. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 137 The priorities identified in the CP were developed by. • Weighing the severity of the need among all groups and sub -groups • Analyzing current social, housing, and economic conditions • Analyzing the relative needs of low- and moderate -income families • Assessing the resources likely to be available over the next five years, and • Evaluating input from focus group sessions, interviews, service provider surveys, City staff, and public hearings. Iowa City will invest its CDBG and HOME funds in areas primarily impacted by non -student LMI persons. Several of the City's LMI census areas are located in the downtown area and include the University of Iowa and a significant rental housing stock that is predominantly occupied by students. While resources other than CDBG and HOME funds may be used in these areas to maintain and preserve housing, infrastructure, and public services, the City's CDBG and HOME funds will be focused in areas that are home to families, the elderly, the disabled, and the homeless. The City's provision of funding for new construction and acquisition of affordable housing will continue to be governed by its Affordable Housing Location Model. The primary obstacle to meeting underserved needs is the limited resources available to address identified priorities. Iowa City will partner with other public agencies and non-profit organizations, when feasible, to leverage resources and maximize outcomes in housing and community development Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) nm. 9 c CL C C EO v N U N � Y p_ C U/ N U N -a C C Y � Q � O � U � O O t CO L v — v o 'o N C Y C C � Y_ Y N f0 C v � � bn v s v E bn c c + Y O CO. N O O O O t O _ — O Q C U N + 0 _ D a- � 3 s v v 0 p y U L N N Y N m U V C V O LO f0 u � ~ VI y t C Y Y N f0 O p. CN in O O Q c p E m p bn 0- OQ C QO wO N (D V TU " O => vCO UO Y > z N c O �" D t O c -I 0 Q p V c w V H w oo O m o_ D o_ V Q 'a w W O a E O v c *d m w 'O -O L A N O V N N E � Q W 1p d V t N N Ed S E S s O. r O td U1 I'd id N w u d s 1.1. C O Z Q O. 3 Q r+ t +L+ -O Q Z Q O. 7 Q +' V to y N O to d .i 00 o V 00 E_ 0 .O 00 0 o V ltl k O y d d ltl '+d E O V R L O C N LL 0 Z LL o W w a J O. LL 0 Z LL o — N 9 c CL C C EO c CL C C EO v Z v E 0 v 0 v E O t y C O Y O 3 O` d bn 0 0 l0 N V1 � LL LL LL C C o C C ON o o W O M V1 = L v C 2 n 6 U Q '6 J Y_ c � E 2 O = 2• N O hn C j O (D C O 6 N O U f0 > O E bD VI 0 O = (D C O \ U Z Q C '6 C W 01 � t/} i C V C 0 Y O O 3 6E � 3 T C ro N E Q L p E LL O C o O 3 p V1 N M Y J 6 C E o 2 E bD O C N E v Q E J } O T c 'o L Y v 0 -6 0 T Q U) Y vOi N C w W w W a E a E O � O C � N W C N W 00 s ed W EN E A+ t f6 m E = 00 G 0c W w G 0W a w J 2 u O. £ i LL ttl i 00 b d O C O U� d Z 00 'O r LL O V d o 00 p d E— i_+ t m E = 2L •++ E O W w a 0 G w u N w u r £ O to i 00 s to d O C b 0 M Q c CL C C EO c CL C C EO v Y 0 v v C � C_ Y N v -p v c c o 6 U C C O - Y Y N O ro C p_ O c 1/1 E � o O O O t O O 6 6C U1 y O O bD c c U E w v N � t O L Y > C o N O = 00 O O ( C C � � Y N N Q c v 0 C _ U_ in Y N -0 O 4 C O ro v vQ p N Y t Y N O LE C > VLE c O U1 ro Z Q C N O w in v t -O CL O O � E ON 0 0 0 T C O w O O p t +' N E _O Y O Y ^ 00 l0 LLc 3 Q O' N in O h0 U 0 C 'C O 'O % O O 00 N (7 (D O m 0 00 Nm O EO' 0 O O N W Q M O d m d u D_ 0- O 0 O a E a E O O N W N W d W 0W O d 0 O w N w N c O td w p d s d 's0 -O Q t m u Z Q C 7 Q 00 c O- a+ +, N w r v ++ V a+ vl 00 c C '� r+ +, N v v N V N O V N N V N O .E u O i° k d o °i° E- a '� s c d 3 d k + o N O m s m o d = d m E o c m Z LL o W w a J O. LL 0 Z LL o W w aF J O. Ln c CL C C EO N EO 0 v 6 v c J o s E U O Y U U C '6 - v 3 -9 O O T c O •Y N � a U J O � iri O Y Y_ VI O Q � W C j O 2 Y W C J O t Y U) C J = N � U) v t t Y 3 Y C y CO Y N j O s N E W C Y U) U N o w N v v W O N v bjO T Y c v Y In o a v Y v ro _O aa h0 C W O 00 W V v c O o U V " s3 Y 0 N v t OM M O O 2 C 3 Z LE 0 °D O Y > o ¢ UO N > d Vim} w 2 > Y N O o p1 E v O W 3 Y N M W W 0 O O 0 a E a E O � O C � N W C N W d V i LL ltl 'O t N O 0 y N d Z r LL C O d o td ltl W E— 7 > '� t e m y N '++ .E O W w a 0W O G -E w O U J N v j:a u y O. d V O LL s i� -O d 1! C ttl 0 y m -O N d Z LL O '� N o td Oso w E— 7— i+ t e m y N E, a W w a 0 O a r w O R J �D 1� N EO M 7 c CL C C EO C Y C O U) o E O O � t O C Q O E b0 c Y 0 p E bn YO C v 3 0 O � v N V y U i+ C O Y O b0 = c U) C h0 O h0 C C T c c c 3 'y O 0 io a L ma_ N N E N 5 C O C C Oa y v v v 3 3 v v v c c v v -o f0 \ t C f0 \ 6 Q N N O O__ t i O vi a o a O O U E o O 0O 00 LL W _ OO N bD (D Q C t bD a) Q O C in Q C t C t O 'N Y C It U_ O LL 'N Y C M U_ E =O N Q C bD O (D Q O C — C y v v v 3 0 " v v s p s °' ° `° o s °' p s o x w W O � a E O N W L d ++ lC d C 2 sIV O aw d 00 'O V 00 E� d .O V 00 G.i '++ N C L k d C L ltl O d d ltl E O u O. LL (� Z LL o W w a J O. LL (� Z LL OD Q� M 7 c CL C C EO EO ) ; \ \ §/ bn ((D jj k ® bD \\ \\\ } \ ) §] {/% / (D \ ) ( 0 - / } | - a `bD- _ƒ \ \ 3 : / \\ /} }( $ \ - ` � ) ( E \ : 0 / ) ƒ } o \ ƒ / } Q = 2 8 = �3 5 /\ \\ ?e/{_ 7] ?eii_ ) 2\) ' $ | ) } § E « 0) § E ] R 2 2 |§ ]!# 2 A 2_ A IV 2 \ 2 j \ \ ( / ) E \ \ ( 0 u ) o u 0 2 2� E e o)) a 2 2 8L 2 E: IL e o EO EO E : bD / [ } / ƒ x ) \ bbD i ƒ �` a ( \ > 2 / - \ } j - / \ I D (D 2 ) ( _ \ : ƒ& §bD \ } \ } & } \ ! » \\ \\ ) } )) a = d 2\) ) / 2 2� k � k \ - $ ) r E | 2 \ . / t 0 } j o)) ) § § c ) a k / ��) 2% ) ) } / 2 2 8 k ) ! \ - \ ) ) EO C CL C C EO v c blO v o J � -6 C U N T Y_ Cv C O '^ O U N � Y U_ N > U) C h0 b d C O N U) C U/ O U N E o N N G O t U Y YO N= V c C J t > O a L ~ \VI N O > In in J x° Q 7 CO o N f0 O Oa YO bD -6 C U) O > O a N J >_ -6 aO+ E Q a 0 U) O C 7 Opp Y N ~ U) Q 6 N v .y E y U Y N N O. .� N O_ E CC 0 O. E — OY) C aO+ f0 U N Q n m o C CN -0 U) U) (Yp •' U > C 'Y U J U) > V O O E CO N v ro C N u W W 0 O 0 O a E a E O � O d ? .i LL d s ttl M a O. O 0 O N L d Z LL O d o y td k C M N 7 ice+ y y. ++ t Oa '+, E O W w a O G N w O u u u r d 0 d s 00 s MEA t a C ttl N s 0 d Z LL C O V N o yVj td 00 s C N 3 ice+ y ++ ++ t y N E_ a W w a M Q C CL C C EO EO T Y .N v U f0 U/ f0 U/ N .y C N Q .0 U Y 0 w N C O Q D T Y N .0 � N U E C v Q E U C O C E O Q � Y N to C f0 U) � U) Y C ro Q C v O O m U � C C f0 N 0 V O V i v� w W O � a E �• O N W w D O Qu y m a to Z V i LL L Q m H CL C = O 0 'O Qto d Z 7 LL O d o ltl to ff L G� N L N NCL + E o w w a w O u u y a Ln EO AP -50 Geographic Distribution - 91.220(f) Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed Iowa City will invest its CDBG and HOME funds in areas primarily impacted by non -student LMI persons. Several of the City's LMI census areas are located in the downtown area and include the University of Iowa and a significant rental housing stock that is predominantly occupied by students. While resources other than CDBG and HOME funds may be used in these areas to maintain and preserve housing, infrastructure, and public services, the City's CDBG and HOME funds will be focused in areas that are home to families, the elderly, the disabled, and the homeless. In order to achieve the greatest impact possible from the limited federal funds available, the City intends to allocate its non -housing community development resources primarily to projects that will have a focused neighborhood impact, as opposed to infrastructure projects of more dispersed expected benefit. The City's provision of funding for new construction and acquisition of affordable housing is governed by its Affordable Housing Location Model, which has three goals: • Avoiding further burden on neighborhoods and elementary schools that already have issues related to a concentration of poverty, • Promoting diverse neighborhoods in terms of income levels, and • Incorporating factors important to the Iowa City Community School District in affordable housing siting as it relates to educational outcomes. The model mathematically combines seven factors, including distance to existing subsidized family rental housing, income, sales prices, school mobility and performance, poverty, and crime density, and sets threshold scores below which funding for rental housing construction or acquisition should not be available. The affordable housing location model, now frequently cited as a best practice, has been successful in achieving its intended objective of not placing additional assisted rental housing in areas of concentrated poverty and other factors. The City does not restrict the location of funding for owner -occupied housing or for rental rehabilitation, nor does it restrict the location of funding for projects for the elderly or persons with disabilities. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) En Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically In light of the limited amount of CDBG funds available to the City, not all the City's housing and community development needs can be addressed over the next five years. Therefore, priorities must be established to ensure that scarce resources are directed to the most pressing housing and community development needs. The neighborhood -level focus for non -housing community development needs within income -eligible areas reflects the City's desire to create appreciable and lasting living environment improvements given limited funds, and the specific geographic targeting of new family rental housing reflects the need to affirmatively further fair housing by directing this type of development to a broader range of neighborhoods, combating existing segregated settlement patterns. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 149 AP -55 Affordab/e Housing - 91.220(g) Introduction The City will use HOME funds and a portion of CDBG funds for new affordable housing and to rehabilitate existing housing units. The special needs population will be served through the rehabilitation of an existing structure for rental housing. The homeless population will be served through assistance grants to local service providers. Therefore, these two groups do not have easily quantifiable goals. The one year goals noted below have been extrapolated from the table included in SP -45. One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 0 Non -Homeless 43 Special -Needs 0 Total 0 Table 33 -One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Requirement One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported Through Rental Assistance 0 The Production of New Units 2 Rehab of Existing Units 24 Ac uisition of Existing Units 14 Total 43 Table 34 -One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Type Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 150 AP -60 Pub/ic Housing - 91.220(17) Introduction Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) is part of the Neighborhood and Development Services Department and was established in 1969 to administer housing assistance programs throughout Johnson County, Iowa County and Washington County North of HWY 92. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing The ICHA targets available tenant based rental assistance to disabled, elderly, and families with children under 18 (who reside in our jurisdiction) whose income is <= 30% of AMI. The ICHA targets available public housing units to disabled, elderly, and families with children under 18 (who reside in our jurisdiction) whose income is <= 80% of AMI. The ICHA will maximize HCVP and VASH budget authority and voucher utilization and lease -up rates for Public Housing. The HCV Homeownership program permits eligible participants the option of purchasing a home with HCV assistance rather than renting. Public Housing tenants are eligible for a Special Admission to the HCV Homeownership program if they have lived in a Public Housing unit longer than I year and their total tenant payment (TTP) is higher than $499. The Family Self -Sufficiency (FSS) Program promotes self-sufficiency and asset development by providing supportive services to participants to increase their employability, to increase the number of employed participants, and to encourage increased savings through an escrow savings program. This program is designed to work with households on a five-year plan to attain financial self-sufficiency as well as provide rental assistance. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership Timeline and Analysis of the Housing Authority's efforts to create a Resident Advisory Board (RAB) In March 2009, The Housing Authority surveyed all active Public Housing tenants and Family Self - Sufficiency (FSS) program participants (21 1 families) to determine interest in serving on a Resident Advisory Board (RAB). Twenty-six (26) families responded. In May 2009, The Housing Authority sent the 26 RAB interest survey respondents a copy of the survey used to collect citizen input for CITY STEPS Iowa City's Consolidated Plan for Housing, Jobs, and Services for Low -Income Residents 2010 — 2015. Eight (8) families responded. In June 2008, the Iowa City Housing Authority's Public Housing unit located at 608 Eastmoor, Iowa City, Iowa, was severely damaged by flooding. It was located in the 500 year flood -plain. Due to the City of Iowa City's intent to purchase all properties located the 100 and 500 year flood -plains, the Housing Authority submitted a Demolition/Disposition applications to the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD requires RAB input/comment for Demolition/Disposition applications. The 26 respondents to the Housing Authority's March 2009 RAB Interest Survey were contacted in October 2010 to submit input/comments — none responded. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 151 In December 2014, The Housing Authority surveyed all active Public Housing tenants (75 families) to determine interest in serving on a Resident Advisory Board (RAB). Seven (7) families responded; three (3) stating an interest; four (4) stating no interest. Analysis of the recommendations submitted by Resident Advisory Board (RAB) and the decisions made on these recommendations. There appears to be very little interest in Housing Authority participating families in serving on an RAB focusing solely on Housing Authority programs and services. The majority of comments received via 3 separate survey instruments are beyond the scope, power, and authority of the Iowa City Housing Authority to impact these concerns, or other City Departments and Community Based Agencies are better suited to meet these concerns. Examples include fixing streets, repairing abandoned homes, empowering neighborhoods, dealing with perception of City-wide increase in criminal activity, safety, events, neighborhood development and clean up, etc. The Iowa City Housing Authority and the City of Iowa City Neighborhood Services will continue the initiative they launched in 2008: "Good Neighbors—Strong Neighborhoods." The idea is to partner with Neighborhood Associations to develop strategies to promote the peaceful enjoyment of the neighborhood for all residents. The goal is the increased participation of Housing Authority clients in the activities sponsored by the City of Iowa City Neighborhood Associations. Through the Office of Neighborhood Services, the City of Iowa City supports and encourages neighborhood action and provides ideas and resources that can help shape the future of a neighborhood. The City coordinates with the Neighborhood Associations to work through their short and long-term needs that best serve the interests of the neighborhood within the goals of the larger community. The City of Iowa City also provides financial and technical assistance in the printing and mailing of newsletters and meeting notices. The Housing Authority will repeat the survey process in partnership with the City of Iowa City Housing and Community Development Commission when citizen input is collected for CITY STEPS Iowa City's Consolidated Plan for Housing, jobs, and Services for Low -Income Residents 2021 – 2025 and the Iowa City Housing Authority 5 -year plan for 2021 – 2025. If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance HUD has not designated ICHA as troubled. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 152 AP -65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities - 91.220(i) Introduction As a participant in the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board (JCLHCB), the City is a partner in its plan to address homelessness and the priority needs of homeless individuals and families, including homeless subpopulations. Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including During FY2016, the City's federal funds will continue to support programs to provide decent and safe living environments for homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless, through funding such activities as emergency shelter operations, financial assistance for rent, utilities and other critical expenses, and rapid re -housing. The City will maintain support for JCLHCB, the region's Continuum of Care (CoC) organization. The City will contribute CDBG, General Fund, and utility revenues to help assist local service agencies provide services. Non-profit agencies will apply through the United Way Joint Funding process to access these funds. Applicants can apply for United Way, Johnson County, Iowa City, and Coralville funds under one application. Each funding entity determines how they will allocate the funds they contributed. Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs The City's strategies as they specifically relate to reaching out to homeless persons and understanding their individual needs include: Advocate human services coordination • Pursue a single application for service system entry • Pursue the formation of a local computerized system that connect clients with services, serves as a database, and provides inter -agency referrals • Support the Local Homeless Coordinating Board (LHCB) Increase understanding of issues surrounding Johnson County homelessness Conduct a study of rural homelessness coordinated with Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOJC) to determine the level of unmet need, formulate outreach efforts, and support requests for additional funding. • Conduct a survey to determine community attitudes surrounding affordable housing and homeless organizations and participants. Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons In light of the limited amount of CDBG and HOME funds available to the City, not all of the area's homeless needs can be addressed using federal funds. The City does not receive Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) or HOPWA entitlement funds from HUD to assist with homeless needs, and it relies on a Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 153 variety of community agencies to provide basic needs assistance and other support for the local homeless population. However, the City will continue to support the JCLHCB in FY 16, and it will continue to implement strategies related specifically to addressing emergency and transitional housing needs for the homeless, including: Expand/Rehabilitate Emergency Shelter • Improve and maintain existing shelter facilities • Support expansion or addition of facilities to meet increased demand • Expand staff within existing system to provide improved service Support plans for improving day shelter opportunities • Expand available services such as social/case worker availability, facilities, childcare opportunities, improved public and private transportation access, showers • Supported Training and Access to Resources (STAR) program continuation Improve transitional housing programs for families • Continue to develop scattered site, transitional housing programs requiring participation in supportive services • Provide transitional housing for single individuals • Continue to develop Single Room Occupancy (SRO) type housing for persons living alone with access to supportive services • Continue support of transitional housing for unaccompanied youth Provide special needs transitional housing • Continue to support the development of transitional housing for persons with mental illness. • Provide services to support special needs populations in non -facility based care environments (i.e. Compeer, Buddy System, Coaches) Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again The Continuum of Care (CoC) addresses the housing and supportive services needs in each stage of the CoC process to help homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent living. In FY 16, the City will continue to support the CoC strategy to meet the needs of homeless persons and those at risk of becoming homeless. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 154 Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs. In recent years, Iowa City has allocated the maximum amount of CDBG funding possible to public services to assist human service organizations. To the extent possible in FY 16, the City will provide support to the system of facilities and service providers described in the homeless inventory. ICHA locally administers efforts that assist in homelessness prevention, including the Section 8 voucher program and administration of 81 units of public housing for residents who are low-income, very low- income, and extremely low-income. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 155 AP -75 Barriers to affordable housing - 91.220�i) Introduction: The City of Iowa City finalized an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in March 2014. The impediments identified, along with recommendations to address the impediments, are outlined in SP -55. Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment The City is actively involved in presenting to organizations in the region to educate persons about what is affordable housing and who needs it. Presentations will continue during FY 16. The City will also support the Local Homeless Coordinating Board's efforts to develop a campaign to educate the community on affordable housing and put a face on who needs affordable housing. The City will continue to review housing to be constructed with City or CDBG/HOME assistance to ensure it meets the City's Affordable Housing Design Guidelines. Quality design and neighborhood compatibility will assist with neighborhood and community acceptance of affordable housing. The City will support the rehabilitation of existing rental units in low income neighborhoods and work with private property owners to preserve affordable housing throughout neighborhoods in Iowa City. The City will also work with the Human Rights Coordinator to provide Fair Housing updates to educate local commissions and boards. Based on multiple years of functional experience, the City has plans to reevaluate certain aspects of the Affordable Housing Location Model. Most notably, the model factors in the density of a project but imposes a buffer irrespective of the surrounding neighborhood density, which limits housing options beyond the model's original goals. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 156 AP -85 Other Actions - 91.220(k) Introduction: Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs Iowa City has a long history of successfully implementing HUD funded programs. Serving the needs of the City's various special needs population drives the city's consolidated planning efforts. Addressing the needs of the homeless and special needs populations are high priorities for use of resources within Iowa City. Due to limited funding and the prospect of reduced funding in future years, the following considerations will be made when determining whether to fund a project: 1) The project must be an identified CITY STEPS priority. Applicant must document the ability of the project to address the specific need. 2) The project budget is justified and leverages other financial resources, including human resources. Applicant must document efforts to obtain outside funding as well. 3) The project has a measurable impact in the community. The project primarily targets low-income persons, utilizes community partnerships, and provides adequate benefits in relation to costs. 4) The applicant can maintain regulatory compliance. Applicant must demonstrate it has strong financial skills, administrative capacity to complete a federal grant, and the ability to complete the project within the required time period. Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City will continue to support its goals of maintaining and expanding affordable housing by utilizing its CDBG and HOME allocations to create new opportunities for affordable rental and homeownership and rehabilitate existing affordable units. The GRIP program will continue providing $200,000 annually for low- to moderate -income homeowners to rehabilitate their properties. The UniverCity Program will continue as funds are available; two homes are planned in FY2016. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards The City will continue to ensure compliance with the HUD lead-based paint regulations that implement Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, which covers the CDBG and HOME programs, among others. The State of Iowa passed legislation in 2009 to certify renovators who work in housing and child -occupied facilities and to require all children entering kindergarten to be tested for lead poisoning. The Housing Rehabilitation Office will continue to implement all aspects of the lead-based paint regulations. In its efforts to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards in all of its CDBG and HOME funded rehabilitation projects, the Office provides information and outreach on the dangers of lead- based paint, as well as guidance in the identification and reduction of lead-based paint hazards to all Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 157 program participants. Blood level tests may be paid through the Housing Rehabilitation program for targeted populations such as children under 7 when needed. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty -level families The City, Housing Authority, and the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board work together to address homeless and poverty issues. In addition to the activities outlined in the Annual Action Plan, the Housing Authority provides supportive services and coordination with the agencies making up the Local Homeless Coordinating Board to support families and individuals achieve their highest level of self-sufficiency. With respect to economic development, the City has had a long-term partnership with the Iowa City Area Development Group (ICAD) and the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce. ICAD is a private non-profit organization whose mission is to position the region as a quality place to work. ICAD works as a confidential advocate for expanding businesses and new industries. ICAD helps businesses pursue state and local financial assistance and serves as a liaison between the City, the Iowa Economic Development Authority, the University of Iowa and other entities. The Chamber of Commerce works to enhance the business climate in Johnson County and provides educational programs on customer service, human resources, and other issues relevant to small businesses. Starting in FY03, the City set aside CDBG funds to promote economic development Funds primarily support gap financing or start-up capital to micro -enterprises or small business creating jobs for low - moderate income persons. These funds are available throughout the year, instead of a once a year funding cycle to allow greater flexibility and attract a greater number of applicants. Since 2005, the City has reviewed 43 applications and approved loans for 22 businesses and non-profit entities. The City's CDBG Economic Development Fund has created and/or retained 364 jobs, provided employment training to 15 residents, and assisted five micro -enterprises. Loans have been provided to bakeries, restaurants, small construction contractors, craft retail stores, salons, fitness studios, and more. As of May 2015, there was a fund balance of approximately $25,000. In 2013, the City Council expanded the use of the Economic Development Fund to be used for facade improvements in the City -University Urban Renewal Area as part of the Building Change program. The program meets the objectives of the Urban Renewal Plan by 1) eliminating substandard buildings blighting influence and environmental deficiencies; 2) improving the appearance of buildings and encouraging high standards of design; and 3) encouraging the restoration and rehabilitation of structures in downtown Iowa City which are of architectural and/or historic significance. The program was offered in 2013 and 2014 with only CDBG funds and City general funds. The City awarded grants to eight small businesses for building and storefront improvements. Of the $215,881 in grant funds, the program leveraged $657,130 in total improvements. Actions planned to develop institutional structure The City undertakes extensive consultation as part of its consolidated planning effort, particularly in association with the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board (JCLHCB) Continuum of Care's planning process. The JCLHCB represents over 25 agencies in Iowa City providing services to the homeless and low-income persons in Johnson County. The City works closely with the JCLHCB to Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) V1 increase coordination between housing providers, health, and service agencies in addressing the needs of persons that are chronically homeless. The City facilitates coordination among its partner agencies that results in a broadly shared understanding of community needs, collaborative and complementary approaches to addressing needs, and responsiveness to changes in conditions. Additionally, resources such as Aid to Agencies and City General Funds available for economic development indicate a real commitment to leveraging all possible resources to meet needs. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies The City created a citizen advisory group, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC), in 1995, to assess Iowa City's community development needs for housing, jobs and services for low and moderate income residents, and to promote public and private efforts to meet such needs. HCDC leads the CDBG/HOME allocation process to determine what projects will be awarded funds based on priorities established in CITY STEPS. Each year the City and HCDC reviews applications on a competitive basis. Fragmentation and duplication of services in Iowa City is a minor obstacle due to the communication and coordination of existing service providers. Service providers are members of the Johnson County Local Homeless Coordinating Board and participate in the local Continuum of Care planning. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 159 AP -90 Program Specific Requirements - 91.22001(1,2,4) Introduction: Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(1)(1) Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out I. The total amount of program income that will have been received before $0 the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 100% 2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be $0 used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in thegrantee's strategic plan 3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements $0 4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the $25,000 tanned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan. 5. The amount of income from float -funded activities $0 Total Program Income $25,000 Other CDBG Requirements I. The amount of urgent need activities $0 2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income 100% HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) Reference 24 CFR 91.220(1)(2) A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows: The City offers the GRIP program to provide low interest loans to income eligible homeowners to rehabilitate their homes. Approximately $200,000 in general obligation funds are allocated annually for this program. The City also continues to administer the UniverCity program, focusing on neighborhoods located near the University campus that retain a single family character and a demand for single family housing, but that also have a large renter population. The City purchased 56 homes to date and have sold 43, some of which homes are restricted to homeowners under 80% of median income. 2. A description of the guidelines that will be used for resale or recapture of HOME funds when used for homebuyer activities as required in 92.254, is as follows: Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) rMl Iowa City has elected to adopt the following recapture or resale provisions when HOME funds are used to create affordable housing. Recapture guidelines are used for any homebuyer activity where the client receives direct financial assistance (including any assistance that reduces the purchase price from the fair market value to an affordable price) and resale is used when the homeowner does not receive direct financial assistance. Recapture Provision A recapture provision of the HOME regulations pursuant to CFR Part 24 92.254 (a)(5)(ii) will be used when HOME funded assistance is provided to reduce the selling price of a home from appraised value to one of affordability (affordability subsidy) for people at income levels of 80% or less of Iowa City's median income. This will include an affordability period based on the amount of HOME funds used for that purpose as indicated in the following table. If downpayment assistance will be provided, that amount will be added to the total amount to determine the affordability period. • < $15,000: 5 years $15,000-$40,000:10 years > $40,000: 15 years Upon the sale of the home, the net proceeds (sale price, minus superior loan repayment and closing costs) shall be distributed proportionately between the City, up to the Principal Amount, and the Buyer (Shared Net Proceeds). The City and/or HUD are not responsible for covering negative net proceeds. The Principal Amount shall be forgiven after the affordability period identified in the Recapture Agreement ends if the homeowner remains in compliance with their written agreement 3. A description of the guidelines for resale or recapture that ensures the affordability of units acquired with HOME fundsfound at 24 CFR 92.254(a)(4) are as follows: Iowa City has elected to adopt the following recapture or resale provisions when HOME funds are used to create affordable housing. Recapture guidelines are used for any homebuyer activity where the client receives direct financial assistance (including any assistance that reduces the purchase price from the fair market value to an affordable price) and resale is used when the homeowner does not receive direct financial assistance. Resale Provision A resale provision deed restriction will be used with an affordability period based on the amount of HOME funds provided per the following table when HOME funds are used for a construction subsidy. 0 < $15,000 5 years 0 $15,000440,000 10 years 0 $40,000 15 years Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) rn The affordability period shall begin with the original HOME assisted owner's closing date. If the home does not continue to be the principal residence of the buyer during the duration of the period of affordability, then the housing will be sold only to a buyer whose family's income does not exceed 80% of Iowa City's area median income as determined annually by HUD. The City will target homeowners between 60 to 80% of Iowa City's area median income. The buyer shall use the home as their principal residence. The purchase price may not exceed 95% of the median area purchase price for single family housing in the Iowa City MSA as determined annually by HUD for new or existing housing. The original HOME -assisted owner is entitled to a fair return on investment (homebuyer's downpayment plus capital improvements made to the house). The City will determine the original homebuyer's return on investment by using the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the period of ownership. The value of capital improvements will be based on the actual costs of the improvements as documented by the homeowner's receipts. The City will determine whether the sale price meets said requirements and must approve the price before Buyers accept a purchase offer. There may be a declining housing market where home values are depreciating. If the home is sold for less or the same price as the original price, the original homebuyer may not receive a fair return or any return on their investment The City and/or HUD are not responsible for covering a loss on the original homebuyer's investment HOME regulations allow revocation of HOME's affordability restrictions if an ownership interest is terminated prematurely by foreclosure, transfer in lieu of foreclosure, or assignment of an FHA -insured mortgage to HUD. Under the HOME program, certain requirements must be placed on properties by means of deed restrictions or a recorded note and mortgage. 4. Plans for using HOME funds to refinance existing debt secured by multifamily housing that is rehabilitated with HOME funds along with a description of the refinancing guidelines required that will be used under 24 CFR 92.206(b), are as follows: Not Applicable — The City of Iowa City does not use HOME funds for this purpose. Annual Plan OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 07/31/2015) 162 .5d= Prepared by: Josh Slattery, Senior Engineer, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5149 RESOLUTION NO. 15-136 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE STORM SEWER, SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN, PAVING, TRAIL, AND CERTAIN SIDEWALK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR WINDSOR WEST - PART THREE, AND DECLARING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OPEN FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND USE. WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has certified that the following improvements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications of the City of Iowa City: Sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main improvements for Windsor West - Part Three, as constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. Paving, trail, and certain sidewalk improvements for Windsor West - Part Three, as constructed by Metro Pavers, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. WHEREAS, the maintenance bonds have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has notified those contractors listed previously of the date on which it will consider acceptance of the aforementioned public improvements; and WHEREAS, the traffic control signs have been installed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and that all dedications and public improvements previously set aside as not being open for public access are hereby formally accepted and declared open for public access and use. Passed and approved this 5th day of May 20 15 ATTEST: 2e.t,, J CITY'CLERK It was moved by Mims adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: Approved by AW v, 4W,,wZZft1� -�. City Attorney's Office and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be NAYS: pweng\masters\acpt-improvements. doc ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton � r CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX ENGINEER'S REPORT www.icgov.org April 28, 2015 Honorable Mayor and City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: Windsor West — Part Three Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons: I hereby certify that the construction of the sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water main, paving, trail and certain sidewalk improvements for Windsor West — Part Three has been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications of the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. The required maintenance bonds are on file in the City Clerk's Office for the sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main improvements constructed by Maxwell Construction of Iowa City, Iowa and paving, trail and certain sidewalk improvements constructed by Metro Pavers, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer Prepared by: Dan Striegel, Equipment Superintendent, 1200 S. Riverside Drive, Iowa City, IA 52246 (319) 356-5197 RESOLUTION NO. 15-137 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PROCUREMENT OF TWO TORO GROUNDSMASTER MOWERS WHEREAS, two (2) mowers are budgeted for replacement in fiscal year 2015; and WHEREAS, the State of Iowa Multiple Awards Contract #4425-11, awarded to MTI Distributing of Grimes, IA, will be utilized to procure the mowers; and WHEREAS, the purchase price of the two mowers with accessories is $163,614.75, which exceeds the City manager's spending authority of $150,000, thus requiring City Council approval; and WHEREAS, funds for this purchase are available in account # 81710520; and WHEREAS, approval of this procurement is in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The proposed procurement as described is approved. 2. The City Manager is authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to effectuate the purchase. Passed and approved this 5th day of _ May 20 15 1 6"- m --- AYES: NAYS.- MAYOR AYS: MAYOR Approved by City At rney's Office ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton 5d(12) Prepared by: Ed Moreno, Water Superintendent, 80 Stephen Atkins Drive, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5162 RESOLUTION NO. 15-138 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PROCUREMENT OF PEBBLE QUICKLIME FOR LIME SOFTENING OF THE CITY'S DRINKING WATER. WHEREAS, a bid was put out to solicit pricing for pebble quicklime as well as the other water treatment chemicals needed to process the City's drinking water; and WHEREAS, three bids were received for the pebble quicklime; and WHEREAS, the lowest pebble quicklime bid, from Graymont Western Lime, Inc., of West Bend, Wisconsin, is recommended; and WHEREAS, the initial term of this contract will be for one year, with an option to renew for five (5) one (1) year terms; and WHEREAS, in future renewals, the City expects to spend a similar amount on this purchase; and WHEREAS, the purchase price of the pebble quicklime is $233,600, which exceeds the City manager's spending authority of $150,000, thus requiring City Council approval; and WHEREAS, funds for this purchase are available in account # 73730120; and WHEREAS, approval of this procurement is in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The proposed procurement as described is approved. 2. The City Manager is authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to effectuate the purchase, and to execute subsequent annual renewals as are reasonable and appropriate. Passed and approved this 5th day of May '20 15 . ATTEST: CIT ERK � alb 1 9_ Approved by dak-z City A orney's Office Resolution No. 15-138 ]Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton Prepared by: Sara Greenwood Hektoen, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. 15-139 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA AND EMRICO PROPERTIES II, L.L.C. WHEREAS, on December 2, 2014, Council approved an agreement for private redevelopment by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa and Emrico Properties II, L.L.C.; and WHEREAS, EMRICO Properties Il, L.L.C. has changed its name to Riverview West, LLC; and WHEREAS, this Amendment No. 1 acknowledges this name change. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY IOWA THAT 1. The attached Amendment to Agreement for Private Redevelopment is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor is authorized and directed to execute the Amendment and the City Clerk is authorized and directed to attest his signature and to affix the seal of the City Clerk and record the same at Riverview West, L.L.C.'s expense. Passed and approved this 5th day of may 2015. ATTEST: Z;4,7 J 7 � CITY i2LERK Approved by � 1 City Attorney's Office W7 r- ice ResoluVon No. 15-139 Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Minis Payne Throgmorton AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT COMES NOW, the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipality (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Riverview West, LLC f/k/a Emrico Properties II, LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Developer"), who state as follows: WHEREAS, the parties have previously entered into and executed an Agreement for Private Redevelopment dated December 2, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as "Agreement"); and WHEREAS, Developer has filed an Amended Certificate of Organization with the Iowa Secretary of State changing its name from Emrico Properties II, LLC to Riverview West, LLC; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to reflect Developer's name change. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, THE PARTIES COVENANT AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1, The Agreement for Private Redevelopment dated December 2, 2014 previously entered into by the parties is amended as follows: A. The term "Developer" as defined in Article I is amended to refer to Riverview West, LLC; B. Any and all references in the Agreement for Private Redevelopment to "Emrico Properties II, LLC" are revised and amended to refer to "Riverview West, LLC'; and C, Other than as revised herein, all other terms and provisions of the Agreement for Private Redevelopment dated December 2, 2014 previously executed by the parties are hereby confirmed and remain unchanged. Dated and made effective this Sf day ofj r , 2015. (SEAL) CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA By: AWL Mayor ATTEST: Approved by: By:?�t�st2,J 7S AGI fA/ u1 ld�� City Clerk City Attorney RIVERVIEW WEST, LLC By: ,'� - h2 4� 'c_e CITY OF IOWA CITY STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF JOHNSON ) th _ ra On this `J day of , 2015, before me a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Matthew J. Hayek and Marian K. Karr, to me personally known, who being duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal Corporation, created and existing under the laws of the State of Iowa, and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the seal of said Municipal Corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Municipal Corporation by authority and resolution of its City Council and said Mayor and City Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said Municipal Corporation by it voluntarily executed. Pay} r I(. LLIE K. TUTTLE $� mi,f-`-n'l.imber 221819 / C �i'� S 4)¶5°x' exp1e9 Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa 2 STATE OF IOWA ) ss: COUNTY OF JOHNSON This instrument was acknowledged before me on this $ I -)-'day of4 2015, by Kevin Hanick, as Manager of Riverview West, LLC. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa KATHLEEN M THORNTON `I& Commission Number 764003 My Commission Expires b I �4,, CITY OF IOWA CITY 5d(14) l &' MEMORANDUM�1' 10 74k Date: April 29, 2015 To: Dennis Bockenstedt, Finance Director From: Mary Niichel-Hegwood, Purchasing Agent Re: Award of a Contract for Auditing Services, May 5, 2015 Agenda Item Background On March 6, 2015, the Purchasing Division posted a Request for Proposal for Auditing Services for the City's financial statements to the City of Iowa City website. The RFP sought proposals from qualified firms of certified public accountants to audit City financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015. The proposal also provided the option of auditing City financial statements for two (2) subsequent years (FY16 and FY17). The RFP contemplated a three year contract, subject to annual review by the Finance Director, the satisfactory negotiation of terms by the City Attorney's office, the concurrence of the City, and the annual availability of an appropriation. The City received multiple proposals and staff from the Finance Department evaluated the proposals on technical requirements, customer service, and pricing. The accounting firm Eide Bailly, LLC from Dubuque, Iowa, proposed to provide the requested auditing services for the following prices: $61,070 for FY15, $63,510 for FY16, and $65,820 for FY17. The all-inclusive total price proposed for Eide Bailly's auditing services for FY15-FY17 was $190,400. After contacting references, the evaluation committee submitted their individual scores to the Purchasing Division. The Purchasing Division averaged the scores for each proposer. Eide Bailly received the highest score. The Purchasing Division has recommended that Eide Bailly receive the award for Auditing Services. City Council approval of this professional services agreement is required pursuant to the City's purchasing policies due to the dollar amount of each year's engagement, and due to the total dollar amount of a three-year agreement. Financial Impact Over the course of the three-year engagement, we expect to expend an all-inclusive maximum price of $190,400. The total contract cost includes $61,070 for FY15, $63,510 for FY16, and $65,820 for FY17 for auditing the City's financial statements. Funds for this purchase are available in the Accounting Division's operating budget under account #10310200-432020 and approximately twenty (20) different accounts. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the three year contract with Eide Bailly for Audit Services. Cc: Nicole Davies, Controller Prepared by: Mary Niiehel-Hegwood, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240; (319) 356-5078 RESOLUTION NO. 15-140 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER AGREEMENTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR AUDITING SERVICES OF IOWA CITY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2015, 2016, AND 2017 WHEREAS, a Request for Proposal (RFP) was issued to procure Auditing Services for the Accounting Division; and WHEREAS, multiple proposals were received in response to the City's RFP for the three-year engagement; and WHEREAS, the proposals were scored by staff members from the Finance Department with expertise, resulting in an award to Eide Bailly, who met the City's requirements; and WHEREAS, City policy requires City Council to approve professional service contracts over $60,000; and WHEREAS, Eide Bailly's fees for the auditing of the City's financial statements for fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017 are an all-inclusive maximum price of $190,400; and WHEREAS, funds for this purchase are available in the Accounting Division's operating budget under account #10310200-432020 and approximately twenty (20) accounts; and WHEREAS, approval of this professional services contract is in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: The City Manager is authorized to enter agreements as approved by the City Attorney for auditing services by Eide Bailly for fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 20 15 . NI .i 1 . e- — Approved by Resolution No. 15-140 ]Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton 5d(15) Prepared by: Josh Slattery, Senior Engineer, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, to 52240 (319) 356-5149 RESOLUTION NO. 15-141 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE STORM SEWER, TILE LINE, DRAINAGE WAY, SANITARY SEWER, LIFT STATION, FORCE MAIN, WATER MAIN, PAVING, LIFT STATION DRIVEWAY, AND CERTAIN SIDEWALK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PALISADES - FIRST ADDITION, AND DECLARING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OPEN FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND USE. WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has certified that the following improvements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications of the City of Iowa City: Sanitary sewer, lift station, force main, storm sewer, tile line, and water main improvements for The Palisades - First Addition, as constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. Paving, lift station driveway, and certain sidewalk improvements for The Palisades - First Addition, as constructed by E & F Paving Company, LLC of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. WHEREAS, the maintenance bonds have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has notified those contractors listed previously of the date on which it will consider acceptance of the aforementioned public improvements; and WHEREAS, the traffic control signs have been installed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and that all dedications and public improvements previously set aside as not being open for public access are hereby formally accepted and declared open for public access and use. Passed and approved this 5th day of May 20 15 ATTEST:e - CITY nLERK Approved by Ci Attorney's Office y Z9�i5 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Botchway X Dickens X Dobyns X Hayek X Mims X Payne X Throgmorton r rlroai�1l CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX ENGINEER'S REPORT www•icgov.org April 29, 2015 Honorable Mayor and City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: The Palisades — First Addition Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons: I hereby certify that the construction of the sanitary sewer, lift station, force main, storm sewer, tile line, drainage way, water main, paving, lift station driveway, and certain sidewalk improvements for The Palisades — First Addition have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications of the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. The required maintenance bonds are on file in the City Clerk's Office for the sanitary sewer, lift station, force main, storm sewer, tile line, drainage way, and water main improvements constructed by Maxwell Construction of Iowa City, Iowa and paving, lift station driveway, and certain sidewalk improvements constructed by E & F Paving Company, LLC of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City, Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer UO -UO -1 0 5d(16) Prepared by: Josh Slattery, Senior Engineer, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5149 RESOLUTION NO 15-142 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE STORM SEWER, TILE LINE, DRAINAGE WAY, SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN, PAVING, AND CERTAIN SIDEWALK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PALISADES - SECOND ADDITION, AND DECLARING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OPEN FOR PUBLIC ACCESS AND USE. WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has certified that the following improvements have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications of the City of Iowa City: Sanitary sewer, storm sewer, tile line, and water main improvements for The Palisades - Second Addition, as constructed by Maxwell Construction, Inc. of Iowa City, Iowa. Paving and certain sidewalk improvements for The Palisades - Second Addition, as constructed by E & F Paving Company, LLC of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. WHEREAS, the maintenance bonds have been filed in the City Clerk's office; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has notified those contractors listed previously of the date on which it will consider acceptance of the aforementioned public improvements; and WHEREAS, the traffic control signs have been installed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT said improvements are hereby accepted by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and that all dedications and public improvements previously set aside as not being open for public access are hereby formally accepted and declared open for public access and use. Passed and approved this 5th day of Ma 20 15 49519 4�Z61 MAYOR Approved by ,�.� ✓dam-�-�.�%�� L CityAttorney's Office ,1 Z �S It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Botchway X Dickens X Dobyns X Hayek X Mims X Payne X Throgmorton X111 MT ZN CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX ENGINEER'S REPORT www•icgov.org April 29, 2015 Honorable Mayor and City Council Iowa City, Iowa Re: The Palisades — Second Addition Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons: I hereby certify that the construction of the sanitary sewer, storm sewer, tile line, drainage way, water main, paving, and certain sidewalk improvements for The Palisades — Second Addition have been completed in substantial accordance with the plans and specifications of the Engineering Division of the City of Iowa City. The required maintenance bonds are on file in the City Clerk's Office for the sanitary sewer, storm sewer, tile line, drainage way, and water main improvements constructed by Maxwell Construction of Iowa City, Iowa and paving and certain sidewalk improvements constructed by E & F Paving Company, LLC of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. I recommend that the above -referenced improvements be accepted by the City of Iowa City. Sincerely, Jason Havel, P.E. City Engineer CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE It Nr CITY O F IOWA CITY 5d(1547s MEMORANDUM -' Date: April 17, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Wendy Ford, Economic Development Coordinator Re: Request from EDC for annual funding Introduction: The Entrepreneurial Development Center, Inc., widely known as EDC was founded 11 years ago with a mission to improve the economic vitality of the region through the creation and growth of high -impact, scalable entrepreneurial businesses. While they are based in Cedar Rapids, they serve businesses on both ends of the Creative Corridor and hold office hours and list the CoLab in Riverfront Crossings as their Iowa City office. They have requested support from the City of Iowa City in the amount of $25,000 annually. At their meeting on March 30, the City Council Economic Development Committee voted to recommend approval of three years of funding to the full City Council, prorating the initial year to one quarter of a full fiscal year's request, or $6,250. History/Background: The EDC's function is to connect entrepreneurs with the full range of business expertise to enable high potential businesses to grow and thrive. Nelson has developed what he calls a recipe for business success that EDC uses in guiding business growth. In the recipe, there are six ingredients: marketing, development, sales, operations, information technology and finance. EDC's approach is to ensure that clients have the right amount of each ingredient. They gain an understanding of the client's needs and then provide the expertise or find it by building strategic networks for their clients. They are also well connected to financial resources for their clients. Discussion: EDC first approached the City of Iowa City in 2007 with a request for $15,000. At that time, the City Council Economic Development Committee voted to defer support and to re-examine the request later in 2008, pending more information. In 2009, the committee received a $20,000 request from EDC, but voted to table the consideration until they could learn if a newly established, small funding commitment from ICAD was working as planned. In the ensuing five -plus years, EDC has continued to provide services to an ever-growing entrepreneurial community. ICAD has maintained and increased their funding of EDC and Mark Nolte confirms that EDC is doing a lot more work in our area and that they have offered solid guidance to some up and coming Iowa City businesses. One of their clients, Pear Deck, an Iowa City -based education software company was recently awarded a $150,000 prize in the "Rise of the Rest" pitch competition at SXSW (South by South West) in Austin, TX. The City of Cedar Rapids has maintained its funding of $100,000 annually, the City of North Liberty is investing $5,000 per year, Hiawatha is providing $11,500 annually, and the U of I and April 29, 2015 Page 2 the John Pappajohn Entrepreneurial Center are committed to $20,000 each, per year. Additionally, the UI Vice President for Research Office engages EDC on a case by case basis for specific work. EDC staff has indicated that the City of Coralville will be a new funder this year, but they have not yet committed to a specific amount. Entrepreneurship continues to grow in the U.S. and cities that welcome entrepreneurs stand to gain new employers, new employees and the economic benefits they bring. Iowa City has spent the last several years building a community that fosters entrepreneurs. We assisted in getting the CoLab off the ground which has proven to have provided critical early stage support to some very successful, highly scalable companies. We have provided a number of small entrepreneurs low -to -no interest loans; we have sponsored Entrefest, the Iowa City -based convention geared to the entrepreneurial community, and we are working on a plan to secure new space for the CoLab in the Court Linn development. It is clear that fostering a culture of entrepreneurship takes a lot of effort from a lot of organizations -- ICAD, the UI Small Business Development Center, the City, the Chamber — and organizations such as EDC, Inc. to provide the support necessary to a burgeoning entrepreneurial community. Recommendation: The City Council Economic Development Committee voted (March 30, 2015) to recommend funding one quarter of the requested annual amount, or $6,250, for the remainder of FY15 and funding the full annual request of $25,000 from the Economic Development Assistance line in FY16. The recommendation also includes adding a budget "placeholder" for $25,000 in the upcoming FY17 budget for Community Development Assistance and requiring a report from EDC on achievements in Iowa City before a disbursement would be made in FY17. EDC March 30, 2015 1 MINUTES Preliminary CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MARCH 30, 2015 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, 12:00 P.M Members Present: Susan Mims, Michelle Payne, Matt Hayek Staff Present: Tom Markus, Tracy Hightshoe, Jeff Davidson, Eleanor Dilkes, John Yapp, Others Present: Michal Eynon -Lynch (Pear Deck), Julie Zielenski (EDC), Mitchell Schmidt (Gazette), Amanda West (Entrefest), Curt Nelson (EDC) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: Payne moved to recommend the request to the full City Council for annual assistance of $25,000 per year to EDC, Inc., prorated for this year, for a three-year period. Hayek seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. Hayek moved to approve the request from Entrefest for a sponsorship of $10,000. Payne seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Mims at 12:03 P.M. She first asked those present to identify themselves. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the January 12, 2015, were reviewed. Payne moved to approve the minutes as presented. Hayek seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. Jeff Davidson provided an update for Members, noting that Wendy Ford had been called away but may join them later in the meeting. Continuing, Davidson noted that staff wanted to review the two budgeted line items that they currently have for assistance with economic development projects — one category is community development assistance and the other is economic development assistance. He further explained how the City has used these avenues of assistance in the past, as well as the continued commitments that are part of each year's budget. Davidson further explained the various funds to Members, noting that there is a current balance of $132,866, and that today's requests will both come out of this fund, if approved. Mims asked if they should be giving consideration to increasing the $100,000 line item for economic development assistance. Markus stated that he likes to have a fairly tight leash, for both the Council and himself, when it comes to this fund. He added that they can always amend it, if needed, but that he would prefer not to increase it at this time. EDC March 30, 2015 2 Preliminary Davidson noted that representatives from both Pear Deck and EDC are present today. He talked about the history of EDC and how things have progressed through the years, to the point where ICAD speaks highly of the relationship and the value they offer. Davidson noted that staff does believe that they are at the point where it would be worthwhile for the City to be involved in providing some funding to EDC. The current request is for $25,000, and staff is suggesting that this be pro -rated for the current fiscal year and then for the following two years that the City fund this at $25,000 per year. Davidson noted that Pear Deck is a great example of what has come out of EDC's efforts. He added that in providing funding, Iowa City would join ICAD, the U of I Small Business Development Center, and the Chamber of Commerce, to name a few, in these entrepreneurial efforts. At this point Curt Nelson with EDC spoke to Members. He spoke to the founding of EDC in 2003 when he was on the Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce Board. After researching various types of accelerator/incubator programs across the country, Nelson came back to the Chamber of Commerce with a request for $500,000 to seed the program. EDC was created as a corridor or regional organization, and according to Nelson it has become a statewide organization, as well as one of the top programs of its type in the country. they think of the EDC as a consulting group for theses art -ups they mentor• Nelson hensted that introduced others from EDC, noting their roles within the organization. Nelson continued, speaking to how they can help the small businesses they deal with in the incubator program. He stated that they are only able to work with about 40 businesses at a time, given their current staffing and resources. Nelson stated that whenever these organizations have a need, the EDC is there for them. He talked about partnerships they have throughout the corridor, including the John Pappajohn Centers, the Chambers, and other such organizations in the state. Nelson also spoke to how the EDC generates a portion of their income each year for services rendered to companies such as Rockwell Collins and Apache Hose and Belting. Michal Eynon -Lynch with Pear Deck spoke next, stating that they are based out of the CoLab space. This is their second education -based tech company, having started Active Grade in 2010. She noted that being former teachers, the group had no idea what they needed to do when they began their first company. Eynon -Lynch stated that in working with EDC, they have learned how to access State funding and grants and have been successful in working through the contract process. She added that the EDC's support is invaluable. Nelson then introduced some others in attendance, including John Slump and Jerry Garfield, who started Corvida Medical. He noted briefly that the pair invented a medical device to be used for the transfer of chemotherapy drugs. There is now about $8 million in this business and the product was submitted to the FDA at the beginning of March of this year. He added that the `med tech' industry is growing quickly. He then shared EDC's five-year plan. Davidson noted that the staff is recommending approval to the full City Council for the requested amount, to be pro -rated for this year, and to fund the full $25,000 in FY16 and recommend budgeting a placeholder for $25,000 for FY17. Markus suggested it be conditioned upon Nelson and his team coming back before the third year to report out accomplishments. Markus asked what the annual $25,000 request is based on. Nelson stated that it is relative to the amount of money and time that is being invested in this area. He added that he would have asked for $50,000, but believes they should start small. He hopes to be granted $25,000 from Johnson County, too. Nelson noted that they will come to the City Council yearly with a 'report card' of accomplishments on the past year — how much capital was raised in Iowa City, how much work was done in Iowa City itself. Markus spoke further to what he is trying to do here, noting that it would be helpful for the City to have some type of 'predictors' to look at, to measure those against what has actually taken place during the year. Nelson stated that this should not be a problem and that he would be happy to supply this information. EDC March 30, 2015 3 Preliminary Mims stated that it sounds like EDC is working with an interesting array of businesses, and that she agrees with Markus' request for yearly measures. She added that she would definitely be supportive of this request. Hayek stated that he is also. He asked if EDC plans to continue to office out of the CoLab. Nelson stated that they do, that it has worked out very well for them. Markus spoke again to the work that EDC does, noting that he believes it makes sense for the City to fund this three-year request. Mims spoke to this type of economic development ship work, asking in general what else could they be doing to help with lower socioeconomic and/or minority communities, within the Iowa City community. r She asked what type of programming and outreach they could do to help those who are not finding the traditional - type of blue collar jobs any longer. Markus stated that the issue of school boundaries plays into this same argument, regarding opportunities for their population. Payne moved to recommend the request to the full City Council for annual assistance of $25,000 per year to EDC, Inc., prorated for this year, for a three-year period. Hayek seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. regarding Entrefest's request. He added that staff feels very Davidson noted that Members have a letter in their meetingpackets from Amanda West- st , past participation has reflected this. One of the things staff attempting to do istree tof keepnd that Entrefest in Iowa City and to grow the event. Davidson stated that the request is for $10,000 and that this can be budgeted through the economic development assistance fund. Mims stated that the growth is impressive. She added that she likes the idea of trying to keep the festival here, and the coordination between Iowa City and the University is a positive for that. Hayek asked West how many venues they will be occupying during this fest. She responded that it is growin this year already. They will be in the Sheraton, the hotel Vetro, the Library, the Englert, Film g Scene, and they have also had offers from McGladry, Midwest One, Beadolo and Eden, as well as Clinton Street Social Club. Davidson stated that having the event in o many venues is a win for downtown and makes it a better event overall. West added that they believe Iowa City is perfect for this type of event, mainly due to how the downtown is structured. She stated that the attendees last year stated that they really enjoyed being able to go outside and go from place to place, and that the 'human scale' set-up of downtown makes it the perfect spot. Hayek moved to approve the request from Entrefest for a sponsorship of $10,000. Payne seconded the motion. The motion carried 3-0. STAFF UPDATES: Telepharm parking incentive — Davidson noted that this will be their third parking arrangement that has been successful in attracting or expanding business downtown. The Press -Citizen was the first, and MetaCommunications the second. He noted that currently Telepharm has four employees, with plans to ramp up to 10. In order to remain in downtown Iowa City, they have asked for some assistance with their parking needs as they attempt to grow their business. Davidson noted that initially Telepharm was provided four half-price parkin g passes, and half-price is equal to $40/month. He added that the jobs being created do exceed the Count the median in terms of wages and benefits. Staff is recommended the City offer up to a total of 0 requirements of Telepharm in order for this arrangement to work, noting half-price parking passes, for a period of two years. Davidson further clarified some of the that if maintained for three years, the subsidy would be forgiven. EDC March 30, 2015 4 Preliminary COMMITTEE TIME: Tracy Hightshoe stated that the Iowa SBA was accepting nominations for "Small Business Community of the Year' and that staff submitted a nomination on behalf of Iowa City. She shared a copy of the application with Members. Markus noted that when you start to read about all of the things the City is doing for small businesses, it really shows how much is being done. Davidson then spoke to a couple of renovation projects downtown that the City has been asked to help with financial assistance on. He stated that they are still working out the details, but that one is on the Whitey's building and the other is the Fieldhouse building. They hope to have these on an agenda soon. Also occurring soon will be the City -initiated process for the rezoning that would lead to the Chauncey project moving forward. Davidson also noted the Moss property project off Highway 1 and Interstate 80. He stated things are starting to happen here, and that grading has been taking place. Hayek noted that if and when anything comes forward on the Whitey's building project, he would need to recuse himself from this conversation. Payne asked about some funding that was approved about a year ago for a new restaurant. Davidson stated that this did not come to fruition. Hightshoe noted that they pulled out of the deal at the last moment. This would have been a CDBG funded project. Davidson also noted an article that was placed in this meeting's packet regarding Cedar Rapids' TIF process. OTHER BUSINESS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Payne moved to adjourn the meeting at 12:55 P.M. Hayek seconded the motion. Motion carried 3-0. EDC March 30, 2015 5 Preliminary Council Economic Development Committee ATTENDANCE RECORD 2014-2015 Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused TE�M"NAME EX w N c Michelle 01/02/16 X X X X X X X Payne Matt 01/02/16 X X X X X X X Hayek Susan 01/02/16 X X X X X X X Mims Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused F Prepared by: Wendy Ford, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5248 RESOLUTION NO. 15-143 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF $6,250 IN FY15, $25,000 IN FY16 AND INTENT TO BUDGET $25,000 IN FY17 FOR ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC. WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City has established Strategic Planning Priorities; and WHEREAS, the City's economic development policies are based on the City Council Strategic Priorities; and WHEREAS, two of the five Priorities are engaging in strategic economic development activities and ensuring a strong urban core; and WHEREAS, Entrepreneurial Development Center, Inc. (EDC, Inc.), a Chapter 501c6 not-for-profit organization funded by over 100 public and private supporters, has made an application for $25,000 per year in financial assistance; and WHEREAS, this assistance will enable them to fulfill their primary function, which is to connect entrepreneurial needs with qualified community and state resources and to provide hands-on professional business direction throughout the Creative Corridor; and WHEREAS, EDC, Inc. maintains an office in Iowa City at the IC CoLab; and WHEREAS, assisting in the growth and development of Iowa City based businesses helps ensure the success of those businesses and the likelihood of their developing into employers of high quality jobs, and WHEREAS, Staff recommends approving this request for three years, with the first year's assistance prorated for the remaining fiscal quarter, and continuing the $25,000 support for the next two years; WHEREAS, on March 30, 2015, the City Council Economic Development Committee considered this request and recommends that the City Council approve the same. WHEREAS, funds for this expense for the FY15 and FY16 allocations would be made available from account 10610510-448070 Economic Development Assistance and the allocation from the FY17 budget would be made available from account 457100 - 448020 Community Development Assistance.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The City Council approves funding assistance to EDC, Inc. in the amounts of $6,250 from the FY15 budget; and $25,000 from the FY16, and intend to allocate $25,000 toward EDC,Inc. in the FY17 budget. Resolution No. 15-143 Page 2 2. EDC, Inc. shall provide a report to the City Council Economic Development Committee annually, in a form approved by the City Manager, to demonstrate the impact this funding has on the EDC, Inc.'s operations. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 20 15 . ATTEST:2) CITY tERK MAYOR Appr ved by ity Attorney's Office Resolution No. ]Page 3 15-143 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: DAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton CITY OF IOWA CITY �j5 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 29, 2015 TO: Tom Markus, City Manager FROM: Jason Havel, City Engineer TaA RE: 2015 Highland Avenue Water Main Improvement Project Set Public Hearing — May 5, 2015 Hold Public Hearing — May 19, 2015 Award Project — June 16, 2015 Introduction: This agenda item begins the bidding process for the 2015 Highland Avenue Water Main Improvement Project History / Background: The existing water main under Highland Avenue is 6 -inch diameter cast iron pipe. Due to the age and material of the main, this section of main has a history of water main breaks and future resurfacing work in the area identifies the main as a good candidate for replacement. Discussion of Solution: This project will replace the existing water main from Marcy Street to Lukirk Street. The work is being done ahead of the 2015 Asphalt Resurfacing Project that includes Highland Avenue. Watersmith Engineers was hired to design the project. Water main installed with this project will include 8" PVC main. To minimize impacts to surrounding property owners, the majority of this installation will be completed by directional boring. Some excavation across Highland Avenue, Marcy Street, and Lukirk Street will still be needed due to limited working area. Financial Impact: The estimated cost for this project is $196,000 and will be funded with Water Revenues. Recommendation: Staff recommends proceeding with the following schedule for this project: May 5, 2015 - Set Public Hearing May 19, 2015 — Hold Public Hearing June 16, 2015 —Award Project July 1 - August 31, 2015 — Construct Project cc: Ron Knoche, Public Works Director Dave Panos, Senior Civil Engineer Ed Moreno, Water Division Superintendent Prepared by: Dave Panos, Engineering Division, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, (319) 356-5145 RESOLUTION NO. 15-144 RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 19, 2015 ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 2015 HIGHLAND AVENUE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF SAID HEARING, AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PLACE SAID PLANS ON FILE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. WHEREAS, funds for this project are available in the Highland Avenue from Marcy to Lukirk project account #W3299. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: That a public hearing on the plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for the construction of the above-mentioned project is to be held on the 19th day of May 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish notice of the public hearing for the above-named project in a newspaper published at least once weekly and having a general circulation in the City, not less than four (4) nor more than twenty (20) days before said hearing. 3. That the copy of the plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for the construction of the above-named project is hereby ordered placed on file by the City Engineer in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection. Passed and approved this 5th day of May _,20 15 Approved by -v 011 ATTEST: 71 Ja4aAaw�l CITY SEERK `�—City Attorney's Office y12 I��5 S\ENG\PMResolutions\Project Resolutions\Setting Public Hearing\Sycamore Street 2015\Set Public Hearing Project -Sycamore Street 2015 doc Resolution Into. 15-144 ]Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. 15-145 RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 19, 2015 ON A CONCESSION AGREEMENT WITH FIN & FEATHER H2O LLC FOR THE PROVISION OF RECREATIONAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT AND FOOD SERVICES AT TERRY TRUEBLOOD RECREATION AREA. WHEREAS, the City and Fin & Feather H2O LLC ("Fin & Feather") signed a 3 -year agreement for the provision of rental equipment and food services at Terry Trueblood Recreational Area that will expire on August 31, 2015; WHEREAS, Fin & Feather would like to enter into a 2 -year renewal of the agreement on the same terms; WHEREAS, because the total terms of the original agreement and the renewal exceed three years, state law requires a public hearing; and WHEREAS, a public hearing should be held on the renewal of the agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The City of Iowa City does hereby declare its intent to enter a two-year renewal of the above - referenced agreement. 2. A public hearing on said proposed renewal of the agreement should be and is hereby set for May 19, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in Emma Harvat Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause Notice of Public Hearing to be published as provided by law. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 2015. ATTEST: CITY CtERK Approved by City Attorney's Office 5e(5) Resolution No. ]Page 2 15-145 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Throgmorton the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne X Throgmorton U " MM CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: March 27, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator 7%r' Re: Additional information related to proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for Central Planning District related to goal of compatibility between commercial and residential uses on the same block At this stage, while staff has not conducted a more detailed analysis of the structures east of Van Buren St and north of Iowa Ave due to limitation on resources, we have done additional research into how other cities have dealt with the issue of building height when higher density and lower density zones are adjacent to each other. We found there are three general methods used to deal with building height transitions between zones: Through the layout of zones: Like Iowa City, other cities allow different building heights in different zones. It is typical to allow taller buildings near the city center or other commercial/employment nodes, and shorter buildings further away from the city center. Height is controlled through the application of where zones are located, by zoning property closer to the city center to a category that allows greater density and height. Iowa City uses a form of this method currently through the use of the CB -2 and CB -5 zones. 2. Requiring larger setbacks in exchange for taller heights: Some cities require greater front and side setbacks in exchange for taller heights, so taller buildings must be set back further from property lines to minimize the height impact. Iowa City uses a form of this method in residential zones, in that the side yard setback is 5 feet plus an additional 2 feet for every story above the second story. Some cities require an additional foot of setback for every 2 feet of height above a predetermined level, such as two stories. Staff does not recommend pursuing this method, as the unintended consequence is larger setbacks which may be inappropriate on small lots. 3. Requiring building height step-downs where different zones abut: The third method is requiring building height of a structure in the higher density zone to be no taller than a typical structure in the adjacent lower density zone, for a pre -determined horizontal distance. The result is a `step-down' effect that matches building heights where adjacent zoning boundaries adjoin, and allowing a `stepping -up' in height further away from the residential property. The intent of this approach is to avoid abrupt changes in building height on adjacent properties. This is the approach staff recommended pursuing in its March 17, 2015 memo to you, and continues to recommend. Below is an image from the Oregon Infill and Redevelopment Handbook which illustrates one way of formulating this approach: 7a 7b March 27, 2015 Page 2 Building Height Transition - Sample Code Provisions: Taller buildings shall step-down to provide a height transition to existing adjacent (single-storyf building(s). This standard applies to new and vetYicalty expanded buildings within _ feet (as measured horizontally) of an existing single -story building of less than _ feet in height. As shown above, the standard is ntet when the height of the taller building ..! ` ° l does not exceed the height ofthe shorter building by more than _ percent (V) within the _ -foot horizontal zone Image from Oregon Infill and Redevelopment Handbook Height and Floor to Area Ratio Building height and mass in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones are controlled by a combination of Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) and maximum height. Floor to Area Ratio determines the maximum square footage of a building (i.e. for an FAR of 2, a building can have 2 square feet of floor area for every one square foot of lot area). If a hypothetical building footprint occupies 100% of a lot, and has an FAR of 2, it can be two stories in height. If a hypothetical building occupies 50% of a lot, and has an FAR of 2, it can be four stories in height (each floor represents 0.5 FAR). In residential zones, there is no FAR requirement, but there is a 'maximum building coverage' standard which controls the area of the building footprint on a lot. In reality how much square footage that can occupy a lot is more complicated than just the Floor to Area Ratio due to setbacks, parking requirements, maximum height, minimum square footage per dwelling unit, etc. but staff wanted to provide the Commission the height and FAR that currently apply in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and for comparison in the RM -12 and RNS-20 zones. Zone Floor to Area Ratio Maximum Height Building Coverage CB -2 21 45 feet N/A CB -5 31 75 feet N/A RM -12 N/A 35 feet 50% RNS-20 N/A 35 feet 45% 1 — The C13-2 and C13-5 zones allow bonus FAR for things like masonry finish, pedestrian activity areas, adaptive reuse of a historic landmark, enhanced streetscapes, etc. The CB -2 Zone may have a maximum FAR of 3; the CB -5 Zone may have a maximum FAR of 5. Multi -Family Design Standards Staff had previously noted that for commercial properties on blocks with residential zoning , it would be appropriate to create a mechanism to not always require commercial zoning on the first floor, and to apply multi -family design standards to the design of a structure. Multi- family design standards were created to "promote safe, attractive, pedestrian friendly neighborhoods by preventing expanses of concrete, blank walls and parking lots along street frontages; controlling the building bulk; screening unsightly features; ensuring that pedestrian entrances are visible and clearly identifiable from the street ..." Pages from the multi -family design standards are attached for reference. Page 3 Elements of Form Based Zoning Staff mentioned at the March 19 P&Z meeting that the types of code provisions being discussed for the CB -2 and CB -5 zones are `elements' of form based zoning, in that they regulate the height, setbacks, articulation, etc. of structures. In other words, they regulate the `form' of development. A long term goal might be to create a form -based code district for the commercially -zoned properties in this area, borrowing from the existing Riverfront Crossings Form Based Code. If this is something the Commission is interested in, it would be appropriate to add this to the recommendation as a goal for the Central District Plan. Similar to Riverfront Crossings, this would require the eventual rezoning of properties. Staff Recommendation Staff has not changed the recommendation from the March 19 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The Commission is encouraged to act on this recommendation, or a motion to make a recommendation as it deems appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON PORTIONS OF BLOCKS NORTH OF IOWA AVE AND EAST OF GILBERT ST; AND EAST OF VAN BURN ST AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON ST, WHICH ARE NOT IN THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT (AKA PORTIONS OF THE CIVIC DISTRICT) 1. Staff recommends the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St which are not in the Central Planning District be added to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goal: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(i): Develop Zoning Code standards in the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones when CB -2 and CB -5 properties are on the same block face as residential properties to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block face. Develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for multi -family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text be amended to remove the text regarding further study of this area in the last paragraph of the Introduction Section on pages 1-2, and update the Central Planning District Map. 14-2B-6 Figure 2B.7 - Building Articulation 14-2B-6 Unacceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) 2. Central Planning District: The width of the front facade of new buildings must be no more than forty feet (40'). Buildings may exceed this limitation if the horizontal plane of any street -facing facade of the building is broken into modules that give the appear- ance of smaller, individual buildings. (See figure 2B.8 of this sec- tion.) Each module must meet the following standards: a. Each module must be no greater than thirty feet (30') and no less than ten feet (10') in width and must be distinguished from adjacent modules by a variation in the wall plane of at least sixteen inches (16") in depth. For buildings that are three (3) or more stories in height, the width of the module may be increased to forty feet (40'). b. Each module must have a corresponding change in the roofline. c. Each module must be distinguished from the adjacent module by at least one of the following means: September 2014 Iowa City 14-2B-6 14-2B-6 ( "' (1) Variation in material colors, types or textures; i (2) Variation in the building and/or parapet height; (3) Variation in the architectural details such as decorative banding, reveals, stone, or tile accents; (4) Variation in window pattern; (5) Variation in the use of balconies and recesses. Figure 2B.8 - Building Modules That Break Up The Horizontal Plane �—Module Module-- �Moduie Module Existing New MF Building- - Existing (Ord. 06-4245, 12-12-2006) August 2013 Iowa City 14-2B-6 14-2B-6 F. Balconies And Exterior Stairways, Corridors, And Lifts: For purposes of this subsection the term, "exterior stairways", refers to stairways that lead to floors of a building that are above the first or ground level floor of a building. "Exterior corridors" refers to unenclosed corridors located above: the first or ground level floor of a building. Balconies and exterior stairways, exterior corridors and exterior lifts must comply with the following standards: 1. Exterior stairways, exterior corridors, and exterior lifts are prohibited in the PRM zone; however, the city may allow exterior fire egress structures on existing buildings that cannot otherwise reasonably meet code requirements, provided the fire egress structure is not located on a wall of a building that faces a street. In other zones, exterior stairways, exterior corridors, and exterior lifts must be covered with a roof similar in design and materials to the roof over the rest of the structure. Said roof should be incorporated into the overall roof plan of the structure. Alternatively, such features may be recessed into the facade of the building. Exterior corridors may not be located on a street facing wall of the building or within twenty feet (20') of a street facing wall. 2. Unenclosed or partially enclosed stairways may not be used as the primary means of access to dwelling units located above the ground level floor of the building (see subsection 14-26-6136 of this section). 3. Balconies, exterior stairways, exterior lifts and exterior corridors may not be located on any side of a building that is adjacent to a property that is zoned single-family residential or that contains an existing single-family use. Buildings that are set back at least forty feet (40') from any such property are exempt from this standard. 4. The design of any balcony, exterior stairway, exterior lift and exterior corridor must utilize columns, piers, supports, walls, and railings that are designed and constructed of materials that are similar or complementary to the design and materials used for the rest of the building. (Ord. 06-4220, 7-18-2006) (see following page) September 2006 Iowa City 14-2B-6 Figure 26.9 - Balconies, Exterior Corridors 14-2B-6 ES Unacceptable Acceptable Acceptable G. Building Materials: 1. In the central planning district, the exterior wall material of a building must consist of clapboard style siding, wall shingles, brick, stone, or stucco. 2. In the PRM zone, the exterior walls of the ground level floor of a building must be constructed with a masonry finish, such as fired brick, stone, or similar material, not including concrete blocks and undressed poured concrete. Masonry may include stucco or like material when used in combination with other masonry finish. 3. In the central planning district and in the PRM zone, buildings not constructed of masonry or stucco must have the following trim elements incorporated into the exterior design and construction of the building: a. Window and door trim that is not less than three inches (3") wide. b. Corner boards that are not less than three inches (T) wide, unless wood clapboards are used and mitered at the corners. c. Frieze boards, not less than five inches (5") wide, located below the eaves. September 2006 Iowa City 14-213-6 Figure 213.10 - Building Materials Friez Come wim N 14-213-6 4. Any portion of a building that is clearly visible from the street must be constructed using similar materials and design as the front facade. 5. Exterior walls of buildings that are not predominantly masonry or stucco must have a durable base consisting of masonry, stucco, or dressed concrete that extends at least two feet (2') in height above grade. If the base consists of concrete, it must have a decorative face. 6. Exposed, unpainted or unstained lumber may not be used along any facade that faces a street side lot line. 7. Where an exterior wall material changes along the horizontal plane of a building, the change must occur on an inside corner of the building. 8. For buildings where the exterior wall material used on the side of a building is a different material than what is used on the street facing wall, the street facing wall material must wrap around the corners to the sides of the building for at least three feet (3'). 9. Where an exterior wall material changes along the vertical plane of the building, the materials must be separated by a horizontal band, such as a belt course, soldier course, band board or other trim to provide a transition from one material to the other. October 2012 Iowa City 14-26-6 0 14-213-6 Figure 2B.11 - Changes In Exterior Wall Materials 0 IN, Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Mechanical Equipment/Utility Meters: In no case shall mechanical equipment or utility meters be located along the street side of a building. Mechanical structures must be set back and screened according to the applicable provisions set forth in chapter 4, article C, "Accessory Uses And Buildings", of this title. (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) Additional Standards In Central Planning District: 1. Front Setbacks: The front setback for new buildings must not deviate more than five feet (5') from the average setback of existing principal buildings along the same frontage. Alternatively, for frontages that contain more than six (6) lots, the average may be calculated based on the principal building setbacks on the four (4) closest lots along the same frontage to the lot containing the new building. However, a new building shall not be located closer to the street than the existing principal building that is closest to the street along the same frontage. This setback standard supersedes the set- back standards of the base zone. Frontages that contain three (3) or fewer lots are exempt from the provisions of this paragraph. (Ord. 12-4488, 8-21-2012) 2. Windows And Fenestration: Individual window units that are visible from a public or private street and that are located in primary living spaces, such as living rooms, dining areas, and bedrooms, must have a height that is at least one and one-half (1.5) times greater than the width of the window unit. Individual window units may be located side by side in a wider window opening. Bathroom, kitchen, skylights, and decorative windows, such as stained glass and ocular windows, are not required to meet this standard. October 2012 Iowa City 4 14-213-6 Figure 213.12 - Windows (Ord. 05-4186, 12-15-2005) 14-213-6 3. Architectural Style: The purpose of requiring an architectural style is to ensure that the mass, roof form, window style and configuration, and the basic architectural ' details of a building are generally compatible with the historic character of the central planning district. New buildings should appear similar to a large house or . a small historic apartment building. a. Any building elevation that is within public view (see definition of "public view, within" in section 14-9A-1 of this title), must be i designed in a manner that is consistent with a historic architectural style typical of residential buildings in the central planning district. However, building facades that are visible only from public alleys are not subject to these standards. The applicable architectural styles are as follows: Italianate; Queen Anne; colonial revival; craftsman; craftsman bungalow; American foursquare; prairie school; period revival; and eclectic. The applicant must indicate in detail how each of the following architectural elements in the proposed building are consistent with one of these architectural styles as described in the "Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook", as amended: (1) Form and mass of the building; (2) Roof configuration and pitch; (3) Style and placement of windows and doors; (4) Window and door trim, eave boards, frieze boards, and other trim; (5) Porch and entrance features; March 2007 Iowa City 14-28-6 14-213-6 (6) Building details and ornamentation. b. Detailed information regarding historic residential building styles is available in the "Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook". The design review committee and the historic preservation commission will use this information as a means to evaluate new buildings in the central planning district. c. Alternative designs that have been prepared by a licensed architect may be acceptable and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. (Ord. 06-4245, 12-12-2006) J. Minor Modifications: A minor modification to adjust specific provisions of this section may be requested in either of the qualifying situations listed below. Such requests will be reviewed by the design review committee, the director of planning and community develop- ment, and the building official according to the procedures for minor modifications as set forth in chapter 8, article B of this title and must meet the following approval criteria. The following approval criteria are to be applied in lieu of the general approval criteria listed in section 14-413-1, "Minor Modifications", of this title: 1. Qualifying Situation: The configuration of the lot or other existing physical condition of the lot makes the application of a specific standard impractical. In such a case, the applicant must demonstrate that the following approval criteria are met: a. The applicant must provide evidence that the configuration of the lot, the topography, or other physical characteristic of the property makes the application of a specific standard of this section impractical. Examples of situations that may qualify include double fronting lots, triangular, shaped lots, and steeply sloping lots. b. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed alternative design is not contrary to the intent of the multi -family site development standards. c. The applicant must propose an alternative site or building design that best meets the intent of the specific standard being modified. d. The requested modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property is located. March 2007 Iowa City 14-2B-6 14-213-7 e. The requested modification does not allow a use or activity not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject property. f. The requested modification complies with other applicable statutes, ordinances, laws and regulations. 2. Qualifying Situation: The proposed site or building is uniquely designed to fit the site and the surrounding neighborhood. In such a situation, the applicant must demonstrate that the following. approval criteria are met: a. The applicant proposes an alternative design solution that equally or better meets the intent of the specific standard being modified. b. The proposed site or building design is uniquely designed to fit the characteristics of the site and the surrounding neighborhood such that it equally or better meets the purpose of the multi -family site development standards. c. The requested modification will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the property is located. d. The requested modification does not allow a use or activity not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject property. e. The requested modification complies with other applicable statutes, ordinances, laws and regulations. (Ord. 06-4220, 7-18-2006) 14-213-7: PRM ZONE BONUS PROVISIONS: A. Purpose: The PRM zone bonus provisions provide an incentive for developments to incorporate features that provide a public benefit and also encourage excellence in architectural design. March 2007 Iowa City r Amp ,�� CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY OF IOWA CITY- � - �-% MEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: March 17, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator 7Y"' Re: Additional information proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments: 1. The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque St District) 2. Portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Burn St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District (AKA portions of the Civic District) The Commission asked for further information on several items pertaining to the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments at its March 16 meeting. Staff has the following information to offer: East -west pedestrian connectivity in the North Clinton / Dubuque St District. The Commission asked Staff make a recommendation on ways to amend the Central District Plan to improve east -west pedestrian connectivity between the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and the Northside neighborhood. Staff notes that there are already general goals in the Central District Plan regarding bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, but not a specific goal for the North Clinton / Dubuque St area to the Northside neighborhood. Staff recommends amending the 'complete streets' goal to provide this specific language, as stated below. Update /C2030 Comprehensive Plan: Staff's recommendation is to amend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan so that it is consistent with the proposed amendments to the Central District Plan. Specifically, staff is referring to the last paragraph in the Introduction section of the Comprehensive Plan on pages 2-3. This language states "Two areas — one located to the east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave and west of Dubuque St — were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan.. . Staff recommends a process be initiated to appropriately address how these areas redevelop over time..." As the process to review these areas is being conducted, this language should be removed from the Comprehensive Plan. The map of the Central Planning District would also need to be updated in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. CB -2 and CB -5 Zone recommendation: The Commission sought more detail about Staff's recommendation for potential amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 Zone related to design and compatibility issues along residential block faces. This would include evaluating standards such as: a. Setbacks: The CB -2 and CB -5 zones already require side and rear setbacks equivalent to an abutting residential zone, where the side or rear lot line abuts a residential zone. Staff anticipates that these standards would be reviewed and possibly amended, as well Page 2 as the creation of a front setback standard. Landscaping and screening standards in the setback area would also be reviewed. b. Not always requiring commercial on the first floor: One of the requirements in the CB -2 and CB -5 zone is for commercial/office land use on the first floor. For a block that has residential properties, this may not always be appropriate, and can lead to incompatibility issues along the block face. One option would be to not require commercial land use on the first floor if the structure fronts onto a residential block, by minor modification or other mechanism. c. Step-down in height: Review a 'step-down' in building height where the side or rear lot line abuts a residentially -zoned property. The step-down in building height combined with the setback helps address physical compatibility at the side property line. d. Building Articulation: CB -zone commercial design standards require that for buildings greater than 50 -feet in width, the building must be articulated into modules no more than 50 -feet in width. For block faces where the majority of residential structures range from 25 — 40 feet in width, the 50 -foot width of each building module may still appear to be unharmonious with neighboring residential structures. Multi -Family design standards, however, in the Central Planning District require that for a building wider than 40 feet, the building be broken up into modules between 10 and 30 feet in width. Each module must include a corresponding change in roofline, and variation in other architectural details. The impact of adding properties to the Central Planning District combined with not always requiring commercial on the first floor and making the making the structures subject to multi -family design standards is one way of addressing design and compatibility issues. Other options: As noted at the 3/16 Work Session, staff had considered multiple options for addressing the potential incompatibility issues on CB -2 and CB -5 -zoned properties on blocks with residential properties. These options included a code amendment (as recommended), developing a new zoning classification, creating an 'infill overlay zone,' rezoning properties, or doing nothing and accepting the CB -2 and CB -5 classifications as they are and have been for decades. Staff recommended pursuing amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 zones due to: • Amendments embodied in the zoning standards are more predictable for property owners and designers • Amendments embodied in the zoning standards would apply not just to the properties under consideration in the Comprehensive Plan amendment, but could also apply to any commercial properties on a block with residential uses • Creation of a new zone, and/or creation of an infill overlay zone will take far more time to be integrated into the Zoning Ordinance. Properties would still need to be rezoned, and the process of rezoning would have an unpredictable outcome. Staff notes that a rezoning of CB -2 properties east of Van Buren St to Mixed Use (MU) was attempted in 2005, was strenuously resisted by property owners, and was defeated. Timeline for Code Amendment: The Commission briefly discussed the timeline for such a code amendment to the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, if the goal for amending the CB -2 and CB -5 zones is Page 3 approved. Staff encourages the Commission (if it desires) to recommend to the City Council/City Manager this is a high priority. As a practical matter, staff is obligated to devote time and resources to all current development buildings and projects, to citizen concerns and requests, and to other priorities (For example, staff is currently finalizing the first draft of the South District Plan). Adaptive Reuse: The Commission asked for more information about the possibility of encouraging adaptive reuse. Staff notes the Central District Plan currently has goals of: - Investigating incentives for property improvement and rehabilitation of the existing housing stock, both for homeowners and investment property owners - Encouraging investment and reinvestment in existing commercial areas that provide goods and services for Central District Neighborhoods Iowa City is already flexible in terms of reuse of non -conforming structures, in that any nonconforming structure may be re -used for another permitted use. Any nonconforming structure may be structurally altered or enlarged, provided the degree of nonconformity is not increased. If a nonconforming structure is enlarged, there is a possibility that other elements of the site (lighting, screening/landscaping, etc.) may need to be brought closer to current standards. The City does not, however, require 'full compliance' with all site development standards, and has the ability to 'cap' the cost of site improvements at 10% of the value of the proposed structural alteration. This standard was put into place to make is easier to for property owners to re -use existing structures, without having to come into full compliance with site development standards. However, the decision of whether or not to re -use an existing structure or redevelop is ultimately up to the property owner. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommendations are enumerated below for the two areas under consideration. The Commission is encouraged to act on these agenda items at its March 19 meeting by either making a motion to approve Staff's recommendations as stated below, or a motion to approve amendments to the Central District Plan as it deems appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE BLOCKS GENERALLY BOUNDED BY CLINTON ST, JEFFERSON ST, BLOOMINGTON ST AND DUBUQUE ST (AKA THE NORTH CLINTON / DUBUQUE ST DISTRICT) 1. Staff recommends the North Clinton / Dubuque St properties be added to the Central Planning District Land Use Map, as shown on Exhibit A. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal: Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal: As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design; improve east- Page 4 west pedestrian connectivity between the Clinton / Dubuque St corridor and the Northside neighborhood. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text be amended to remove the text regarding further study of this area in the last paragraph of the Introduction Section on pages 1-2, and update the Central Planning District map. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON PORTIONS OF BLOCKS NORTH OF IOWA AVE AND EAST OF GILBERT ST; AND EAST OF VAN BURN ST AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON ST, WHICH ARE NOT IN THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT (AKA PORTIONS OF THE CIVIC DISTRICT) 1. Staff recommends the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St which are not in the Central Planning District be added to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goal: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Develop Zoning Code standards for commercial zones when they are along the same block as residential properties to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties along the same block. Develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor and provide for multi -family design standards to apply. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text be amended to remove the text regarding further study of this area in the last paragraph of the Introduction Section on pages 1-2, and update the Central Planning District Map. CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE I Date: March 10, 2015 CQfY OF IOWPACITY MEMORANDUM To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp Re: Discussion of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments for: 1. The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque St District) 2. Portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District (AKA portions of the Civic District) Background The Commission is considering an application to amend the Central District Plan to add certain land east of Van Buren St and north of Iowa Ave. The blocks east of Van Buren St include existing CB -2 and CB -5 -zoned properties on the western portions of the blocks, and existing CB -5 and P -zoned properties on the north side of Iowa Ave. The properties along the west side of Johnson St are already within the Central Planning District and are within either the College Hill Conservation District or the College Green Historic District. The Commission is also considering an amendment to add the entirety of the North Clinton / Dubuque St District to the Central Planning District. Infill Redevelopment Concerns The Commission has raised several concerns regarding the interface between existing commercial zoning along the same block face as existing residential zoning on the blocks east of Van Buren Street and asked City Staff to consider the possibility of adding language to the Comprehensive Plan and/or Central District Plan to indicate a desire for redevelopment that is sensitive to this interface. In general, infill development/redevelopment raises several challenges including physical constraints and compatibility concerns, regulatory issues, and economic issues, as discussed below. Physical constraints: Redevelopment of infill properties on relatively small sites requires successful 'melding into' the fabric of the other structures on the block to be perceived positively. Issues such as setbacks, building height, land use and the appearance of the front of the building and the streetscape are some of the concerns with redevelopment of infill properties. Opposition to infill redevelopment can center on design compatibility, increased density, and different housing types and land uses from what existed on the property previously. Regulatory Issues: Regulatory requirements can work against consistency with nearby properties in terms of required setbacks, land use and other dimensional standards. For example, the CB -2 and CB -5 zones have a maximum 12 -foot front setback in order to March 13, 2015 ,Page 2 Q encourage bringing structures close to the sidewalk to promote pedestrian -oriented building design. In contrast, the RNS-20 and RM -12 multi -family residential zones have a minimum 15 - foot front setback for single-family/duplex or 20 -foot front setback for multi -family structures to encourage front yard space. Regarding land use, the CB zones require commercial or office uses on the first floor, while multi -family zones do not allow commercial uses. Economic Issues: Land costs are often higher for infill sites, and construction costs can be higher due to difficulty in staging equipment and materials due working on smaller sites. The pre -construction process can be more time consuming if zoning is proposed to be changed, or a planned development is pursued. Pursuit of special exceptions or modifications to code requirements for parking or setback reductions takes time and investment, and the results are uncertain. All of these factors can lead to a property owner seeking the highest density possible under the existing zoning classification regardless of how the project fits into the larger block. Benefits of infill development: There are benefits to infill development, including the redevelopment of under-utilized property, establishing new land uses, redeveloping functionally - obsolete structures, and increasing densities within walking distance to downtown. Infill development reduces demand on development of farmland, reduces the need for additional infrastructure and reduces demand on City services. To be successful, these benefits should ideally be balanced with compatibility with other structures and uses on a block face. Historic Preservation The Commission also raised concerns about the potential impact of redevelopment for the subject areas. It should be noted that the Central District Plan already includes a goal of supporting the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan which includes identifying and pursuing designation of historic buildings. At the request of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District and the Civic District and offers these findings: In the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District, HPC found that the Saxnay-Gilmore house at 109 E. Market would qualify individually, on its own merits, for historic landmark status and should be given special attention for preservation. Although some properties owned by the University of Iowa, such as 230 N. Clinton Street, may have architectural and/or historic significance, other than 109 E. Market Street, HPC did not find any privately owned properties which would appear to be individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, nor did HPC find sufficient properties of note to constitute a historic or conservation district. It should be noted that HPC's review was limited to properties within the boundaries of the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. There may be significant historic properties located farther north on Clinton, Dubuque and the side streets that could be considered for landmark status. HPC plans to evaluate those properties this year. In the Civic District areas under discussion (north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St) HPC determined that although properties such as 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue have some architectural significance, HPC did not find sufficient properties to constitute a historic or conservation district within the Civic District. Noting the proximity of the area to the College Green and Jefferson Street Historic Districts, HPC was sensitive to the need for thoughtful interface between historic properties and potential redevelopment. March 13, 2015 Page 3 Options The Commission is now being asked to consider amending the comprehensive plan to add these properties (see attached exhibits) to the Central District Plan. The effect of adding these properties to the Central Planning District is they will become subject to the goals and policies of the Central District Plan. While this does not have the effect of amending the zoning code, it may be appropriate amend the goals to the Central District Plan to mitigate the concerns discussed above. Staff considered multiple scenarios for such a goal, and recommends that a goal for a zoning code amendment to address setbacks, height, and landscaping for CB -zoned properties on the same block face is appropriate. In addition, staff acknowledges that commercial land uses (as required on the first floor of CB properties) are not always appropriate or desired along a residential block face due to potential incompatibilities. Staff recommends that the Central District Plan be amended to add a "Housing and Quality of Life Goal' to consider amendments to the CB -2 and C13-5 zoning code for circumstances when C13-2 and C13-5 properties are on the same block face as residential properties, to require front setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, and other zoning regulations to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block face. Staff also recommends developing a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the C13-2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for multi -family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. Staff considered the option of rezoning those C13-2 and C13-5 properties in this area to the mixed-use zoning designation. Staff, however, does not recommend adding this as a goal to the Central District Plan for the reason that such rezoning amendment was proposed in 2005, was strenuously resisted by the property owners, and therefore the application failed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE BLOCKS GENERALLY BOUNDED BY CLINTON ST, JEFFERSON ST, BLOOMINGTON ST AND DUBUQUE ST (AKA THE NORTH CLINTON / DUBUQUE ST DISTRICT) 1. Staff recommends the North Clinton / Dubuque St properties be added to the Central Planning District Land Use Map, as shown on Exhibit A 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan March 13, 2015 Page 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON PORTIONS OF BLOCKS NORTH OF IOWA AVE AND EAST OF GILBERT ST; AND EAST OF VAN BURN ST AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON ST, WHICH ARE NOT IN THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT (AKA PORTIONS OF THE CIVIC DISTRICT) 1. Staff recommends that the Central District Plan be amended as follows: A. Adding the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B 2. Add a Housing and Quality of Life Goal to the Central District Plan to consider amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones related to design and land use compatibility issues on block faces with residential development 3. Staff recommends Approved by: Attachments prehensive Plan text and map be amended for to the Central District Plan of Neighborhood and velopment Services Central District Plan EXHIBIT A North Clinton / Dubuaue Street District Z O Z J U DAVENPORT Proposed Addition to the Central Planning District I BLOOMINGTON Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization - High Density Multi-Fam ® Open Space JW Public Institutional Riverfront Redevelopment - Private Institutional Single -Family Residential Stabilization Low to Medium Density Multi -Family Single -Family & Duplex Residential High Density Mufti -Family Redevelopment ® Mixed Use Urban Mixed Use Neighborhood Commercial - Urban Commercial ® Commercial Redevelopment W Office Commercial 7 0 - Intensive Commercial CO - General Commercial l � O Document Path: S:\PCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\Planning\Central Planning District\CentralPlanningAdditionNDubuque.mxd Civic District o osedAddition g District WN\\�\� \\� s Z Z J WASHINGTON Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization - High Density Multi-Fam ® Open Space Public Institutional Riverfront Redevelopment - Private Institutional Single -Family Residential Stabilization Low to Medium Density Multi -Family Single -Family & Duplex Residential High Density Multi -Family Redevelopment ® Mixed Use Urban Mixed use _ Neighborhood Commercial - Urban Commercial ® Commercial Redevelopment Office Commercial - Intensive Commercial - General Commercial Document Path: S:\PCD\Location Maps\2015\Civic District\CivicDistriclNewBoundary.mxd EXHIBIT B ei1J JEFFERSON Z O rn Z 2 O --,U31zz 1 1 i it1--I__--l.- Historic and Conservation Districts ;i College Green Historic District College Hill Conservation District Jefferson Street Historic District Zoning designations available online at: http://www. icgov.org/site/CMSv2/File/plan n ing/urban/Zoning Map. pdf ! HJL- Document Path: S:\PCD\Location Maps\CIv[cDlsbktZonN.mzd Zoning designations available online at: Document Path: S:\PCD\Location Maps\CivicDistrict.mxd http://www. icg ov.org/s ke/CMSv2/File/planning/u rbanrZo ning Map. pdf � r 1 CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY IOWA CITY M E M 0 RA N D U M UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: February 5, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Additional information related to proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for North Clinton / Dubuque St District and Civic District Comprehensive Plan Function Comprehensive/District Plans function as long-term visions for the community, and are also touchstones for documenting community goals, demographics, issues and aspirations. As stated in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Plan is roadmap for directing growth and change over time, and sets a foundation for policies, strategies, and other actions. The Central District Plan states district plans are intended to promote patterns of land use, urban design, infrastructure, and services that encourage and contribute to the livability of Iowa City and its neighborhoods. These plans are advisory documents for directing and managing change over time and serve to guide decision making, public deliberation, and investment. Similarly, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan states The Master Plan will serve as a framework to guide future public and private investment. In the context of zoning and development, Comprehensive Plans are not regulatory. While they are not regulatory in and of themselves, they do however provide the basis for evaluating future rezoning requests, zoning code amendments, and public decisions related to infrastructure and investment. For example, if a Comprehensive Plan or District Plan included a goal of evaluating setbacks and building placement concerns where commercial property abuts residential property, this would provide the basis for subsequent evaluation and potential zoning code amendments. Historic Preservation Plan As noted at the February 3 Work Session, the Historic Preservation Plan is adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Central District Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan, and includes a specific goal to "Support the goals and Objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan." The link to the entire Historic Preservation Plan is: http://www.icgov.org/site/CMSv2/file/planning/urban/histPlan.pdf. Pertinent sections include Goals #1-4 on pages 31-46, and the section on Downtown on pages 70-72. The area encompassed by the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and the much of the Civic District have had historic surveys completed, which resulted in the site inventory forms for specific properties, which staff referred to at the February 3 work session. These surveys are the basis of Historic District and/or Historic Landmark applications; For example, the Jefferson Street Historic District was a result of the survey of the Clinton St / Dubuque St corridor. The Historic Preservation Plan and subsequent historic surveys provide the basis for any Historic February 5, 2015 Page 2 District and Historic Landmark applications, which function as an overlay zone and require the legislative rezoning process for approval. Dimensional standards in selected commercial and residential zones To provide additional information regarding setbacks and other dimensional standards in commercial and residential zones in the Civic District, staff has prepared the following table: Standard Dimensional Standards for Selected Zones Zone Minimum front Maximum Maximum Floor to area Building setback front setback height rati02 coverage max 3 CB -2 01 12' 45' 2 N/A CB -5 01 12' 75' 3 N/A RM -12 15' for single-fam N/A 35' N/A 50% 20' for multi-fam RNS-20 15' for single-fam N/A 35' N/A 50% 20' for multi-fam Mixed Use 4 5' 15' 35' N/A 50% 1. A 10 -foot setback is required for properties fronting on Burlington Street 2. Floor to Area (FAR) ratio is one means of controlling building bulk on a property. For a property with an FAR of 2, 2 square feet of floor area may be constructed per 1 square foot of lot area. Additional FAR is possible for providing defined public benefits (per Zoning Code Table 2C-4) such as masonry finish, enhanced streetscape, usable open space, adaptive reuse of a designated Historic Landmark, and similar benefits. 3. Building coverage percentage is a means of controlling the building footprint size on a property. A building coverage of 50% means that the building footprint may occupy only up to 50% of the lot. 4. While there are no mixed-use (MU) zones in the affected areas, it is a logical zone for areas identified as 'mixed use' on the land use map. There is a provision in the Zoning Code for side and rear setbacks (but not front setbacks) in commercial zones that where a side lot line or rear lot line abuts a residential zone, a setback at least equal to the required setback in the abutting residential zone must be provided along the residential zone boundary. � r ?N' CITY OF IOWA CITY CITYOF IOWA CITYMEMORANDUM UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE Date: January 29, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Additional information for, and discussion of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: The blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave (AKA the Civic District) This memorandum responds to Commission questions and requests for the Civic District, generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave. What other locations are reserved for multi -story buildings in the downtown? Most if not all building sites downtown are to be developed with multi -story buildings. Staff has attached the map (see Map 1) of proposed building heights from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan, which shows the variety of building heights in the downtown and articulates the policy of encouraging taller buildings on corner locations, with shorter buildings along a block face. Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District: One factor staff did not include in the December 10 report on the Comprehensive Plan amendment is the fact that the three municipal blocks (south of Iowa Ave, west of Van Buren St) are already a part of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District, which extends to Van Buren Street on the east and Iowa Ave on the north. This Parking District allows for a reduction in required on-site parking provided: • The property is located in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District; • The project must not result in the demolition of a property that is designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark, registered on the National Register of Historic Places, or individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places; • The project must qualify for bonus height, bonus floor area, or other development assistance or financial incentive from the City for including uses, elements or features that further housing, economic development, or other goals of the Comprehensive Plan including the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Building Height Map: Staff has prepared a building height map (Exhibit C) to help articulate/visualize the policies of the Downtown District, which states that corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings. Staff developed a map of the three municipal blocks showing recommended building heights. While we do not have a form -based code for the Downtown District, building height will be made a part of requirements for any rezoning applications submitted for this area. For example, for properties designated as 4-6 stories, either the CB -5 zone or CB -10 zone with a conditional zoning agreement specifying a height limit would be appropriate. January 30, 2015 Page 2 Staff wishes to call special attention to the north side of the three municipal blocks along the Iowa Ave frontage. As shown on the map, for the north side of Iowa Ave (currently occupied by the City Hall surface parking lot and Unitarian Church proprties) the recommended height is two-four stories. This height is in keeping with the majority of the Iowa Ave corridor. However, to recognize the location of the block face as part of the downtown area and municipal campus, and for consistency with Downtown and Riverfront Crossings goals, it is recommended that additional building height may be granted through actions which have some public benefit such as preservation of historic property, provision of affordable housing, or other public benefits. These standards would be negotiated as a part of a rezoning application (please note the Unitarian Church property is currently zoned CB -5; City property is zoned Public). Civic District land use, zoning pattern and natural features: Some of the Discussion at the January 15 meeting was regarding the 'transition' between the downtown and the College Green Historic District. Our Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code does not define the term 'transition,' however it is commonly understood to be an increase or decrease in density and intensity over a horizontal distance, combined with buffers such as natural or man-made features. As proposed in the Civic District, the 'transition' is provided through a combination of the zoning pattern, the built environment such as the parking ramp, Ralston Creek, and the College Green Historic District and College Hill Conservation District. West of Van Buren Street / Ralston Creek, the three municipal blocks are proposed to be designated as a Mixed Use / Civic area at the east edge of downtown (see Exhibit D). These blocks include the Police and Fire stations, City Hall, Recreation Center, a 450 -space parking facility, Chauncey Swan Park and provide the setting for numerous events, meetings, music, Farmers Market and other activities. East of Van Buren Street / Ralston Creek, the first tier of properties are proposed to be designated as Mixed Use in the Central District Plan; these properties are currently zoned either CB -2 or CB -5 (which function as mixed-use zones). Properties along the west side of Johnson Street and in the College Green neighborhood are zoned multi -family residential (RM -12 and RNS-20). The College Green Park neighborhood is further protected by the College Green Historic District and the College Hill Conservation District. Exhibit E shows potential building heights based on staff's proposal for the three municipal blocks, and based on existing zoning for the remainder of the area. Ralston Creek, in combination with the zoning pattern, reinforces and provides a natural visual and functional break-point between the downtown and civic uses to the west, and mixed use and residential uses to the east. As noted above, the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Parking District already extends to the Van Buren St, between Iowa Ave and Burlington Street. Historic properties: The Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan contains policies, including the use of transfer of development rights, bonus incentives and the reduction of parking requirements, which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. Given that the City controls approximately 2.5 acres of surface parking lots within the Civic District, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer if the parking lots are to be developed. Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the Civic District. Forms are not available for 505, 507, 513 and 517 Iowa Avenue and 18 S. Van Buren Street (more on these later). Based on the forms only one property, the Unitarian Church at 10 S. January 30, 2015 Page 3 Gilbert Street, is clearly identified as being eligible for the National Register (copy of Iowa Site Inventory Form attached). The properties at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue may also be eligible based on architectural characteristics. For properties which do not have Iowa Site Historic Survey Forms, only 505 Iowa Avenue has potential for National Register eligibility. The other properties have been altered to such an extent that they do not appear to have sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for eligibility. Staff has amended the `Building Height' map (Exhibit C) to identify the Unitarian Church property as a `Key Historic Property' consistent with other identified historic properties in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. This makes this property clearly eligible for transfer of density, modifications to zoning code dimensional and setback standards, and reductions in required parking in order to encourage preservation. This designation does not however require preservation; in order to regulate the property in terms of historic preservation it would need to be designated as a Local Historic Landmark, a legislative (i.e. rezoning) process outside of the confines of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Recommendation for the Civic District: 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B, C and D. 2. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan Land Use Map as an addendum and shown as `Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit B. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Central District Plan and Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan Approved Doug B of roy, Director Departe t of Neighborhood Ind Development Services Attachments � r 'A®I�� CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE CITY O F IOWA C1TY MEMORANDUM Date: January 29, 2015 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Additional information for, and discussion of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque District); These memoranda are to respond to Commission questions and requests for additional information based on the discussion at the January 15 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Staff has reorganized and added information and maps regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for the North Clinton i Dubuque St District and the Civic District. Some Map and Exhibit references have changed from the December 10 report due to this reorganization. General Questions Mixed Use Definition: A question arose during Commission discussion regarding the definition of Mixed Use. In the context of the Central District Plan, Mixed Use is defined as: low to medium density residential uses including single family, duplexes, townhouses, and multi -family, and small scale commercial uses, offices, personal services, and other uses that serve residents and visitors to the area. Buildings can be mixed-use or single - use buildings. An area may be primarily commercial in nature or may be primarily residential depending on the market. Development is intended to be pedestrian -oriented with buildings oriented to the street ... In the context of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, the plan states: In many cases, multiple uses occur within the same building, most often with commercial uses on the ground level and residential uses on the upper floors of the buildings. Commercial uses help create a pedestrian friendly environment, while the residential uses above provide new opportunities for people to live within walking distance of jobs, schools, shopping, recreation, and cultural amenities within downtown and adjacent areas... Within the Downtown District, most of the buildings are designated as mixed- use buildings to provide the widest variety of potential uses to be located there. NORTH CLINTON / DUBUQUE ST DISTRICT Historic Property Policies: While the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify potential historic properties, the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are a based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. January 30, 2015 Page 2 Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Although four other properties in the district have some historic merit, the forms indicate that they are not individually significant enough to be listed on the National Register and there is not a sufficient grouping to form a historic district. Staff Recommendation for the North Clinton St / Dubuque St District: 1. Staff recommends the North Clinton / Dubuque St properties be added to the Central District Land Use Map as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit A. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan Approved Attachmeni Central District Plan North Clinton / Dubu Z O Z z J U ue Street District DAVENPORT Proposed Addition to the Central Planning District EXHIBIT A BLOOMINGTON Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization - High Density Multi-Fam ® Open Space Public Institutional Riverfront Redevelopment - Private Institutional Single -Family Residential Stabilization Low to Medium Density Multi -Family Single -Family & Duplex Residential ® High Density Multi -Family Redevelopment Mixed Use ® urban Mixed use - Neighborhood Commercial - Urban Commercial ® Commercial Redevelopment Office Commercial - Intensive Commercial - General Commercial Document Path: SAPCD\Kirk Lehmann\GIS\Maps\Planning\Central Planning District\CentralPlanningAdditionNDubuque.mxd e n W E I` . r N Hl G � d � L Y Y w C O d N v R O O t R Y C_ Y C N O E a a 0 0 m m N R a c .- C C O R n d n � R Y v c c v m E o n o 3 v w ' d �o v '0 0 o Y roo � R E y n c o bq i R .O R " O N 6 O V O O a � O N Y ' v a O C 9 R C d O d d 6 R r N d at R Y Y C R R U a9 c_ U Y H 9 0 V R {Oj c 0 C O V O O d y f R CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE CPTY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: December 10, 2014 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: John Yapp, Development Services Coordinator Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for: i. The blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque District); and ii. The blocks generally bounded by Gilbert St, Burlington St, Van Buren St, and Iowa Ave (AKA the Civic District) Introduction The Comprehensive Plan identifies two areas, one located generally east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan. The Comprehensive Plan suggests that while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities both should comply with the policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the areas that border them. Both of these areas are currently part of the Downtown Planning District (see attached maps). On October 30, staff held an open house to facilitate public input regarding these areas. All property owners, residents and businesses were invited by letter. In addition, staff issued a media release and designed a webpage to facilitate public input. To date, we have received over 50 responses via the webpage, and several emails (see attached). For the purposes of this report, we have separated the North Clinton / Dubuque District and the Civic District, and have provided staff recommendations for each district separately. NORTH CLINTON / DUBUQUE DISTRICT The majority of the North Clinton / Dubuque District is zoned Planned Residential Multi -Family (PRM). It is characterized by multi -family apartments, former single family homes converted to apartments, religious and other institutions, and other public uses. With close proximity to the University of Iowa, demand is strong for multi -family residential as well as institutional and public uses. PRM Zone: The purpose of the PRM Zone is to provide for the development of high density multi -family housing in close proximity to centrally -located employment, educational and commercial uses. The PRM zone is subject to multi -family design standards, and allows for both a density bonus and height increase up to 65 feet (5-6 stories) provided certain 'public benefits' are included in the project. These public benefits include a masonry finish on the exterior of the building, usable open space for the occupants of the building, rehabilitation of a historic building, provision of assisted housing, streetscape amenities, additional landscaping and/or windows that have a height 1.5 times greater than their width. December 12, 2014 Aeft Page 2 Public Input: Much of the public input we received emphasized a desire for higher -density housing close to downtown ('build up, not out' was used several times), a desire for improved streetscapes, wayfinding, replacement of older 'run-down' buildings, and a desire for more affordable housing. Some input focused on a desire to not increase density, identified the lack of parking as a concern, and the lack of retail and entertainment. Much of the public input was related to a desire for improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amenities. All input received to date is attached. In discussions with University staff regarding this area, UI staff identified the close proximity of the business school as an opportunity for an entrepreneurial center or living -learning community of business students. UI staff also noted the strong market for residential housing close to the Clinton St dormitories, and shared concerns with the appearance of the Clinton St and Dubuque St corridors. Streetscape and pedestrian / bicycle amenities: Dubuque St, and to a lesser degree Clinton St, serve as gateways to the University of Iowa's east campus and to downtown Iowa City. In discussing this area with University of Iowa staff, one of the unique things about the east campus is how intertwined it is with downtown Iowa City. One of the challenges is that there is no clear 'gateway' to campus or to downtown. Related to this, the streetscape and the appearance of some private residences have been identified as not contributing to these corridors serving as 'gateways.' While multi -family zones and the PRM zone has design standards to encourage higher -density housing to result in a more attractive living environment, it may not be designed specifically to encourage higher -quality streetscapes in high -visibility corridors; therefore staff suggests a review of these standards in conjunction with future public projects to improve the appearance of the Clinton St and Dubuque St corridors. Central District Plan: The effect of adding the North Clinton / Dubuque St District to the Central Planning District is that it would become subject to the policies of the Central Planning District, and any redevelopment would be subject to certain building design standards as required in the Zoning Code. Existing policies and goals in the Central District Plan that are pertinent to the North Clinton / Dubuque St District include: Selected Existing Housing and Quality of Life Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #1: Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties throughout the district and by supporting new housing opportunities. • Goal #1(d): Support the goals and objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan. • Goal #2(d): In higher density multi -family zones, ensure that adequate infrastructure and open space is provided to create a livable environment for residents. • Goal #3(c): Implement targeted code enforcement for areas that receive a higher level of complaints regarding zoning code violations, snow and weed removal, and trash control that affect neighborhood quality of life Selected Existing Transportation Goals — Central District Plan Goal #1: Balance traffic circulation needs, preserve neighborhood character, and public safety issues. K December 12, 2014 Page 3 • Goal #1(b): When planning for street improvements, give consideration to all modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and driving. Balance these needs with desirability of on -street parking and street trees. • Goal #3: Develop a plan to formalize safe bicycle and pedestrian connections between the major destinations in the district, including downtown Iowa City, neighborhood commercial areas, the UI campus, parks and elementary and secondary schools. • Goal #3(d): Continue to explore options such as high -visibility crosswalks to improve pedestrian crossings where major pedestrian routes intersect with arterial streets. Central District Plan Land Use Map: The Central District Plan map is a general guide for future land use and development. Staff proposes adding the North Clinton / Dubuque St District to the Central District Plan map with land use categories consistent with the rest of the Central Planning District (see attached map). The entire Central District Plan is available at: http://www.ic oq v o[g/site/CMSv2/File/planning/urban/centralPlan/CentralPlanlayoutA.pdf Staff Recommendation on North Clinton / Dubuque St District: 1. Staff recommends the Central District Plan land use map be amended to include North Clinton / Dubuque St properties, as shown on Exhibit A. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design. 3 December 12, 2014 Page 4 CIVIC DISTRICT The Civic District, so named due to the municipal/public uses in the district, is a mixed-use area in that it contains a variety of uses. Besides municipal uses, it contains multi -family, commercial, and institutional uses. Historically the three municipal blocks (bounded by Gilbert St, Iowa Ave, Van Buren St and Burlington St) have been identified as municipal campus blocks. These blocks contain City Hall, Fire and Police stations, the Recreation Center, Swan Parking Facility, and Chauncey Swan Park. Several years ago, the City advertised the corner of College St / Gilbert St (this corner is already identified as commercial in the Comprehensive Plan) for a private mixed-use building and the City Council has selected a preferred developer of the property. While the municipal blocks will still contain municipal government uses, the City realized that it is ultimately inefficient and contrasts with the desire for mixed-use development to maintain these blocks solely for public uses. The City has also had a proposal for a mixed- use building on the Recreation Center surface lot, south of the Swan parking facility. As noted in the introduction to this memo, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the need to ensure appropriate transitions to the neighborhoods that border this area. These transitions are embodied in the designated zoning classifications: The east side of Van Buren St and the north side of Iowa Ave are zoned CB -2 and CB -5, transitioning to multi -family zones to the east and north. The area around College Green Park has been designated as a historic district, ensuring that any redevelopment or additions are in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. Public Input: Much of the public input received emphasized mixed-use and higher densities, the need for housing and attractions for diverse ages and households (not just students), a desire for more bike lanes, bike parking/storage, more attractive streetscapes, a desire for preserving historic structures, a desire for more contemporary design, and in general support for the growth of downtown. Some public input also emphasized a desire to limit heights and to not increase densities. Much of the public input emphasized the need to extend mixed-use development into the Civic District including retail and housing for diverse households; some input noted extending 'downtown' into the civic district. At the same time, staff has heard concerns with the growth of downtown and the impact on adjacent neighborhoods. Ralston Creek: Staff also prompted public input on the Ralston Creek corridor. We received public input on the need to clean and maintain the creek corridor, provide more pocket parks along the creek and improve the creek greenway, increase seating along the creek, improve the interaction between the creek and nearby parking (Swan ramp and the Recreation Center lot), and to create event space along the creek. In reviewing the Central District Plan and Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, both plans already emphasize goals improve the creek corridor, provide better access to the creek, and make the creek more of an attraction visually and physically. Three Municipal Blocks: The three municipal blocks on the east side of Gilbert St, between Iowa Ave and Burlington St, are currently in the Downtown Planning District, but were not included in the Downtown / Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. The text from the Downtown Planning District (from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan) states: 4 December 12, 2014 Page 5 The logic of promoting higher density residential development in the Downtown Planning District rests in the concept that people who live in and near downtown will walk to work (or classes in the case of University students), will patronize downtown businesses, will add to after-hours vitality, and create a sense of safety downtown. Higher density development in the downtown also reduces pressure on the less dense older neighborhoods surrounding downtown. The three municipal blocks also have land uses which are more consistent with a 'downtown' context than a neighborhood context, including City Hall, Police and Fire stations, the Robert A Lee Recreation Center, Chauncey Swan parking facility (home of the Farmer's Market), and access from a 4 -lane arterial street (Gilbert St) and a 5 -lane state highway (Burlington St). This context, combined with the City goal of encouraging more mixed-use development and no longer viewing the three municipal blocks as solely for municipal functions, leads staff to recommend these three blocks stay in the Downtown Planning District, and be added to the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. There is a natural change in topography on each side of Ralston Creek / Van Buren St on the east side of the three municipal blocks; and there is a change in land use with higher -intensity municipal uses and functions on the west side of Van Buren St, and lower -intensity mixed-use development on the east side of Van Buren St. Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan: The effect of adding these three blocks to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (see attached map) is that these blocks will be subject to the policies and goals of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. In the 'Strategic Infill' section of the Downtown District Section, the Plan states: In order to reinforce the existing fabric that currently exists in Downtown Iowa City, new development should be mixed-use and pedestrian -oriented in nature. In addition, it should follow a list of very basic rules that are consistent with the existing character of downtown. The following guidelines were developed following a thorough analysis of the patterns and framework that make downtown special. These include: • New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings. • Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls) should front onto the street frontages and the City Plaza. • Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses. • Buildings should be built to the property line. • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings, creating a block structure with taller buildings on the corners and lower scale historic buildings between them. • The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with [any] adjacent historic buildings to make them `feel' contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived height of towers. 5 December 12, 2014 Page 6 • Parking should be located both on -street and behind storefronts in parking structures Much of the public input emphasized a desire for more diverse housing options (non -student) than is currently in great supply downtown. Page 18 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan summarizes the residential market findings: It states that there is a potential market for 'High Quality High Amenity' rental units and condominiums, and that demand is likely to come from young professionals, empty nesters, and recent retirees. It further states that the market suggests there is unmet demand for high quality rental and condominium product in Downtown and the north half of Riverfront Crossings. In staffs opinion, the three municipal blocks are a potential location for mixed-use development and adding them to the Downtown District would be consistent with that goal. The Downtown District chapter starts on page 53 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which is available on-line: http://www. icgov.o[g/site/CMSv2/file/planning/2013-09-25-DowntownandRiverfrontCrossings. pdf. Central District Plan: Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, outside of the three municipal blocks, be added to the Central District Plan and identified as mixed-use (These properties are already identified as 'mixed-use' in the larger Comprehensive Plan land use map). Existing policies and goals in the Central District Plan that are pertinent to the North Clinton / Dubuque St District and consistent with much of the public input include: Selected Existing Housing and Quality of Life Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #4: Encourage development of businesses, institutions, and public entities that provide goods, services, and amenities that support healthy neighborhoods. • Goal #4(a): Encourage a diverse range of businesses that provide essential services to the Downtown area — grocery, clothing, household items, etc. • Goal #4(b): Encourage investment and reinvestment in existing commercial areas that provide goods and services for Central District neighborhoods. • Goal #5(a): Install pedestrian lighting where needed to create safe travel corridors for pedestrians. • Goal #5(c): Provide for walkable/bikable routes to and through commercial areas. Selected Existing Transportation Goal — Central District Plan • Goal #3(e): Explore the viability of alternative routes for bikes and pedestrians along Ralston Creek, recognizing the difficulties posed by private ownership of the creek, access, and flooding. Selected Existing Open Space Goals — Central District Plan • Goal #3: Improve the amenities offered in existing parks or other open spaces • Goal #5(a): Develop plans for improving visual and physical access to Ralston Creek and for restoration of the stream along both public and privately owned sections of the creek. n December 12, 2014 Page 7 Staff Recommendation on Civic District 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St remain in the Downtown Planning District and be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Land Use Map be amended to include the three municipal blocks shown as a mix of 'Civic' and 'Mixed Use' and be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit C. 3. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit A. Approved by: Doug Boothroy,1 11irector Department of N4ighborhood and Develop ent Services ATTACHMENTS Map 1: North Clinton / Dubuque St and Civic Districts Map 2: Downtown Planning District Map 3: North Clinton / Dubuque St District aerial and zoning Map 4: North Clinton / Dubuque St District land uses Map 5: Central District Plan sub -areas Map 6: Civic District aerial and zoning Map 7: Civic District land uses Exhibit A: Central District Proposed Land Use Map Exhibit B: Downtown District Proposed Boundary Map Exhibit C: Downtown District Proposed Land Use Map Summaries of public input received r7 M a Q t O Z It I a is 3nonenn IL N Itt I� �• 'Tab' 'yl p11110MC IIt III 1. W d. ru frs I10 .8�,I Ia m A 17 too 1t :i $ n IS No1Nno T L S F m J {�{cc ,lJr � ` y •p Ci ( 3 L J JI O L 4 LL gO C: iF V l: _w 6E r 0 aJ iJl f f Iu u is, E d 9 9 � c c J i i< 8 8 8 t tl g 8 g 8 8� o B da �� W W W W W W W W i i W W W i W i W i i i i i i i E 8 o R R" w R R R n R a -� 1 R a M 2 M A W N M M N N H A .. N A M H N N N ctrMfa rr jp� AMN W ..i MAP 4 North Clinton/Dubuque Street District Land use ,w 1Zr; l BLOOMINGTON ST Us MARKET ST CBS = rto 1 av +to z 0 z J U L.2-24 jErrERSON ST P2 ❑ Single Famlly & Duplex Office ■ Multi Family & Rooming House t Public—City/Other Public Mixed Use ■ Private Institutional . Commercial University i Central° ` ^ 1 C r o, L: q,cr - Subarea A - - --Subarea B , -. Subarea C ::� The housing section of this document dlvldes the Central Planning Dtstrk Subarea A Includes many of the oldest neighborhoods In Iowa City and the Ing"W; In Subareas a and C, sln®rfamlly housing Predominates. MAP 5 w & � ■ P4 6 N ! $ 2 2 z « ! � - � !!!»®t a,;;g;L, a�-! B ) § :!l�a�a■��,-l=!\■2�l.2■«&&!� ■ � ■ � � ■ � � t , ■ � } ■ j $|�§klf}{!!!)lf�fl��lf�` ;,!!„ ■,3&3!|||k|I!||3!■!|\\ u R«"A��|�;; „ ;2|�:ter!|:�� a■;�.s■OV.°°~©"...a;■©;:;� Cm MAP 7 Ctvk Dlstrkt Land Use U utuuy ❑ Single Family & Duplex ❑ Office ■ Multi Family & Rooming House ® Public—City/Other Public Mixed Use ■ Private Institutional ■ Commercial University Central District Plan Proposed Future Land Use Ma EXHIBIT A Low -Medium Density MF Stabilization ® High Density Multi -Family Redevelopment - High Density Multi -Far Mixed Use - Open Space ® Urban Mixed Use ® Public Institutional _ Neighborhood Commercial ® Riverfront Redevelopment - Urban Commercial ® Private Institutional ® Commercial Redevelopment Single -Family Residential Stabilization Office Commercial Low to Medium Density Multi -Family - Intensive Commercial 0 Single -Family & Duplex Residential = General Commercial Document Path: S:\Iowa City GIS\PCD_Maps\_Urban_Planning\20080630_Central Planning Distdct\ReZoningMapForJY.mxd Z O rn Z 2 O 0 0 EXHIBIT B rl South Downtown t � �1�T1 c°a9, 4• I t University ,�rJ= District Central Crossings r West 1 1 Riverfront , 1 1 ° 1 1 � E IA tj rim. F 11 ►I Gilbert I District _ II I it It. e s, II c I Park District If _ _ 6 I -- if s ur..coo wve �� IMP I South r o j Gilbert j r � I �tb��J ..Cn�xp •vf L Mal `� �. 'J "IN awn swan llama _ e MEMO s on ae'•.. N O d A y T 9 A J 3 j Y C—i TATx U0 00 MLLJ L Mal `� �. 'J "IN awn swan llama _ e MEMO s on ae'•.. N O Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 1 What are the strengths of these areas? Answered: 49 Skipped:6 # Responses Date 1 Adjacent to downtown and services Important to increase diverse housing stock in the downtown 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Central location of significant city services easily accessible to citizens. Ralson Creek. Entry way to downtown. 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Restaurants nearby? Captive audience Restaurants 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Civic District- Upscale housing being brought in with activities for the entire community. The Chauncy brings life 11/17/2014 9:20 AM to needed upscale housing and arts/culture and activities North Clinton/Dubuque Street District- Development proposed will enhance building needs. Create a more viable pleasing view for the city 5 Good restaurants. Good number of student -related housing. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM 6 Close to downtown, some historic character. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 Walkability. Close to campus and downtown but not as busy. The area off Clinton I think is more a 10/31/2014 8:54 AM student/university area. East of Gilbert area seems more like a transition to the residential neighborhoods. The farmers market helps makes this area nice, and your close to library, city hall, rec center, etc. So it seems more civic than university oriented. It's a nicer place to bike and walk. 8 New Pi is very important to this area. Good healthy food, jobs, betty supportive of the community. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 New Pioneer Co-op, the Farmers Market, bike library, the UU, the Senior Center, the Presbyterian church. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 Someone emailed me this survey, but the survey does not describe the boundaries of the study area. How can 1 10/30/2014 8:01 PM comment???? 11 They are quite nice as they are now. Look nice, work well. Still have the feeling of a smaller town in them. If the 10/30/2014 8:OO PM planners want a megalopolis feel, they should take jobs elsewhere. 12 New Pioneer Coop is very important to downtown Iowa City! 10/30/2014 6:40 PM 13 Location to downtown current activities and upscale development 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 14 Proximity to downtown. Walkability. Seems like there are many buildings or parcels that are ripe for development 10/30/2014 4:44 PM and rejuvenation. 15 Central proximity; active entertainment and social life; shopping and business; cultural life; older buildings and 10/30/2014 1:03 PM landscapes hold a classical appeal 16 The Civic District has increasingly become the center of important public institutions, including buildings that 10/30/2014 9:19 AM serve government, recreation, senior living, senior activities, and commercial establishments. 17 a busy, attractive (for the most part) downtown area. 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 18 These areas currently offer a wide variety of civic and private mixed use, all attractive amenities that will be 10/29/2014 11:35 AM enhanced by additional populations and ideas, including allowing more density by going vertical. People increasingly want to participate in the city's varied activities, and more and more people are hoping to take up permanent (NOT just rental) residency close to downtown, very close in, to where things are happening, perhaps some cultural venues right in their own resident buildings. 19 Civic District - Ralston Creek North Clinton/Dubuque St - could be an amazing gateway into the city 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 20 These areas host some of the City's prominent civic buildings and provide infill opportunities for additional mixed 10/29/2014 9:50 AM use housing and retail. Ralston Creek is also an asset to the Civic District. 21 diverse amenities, great streetscapes, slow traffic, heavy foot traffic, lovely street cafes! 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 22 These areas are all Central City --where the action is; it's the heart of Iowa City. Will love to see more residential 10/28/2014 1:06 PM and retail in these areas. It creates movement and that is always good I think it's good for the city to build "up" not "out" and these areas are perfect spaces for that concept. The more adults living downtown the better for us all— helps business, makes interactions more enjoyable. The historic fabric of the Central City is also a big plus. 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 23 24 25 26 close in to UI campus and downtown SurveyMonkey 10/28/2014 8:45 AM Great location. In the heart of the town. 10/27!2014 9:33 PM These are important areas for growth and improvement in the city as a whole ! 10/27/2014 9:04 PM The Civic Area, in particular, Sets a tone for our city when approaching from the East side neighborhoods and 10/27/2014 8:27 PM business parks, It's seen by a tremendous amount of people while commuting to/from work. An opportunity exists to bolster the cultural and creative tone of Iowa City. It's also an area highly accessible by walkers, bikers, runners etc. 27 proximity to campus, downtown, amenities like grocery, restaurants, unique shopping, lack of dependence on a 10/27/2014 2:16 PM car 28 proximity to central business district... and where the chauncey is going, no historical or beautiful old buildings 10/27/2014 1:49 PM need to be affected or torn down. 29 The proximity to the Ped Mall, but not being on the Ped Mall makes this (as well as the Northside) the perfect 10/27/2014 11:01 AM place for retail growth in Iowa City. The Ped Mall can be its own worst enemy for retail, and the city would benefit at promoting more on -street options. 30 obviously both are very close to downtown area, which we need to expand in order to grow. I'm a big proponent 10/27/2014 10:35 AM of the two projects that are planned and see the need to proceed with the CB -10 zoning. 31 Proximity to downtown, walk ability, location in general. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 32 walking downtown 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 33 Having mixed retail, office, and residential spaces in the zone would stimulate downtown including those 10/26/2014 3:26 PM supporting businesses in it, increase the sense of membership with downtown better beyond the University population, and otherwise help to re-energize the downtown area 34 Well situated in the city's downtown, and don't require the destruction of a high use or historic structure. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 35 North Clinton/Dubuque is a natural fit for high density student housing as the east and west boundaries are 10/24/2014 4:37 PM already defined with University housing on the west and an arterial road, Dubuque, on the east. The Civic District should be strongly considered for young professionals/non student residents that want to be downtown. The requires building up, not building out. The Downtown District will require a strong permanent resident population to attract and maintain businesses other than bars/restaurants. 36 Proximity to traditional downtown district, good parking, parks 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 37 a) college life (responsible) 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 38 The two areas are different in some significant ways, so it would have helped if this question was worded 10/23/2014 2:55 PM differently. Strength is their limited scale as areas that transition to two very different residential neighborhoods. The north Clinton/Dubuque area feels more connected to the university campus. It also includes some very nice historic buildings that should be preserved. The Civic Complex is more of a meeting between the downtown and adjacent residential areas. It's strength is it openness, lower scale. Iowa Avenue is attractive and Washington Street has the potential to be. College, Washington, and Iowa are all great streets for pedestrians and bikers. The streets feel less congested and traffic seems more residential than commuters zipping about. The Farmers Market, Co-op and and smaller local businesses help to make this area pleasant. 39 Historic buildings, varied businesses food choices, good examples of building taller to best use our limited space 10/23/2014 1:29 PM close to the urban core. 40 convenient location, accesible parking. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 41 Since Ralston Creek runs into and through the area, it can be a source for a very attractive park area. Today 10/23/2014 9:41 AM much of the area is parking ramp and bridges. It can become a very attractive area. 42 North Clinton/Dubuque District: This area is very charming and welcoming. Recent upgrades have renewed the 10/22/2014 1:10 PM area and have improved the area's former reputation as the CBD's "poor cousin." I appreciate the signs that require drivers to stop for pedestrians in the walkways of this district. Civic District: The presence of adequate parking and the Civic and Rec Centers provide anchors to this area not only for existing downtown residents but the community as a whole. 43 A variety of uses, decent parking (esp. Chauncey Swan ramp). Nice to have the civic campus located downtown 10/22/2014 12:41 PM with mix of cultural and commercial, and some residential, right there. 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 44 The historic character of the area and the community feel ... walkability, locally owned businesses, mix of housing 10/21/2014 10:40 AM (various income and age levels--from families to students and older people). The implementation of historic and conservation districts, better zoning (as in the Neighborhood Conservation zones) and the design review for new structures has significantly enhanced and stabilized these areas over the past couple of decades. 45 potential 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 46 Civic District: close to center of downtown. Has the potential to extend and become part of the CBD, improving 10/21/2014 8:38 AM the block of College street between Gilbert and Linn. Great parking amenity with Swan ramp North Clinton District: close integration with pentacrest and college of business 47 proximity to downtown dining, events, etc. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 48 The south end of the North Clinton/Dubuge district contains some historic buildings that add character, and some 10/20/2014 3:32 PM churches and similar religious buildings that add a cultural element. The Civic District's anchors are City Hall, the Rec Center, and the State Historic Society along with half of the Credit Union, New Pi and the Farmer's Market. Only the latter is in a building that has any historic interest — it is the last of the buildings in the district that still relates to the former railroad branch. There is lots of parking here, much used to support Downtown. 49 1) Like the Blue Bird Cafe, the Motley Cow, the Oasis, etc. (restaurants) 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q2 What are the weaknesses of these areas? Answered: 46 Skipped:9 # Responses Date 1 Single uses; surface parking - waste of space, unattractive. Ralston Creek - not really being used as an amenity. 11/17/2014 10:49 AM Reduction of street trees - could be a better entry to downtown of city; surface lots (city lot) - like the parking, but provides development opportunities. 2 Panhandling. Not enough fun quirky shops. Parking can be annoying. 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Civic District- Potential creek flooding- what can be done to divert 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 Need more housing that's not targeted to or primarily used by students. Need more housing that is likely to attract i 11/11/2014 1:24 PM young professionals and empty -nesters. Need to encourage development of additional retail and entertainment venues/uses that will attract those residents. Also need Class A office space. Tax base smaller based upon UI and charitable ownership/use. Need more pet waterers. 5 Lack of historic character on some parcels, underutized space. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 6 The Clinton area neighborhood feels pretty crowded and the streets are is not too attractive. The east of Gilbert 10/31/2014 8:54 AM area is more open, but needs some work. Need to develop the old bus station corner in a way that complements the park and farmers market. That big new building on Washington is the worst. Taking down those houses was really unfortunate. 7 1 wish there were a place outdoors to swim downtown. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 Too much expensive student housing, too many drunk bros wandering around, all of the Moen monstrosities. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 9 They are vulnerable to over -planning by the City. This can destroy a lot that we have that is good. Be mindful of 10/30/2014 8:00 PM the successful businesses in the near North side and don't do anything to disturb or harm them. 10 None 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 11 Limited parking. Some areas are flood -prone (in the Civic area). Costs are very high for development and rent. 10/30/2014 4:44 PM Almost no affordable housing for long-term city residents. 12 Parking is generally accessible but not always. THERE IS TOO MUCH STUDENT HOUSING IN THESE AREAS. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM There can be more student housing, if needed, in areas of the westside near the old Menards. 13 At present there are only limited housing, office, and entertainment facilities in this area. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 14 The streets, sidewalks and ped mall areas are looking run-down and drastically need a makeover. The alleys are 10/30/2014 3:26 AM disgusting and should be cleaned, services consolidated and the physical alley needs to be vitalized and made to be safe and attractive for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Lack of ability to use tasteful, protruding signage makes for boring, generic -looking downtown. There is data to show that attractive, appropriate signage is important to the vitality of businesses and a whole downtown. 15 There is some dated ugliness in new and old structures alike; good design and a better sense of place will be 10/29/2014 11:35 AM appreciated for years to come. I believe the city planners are well attuned to this, and sophisticated audiences moving to Iowa City will appreciate quality in the future, even if it includes replacement, re -purposing, or at least renovation of some time -warn structures now as well as over time. In some ways Iowa City is stuck in the past. We are all proud of its history, but it's time to mix more and more modern desirable, livable structures close to the - center of activities. I believe old and new structures live well side by side. 16 North Clinton Dubuque St - A very ugly gateway to downtown and the whole city really. Civic District - surface 10/29/2014 10:11 AM parking behind City Hall on Iowa Ave, not 17 Lake of signage and way finding. Lack of real connections, despite their adjacencies, to the Downtown area. 10/29/2014 9:50 AM 18 too much low end housing primarily filled with temporary residents, ugly low-cost apartment buildings 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 19 none 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 20 Both have blighted areas and need improvement. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 21 None 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 22 Currently the buildings are outdated, not highly populated, and relics of the late 70s and early 80s. This is a far 10/27/2014 8:27 PM cry from the pedestrian mall area and Dubuque street, which have blended historical and contemporary VERY well. 23 a hardware store (i realize there's one on dodge st) but there needs to be a satellite that carries batteries, i 10/27/2014 2:16 PM lightbulbs, household/apartment items -etc, as we/city infills with residential, commercial and office parking may prove to be a little more challenging 24 none 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 25 Right now the area is architecturally weak. There are some open spaces, low buildings. Something about it isn't i 10/27/2014 11:01 AM very walkable or inviting. Moen's project would be a fantastic way to connect this area to the Ped Mall visually and draw people east. 26 At this time not very aesthetically pleasing (abandoned building, parking lot...... 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 27 Blighted and run down. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 28 A thriving downtown is for all ages. 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 29 Current weaknesses are those attributes listed above that it fails to offer. It is now mostly occupied by a parking 10/26/2014 3:26 PM ramp, a small city park and vacant space. The co op, a wonderful part of life in Iowa City for many decades, has long outgrown its potential and the increased traffic and residents nearby would enhance both the need for more space and the ability to gain return on it. 30 This is the edge of downtown and it will always have some clash with adjoining neighbors as downtown 10/26/2014 3:14 PM continues to expand. 31 North Clinton/Dubuque Street have existing properties that may not be easily transformed into high density 10/24/2014 4:37 PM housing. Also the northern border should be extended all the way to north Clinton for continuity. The Civic District has to cross Burlington. 32 We have an abundance of student housing, but little in the way of young professional housing. This is an area we 10/24/2014 11:35 AM need to remedy to be competitive in a global economy. We have to show a continuum of living options from student, to young professional to family housing. 33 a) too secluded, abandoned -like b) too much traffic c) college life (irresponsible) 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 34 Parking in the North Clinton/Dubuque street district is a problem for future development of the area. 10/23/2014 5:09 PM 35 The buildings that went in along Washington Street, east of the Chancy Swan Ramp are a real eyesore and it 10/23/2014 2:55 PM was a shame to see those old houses go --and the old businesses are largely gone too. This really took away from the charm of the area. It seems now the goal is to have the urban downtown butt right up to the lower scale residential neighborhood. That is unfortunate. I would like to see the scale kept lower in this area and preserve historic buildings where possible. We don't need lots more commercial in these areas. Keep the feel residential. 36 Flooding potential, growth potential, surface parking. 10/23/2014 1:29 PM 37 Noise, drunk students on weekends ect. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 38 Presently the bridges and ramps make the area quite unattractive. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 39 North Clinton/Dubuque District: Additional retail opportunities in the area would further enhance the sense of 10/22/2014 1:10 PM place of this district and provide additional tax revenues for further improvements. If visible links to this district from the CBD could be created, I think the connection with the CBD would enhance both districts. 40 Parking lots seem like a poor use of space in these downtown areas. 10/22/2014 12:41 PM 41 There is still not as much oversight of the maintenance of rental properties (and their tenants) in these districts as 10/21/2014 10:40 AM there could be. Absentee landlords are not the best stewards of property and do not contribute very well to the life i of neighborhoods and the community that lives in them. 42 under -developed --low density. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 43 Civic District: the existing civic buildings North Clinton District: isolation from CBD 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 44 destinations are more spread out and sparse. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey . _ ...... ..... ...... _... .... __._ ..... .. _.. _ . 45 The north end of the North Clinton/Dubuge district is dominated by rather characterless apartment buildings, fraternities and and rooming houses, with most of what could be green space paved over for student parking. There are a few older buildings here that ahave a bit of character, but not much. Aside from the New Pi building, the Civic District has managed to almost completely eface its history. The public buildings lack character -- they look cheap because that was a key design goal. It is another district dominated by parking, which detracts from the character of the area. And, of course, there is a long legacy of inappropriate floodplain development here, with over a century of fill that puts the banks of Ralston Creek way above their natural elevation — much of that was probably put there by the railroad. 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 46 Its unfortunate that the University and City didn't have the foresight to make the arts campus roll from one side of 10/20/2014 2:02 PM the river to the other and anchor the downtown area on the north side with a theater and art museum. This could have resulted in a more cohesive arts campus and it would be a better side of the downtown to attract customers to since it would be easier to get in and out of town. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey C3 What should be considered when the City is reviewing development proposals? Answered: 47 Skipped:8 # Responses Date 1 How development will impact future tax base 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Mixed use; complementary purposes to downtown - synergy with Central Business District. 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Need a quick way to get around town. Keep Market and Jefferson one-way. 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Continue to focus on mixed use- upsscale 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 Whether the proposals will attract young professionals and empty -nesters and will provide office space and 11/11/2014 1:24 PM entertainment venues for them to populate/enjoy. Make the areas more dog -friendly. 6 Increase residential and commercial density in all non -historic parcels, preserve historic structures where 11/3/2014 1:40 PM feasible. 7 Keep the height down east of Gilbert and create something that does not overwhelm the park or the surrounding 10/31/2014 8:54 AM uses. Also make the park more of a feature that complements City Hall. Make sure the co-op gets a home our of the flood plain and preserve the Unitarian Chruch building. Keep the bike library in this area. Affordability, sustainability, scale, and character. Let the high rises stay west of Gilbert and south of Burlington. 8 Please help New Pi find a new home! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 The purpose of buildings - do projects serve the whole community or only elite groups? 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 That you don't destroy what we have that is good in the attempt to "improve" and "develop". 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 11 The optimal location for New Pioneer Coop! A wonderful employer, supporter of many local farmers, and provider 10/30/2014 6:40 PM of healthy, local food! 12 Overall usage and impact for multi purpose exposure - lifestyle (art/culture), urban living - upscale, activities 10/30/2014 5:26 PM (beyond the scope of rest/bar). Multi business usage - to enable growth of new business into the Iowa City area. 13 Affordable housing is incredibly important. Think in terms of long-term residents who are stable and looking for 10/30/2014 4:44 PM reasons to stay. They are paying taxes and investing in the local economy and should have their needs considered first --before the fleeting desires of college students. Help New Pioneer Co-op find a new home in the downtown area, escaping the flood risk of Ralston Creek and establishing a new and improved DOWNTOWN retail location for their well-established and well -loved local business—so that the business can continue to grow and people who live/work downtown can still have access to affordable, healthy food without necessarily needing a car. 14 Affordable housing for families and employees who want to walk to work or downtown. Increased housing options 10/30/2014 1:03 PM for vibrant but retired residents. There is too much student housing.which destroys the neighborhood sense. I would rather see more affordable family, retiree housing and community-based housing for the disabled that augments an urban sense of diversity, community and cultural richness. 15 In reviewing development proposals, the city should consider the range of facilities that developers are proposing, 10/30/2014 9:19 AM as well as the track record of the principal developers. 16 The current overabundance of student housing in and on the periphery of the downtown. There is a stated 10/30/2014 3:26 AM demand for more workforce housing as well as housing for families who are looking for a walking lifestyle - with a pronounced de -emphasis on the use of cars or the needless consumption of fossil fuels.One particular area of concern to me is the West Bank building recently purchased by the Clarks. We do not need another gross apartment building for students. What a great opportunity the LIMA and the School of Music present for cleaning up our residential act downtown. Wouldn't it be a huge shame to have these beautiful buildings with the incredible beauty of the activities going on both inside and outside of these buildings, denigrated by another Clark -style student ghetto, poorly monitored and poorly maintained? 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 17 Flexibility in changing zoning to meet current needs and challenges and aspirations is in order. Zoning in areas 10/29/2014 11:35 AM such as these, as opposed to zoning in residential areas further out, needs to be more flexible. Iowa City is truly and international city, and its downtown can reflect this in architecture and excitement, not "stuck in the mud" NIMBYism. 18 Planning in these areas should be in the context of the larger downtown and guided by design guidelines and 10/29/2014 9:50 AM standards that are predictable and friendly to use. Dense infill should be encouraged and prioritized to help support a sustainable approach to protecting neighborhoods to the east of Ralston Creek. Ralston Creek seems to be a natural divide, as does the Chancey Swan parking garage. The City should not deter height - development proposals that demonstrate compact development design principles support a sustainable growth i pattern by keeping our densest development within the central core where utilities and public infrastructure are already in place to handle them. Good design is good business. The City should prioritize well designed projects - which means a process should be in place to guide well designed buildings and how they interface with the sidewalk / streets. 19 Will it make us proud? Will it create a happy environment for those living and working in the developed area? 10/28/2014 1:06 PM Does it add to the downtown? 20 adjacency to UI and downtown 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 21 Land efficiency, sustainable efforts, (NOT LEED!!!) Land use, high density 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 22 Improving the downtown and increasing housing and economic development " 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 23 1. Does it provide some sort of some for everyone (market, gallery, movie theater, restaurant, etc) 2. Provide a 10/27/2014 8:27 PM majority of single-family housing (town homes, condos, etc). This downtown area is has TOO much housing for the college rental market. 24 sensitivity to current historic architecture there are a large number of neighborhoods where the style, size and 10/27/2014 2:16 PM height have not integrated well with existing streets capes (granted -some of which need updates). 25 overall benefit to iowa city; its citizens and their overall quality of life 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 26 Mix of use (residential, retail, etc) and quality of developer's past projects. 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 27 The mix of retail, housing and architectural design. 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 28 The need for more housing and commercial space. The ability to attract people downtown for a purpose and the 10/27/2014 9:42 AM positive development to improve the area. 29 promoting walkable, mixed-use neighborhood for all ages. 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 30 The track record of those submitting them, viability of them to a wide range of residents including students, and 10/26/2014 3:26 PM the degree of fit with the City development plan. 31 Will it be successful 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 32 The best interest of the City. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 33 Less required retail/commercial on ground level. This requirement has resulted in eyesore vacant space 10/24/2014 1:15 PM (particularly along the west side of Gilbert south of Burlington). There is no convenient parking and without convenient, nearby parking there will never be sustainable commercial/retail in those spaces. 34 Innovative proposals that have a WOW factor. We live in an age when people can and will move anywhere. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM Architecture and innovative spaces are necessary for our community to shine. We have some great historical properties that need to be complimented with the new. 35 a) creating more walking storefronts, such as ART GALLERIES (which would include coffee shops and bars), 10/24/2014 3:55 AM maybe a few dance clubs (both alcohol and juice bars). non-drinkers still like to go out and enjoy themselves. 36 Keeping heights down and keeping the busy, urban feel to the west of Gilbert and the south of Jefferson. Let 10/23/2014 2:55 PM these area be a buffer --no more than 4 to 6 stories. concentrate high rises around Burlington and to the south. Where there is commercial it should be like the northside Market area. 37 Most efficient (maximal) use of space, preservation of historic properties as defined by the Secretary of the 10/23/2014 1:29 PM Interior and Local Ordinance (Preservation Plan and allied documents), allowing for affordable (LMI) housing in addition to more affluent housing options, on site water retention, alternative energy (especially solar and geothermal) /energy efficiency, High sense of architectural design "ACI Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 38 The historic architecture of Iowa City is of great culture and importance to the history of our town (UNESCO world fi 10/23/2014 12:29 PM heritage ect.), new designs should emphasis this history rather than attempt more post modern skyscrapers in a town that is a historic literature site rather than massive metropolis. 39 Build an attractive 5 story building on the corner of College/ Gilbert and maintain Chauncey Park.lf the city bought 10/23!2014 9:41 AM the New Pi land a park could be built which would extend the very popular Farmers' Market. Some of the area could be used for city employees parking. 40 Civic District - "When you're alone and life is making you lonely you can always go downtown; the lights are 10/22/2014 1:10 PM much brighter there. You can forget about your troubles, forget all your cares - so go downtown." Petula Clark. I remember when the parking lot on which Plaza Towers now resides used to be a "dead zone." The corner of College and Linn was a barren area that did not encourage pedestrian activity. So much has changed for the better since Plaza Towers and the Public Library have been built in that area. That corner is vital and encourages additional development in the vicinity. The proposal to build an additional mixed-use project on the corner of Gilbert and Linn will enhance not only the immediate area but will add additional stimulus to the central business district. The residents of the downtown help create a 24-hour downtown and a built-in market for downtown retailers and entertatinment. They will also provide immediate patrons for the music and art facilities proposed in the area. Downtown housing reduces urban sprawl and minimizes the need for constructing additional and expensive infrastructure. It also improves the city's tax base while displacing very few people. Downtown housing ". promotes greater "green" living by increasing the density of the population per square foot. Additional residential housing in the Civic District also reinforces a sense of place and reduces the image of danger and risk. 41 The chance to minimize environmental impact and maximize the diversity of downtown amenities through 10/22/2014 12:41 PM encouraging higher density, mixed use development. 42 All proposals should be evaluated with the primary criteria of ENHANCING THE COMMUNITY AND 10/21/2014 10:40 AM CHARACTER OF IOWA CITY. Build with an eye to the long term. Evaluate design with a strong sense of how any given plan will contribute positively to the strengths listed above—the historic character of the area, the feel of a neighborhood that takes pride in its uniqueness and local quality of life. 43 Iowa City MUST be different than Coralville and North Liberty. Coralville and NL are "short" suburban towns with 10/21/2014 9:09 AM very low density and very poor land usage. Iowa City must do better -encouraging tall buildings with mixed use will differentiate Iowa City from surrounding cities and will be more sustainable. 44 Adding variety to the business and amenities that are in the city. The quality of building, design, construction type, ' 10/21/2014 8:38 AM and residential units. 45 connection of downtown public spaces with adjacent residential areas € 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 46 Parking should be under, not beside new development, so that we don't see neighborhoods close to downtown 10/20/2014 3:32 PM as being dominated by hot dead parking lots. We need to preserve what historic structures we have, but these areas have lost most of their history already. 47 Keep Market and Jefferson as two way streets. Do not turn Market and Jefferson into one way streets. Ease of 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Parking Create some large scale office space to attract more companies to locate offices downtown. No public or other subsidized housing. No higher density of housing. No high rises. Some of the so-called "modern" architecture staff seems to prefer will look like hell a few years down the road. Its not fun to walk in a shadow of buildings plus its is colder in the winter. Let the sun shine down on the sideswalks by keeping building heights reasonable. No TIF!!! 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q4 What types of uses (e.g. residential, commercial, cultural, institutional) are appropriate for these areas? Answered: 50 Skipped:5 # Responses Date 1 residential, commercial and cultural 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Mixed/public, private with public using only what is necessary; divest from other unnecessary property ownership 11/17/2014 10:49 AM Like the residential/older houses; mixed look: churches 3 Restaurants / Move campus are/theaters/galleries North of downtown. Eg - See Torpedo Factory Art Center in 11/17/2014 10:42 AM Alexandria, VA. 4 Civic District- residential, some commercial, culture North Clinton/Dubuque Street District- business mix 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 Mixed-use multiple -family and retail/commercial. High rises should be encouraged to enhance the downtown 11/11/2014 1:24 PM experience and make efficient and environmentally sensitive use of available space. UI uses should be minimized to the extent possible. 6 All. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 Institutional uses—daycare would be nice. A mix of uses would be great. Don't overwhelm the area. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 New home for New Pi! Low. Income. Housing. A children's toy and clothing store. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 Commercial (non -chain) restaurants, arts venues, small independent businesses. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 10 Just please not industrial. And no more condos for rich people. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 11 Residental, upscale hotel, culture, activiy 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 12 All of the above! 10/30/2014 4:44 PM 13 Building the cultural appeal even more. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 14 Mixed use housing, entertainment, commercial, and cultural facilities would be desirable.. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 15 As I;ve said, family and work -force residential, cultural and better commercial enterprises are appropriate here. 10/30/2014 3:26 AM The downtown district is driving a pretty smart and focused bus in terms of vision and taking advantage of the opportunities available for attractive and functional growth. The city's partnering effort with the downtown association is to be commended so far, and I hope this continues. The balance is delicate for this area and the sensitivity of the city is crucial to making the best of the current opportunities that may not again be so rich. 16 All kinds of buildings mentioned above. I particularly think dense residential home (condo) ownership should be in f 10/29/2014 11:35 AM the planning on a large scale. Baby boomers and others are maturing and want to be close to things in condos DOWNTOWN. To me, this means the need for vertical construction to provide people with residential "downsizing" locations that appeal. Iowa City is a bit behind the curve, and should be a leader as a University town where excitement, innovation, and forward thinking are or should be the norm. We have great opportunities here presented, as new demographics come into play --big time. 17 North Clinton/Dubuque St - residential Civic - Cultural - open space along Ralston Creek. More Commerical 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 18 Mixed uses residential and office seem most appropriate, although the City should not preclude the others if the 10/29/2014 9:50 AM site and use are deemed appropriate. 19 There is still a major lack in a band of mid-range and upper -range housing especially for young professional and 10/28/2014 2:02 PM empty nesters who do not wish to own property, this band is primarily between $800-1600 for a single tenant unit. I also believe the market would bare many more higher end housing units (particularly rentals) for professionals and young professionals above that range as well. There is a clear decline in the desire for home ownership amongst this demographic nationally, while a growing desire for downtown urban housing (see Des Moines, Omaha, Kansas City as regional examples). 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 20 Not sure what "institutional " means, but I certainly believe residential, commercial and cultural are all appropriate, 10/28/2014 1:06 PM probably in combination. People who live downtown want food, drink and things to do close at hand. 21 mix of uses i 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 22 We need housing, and property that will bring more variety to downtown as a destination. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 23 The current plans for development are very important to the future of the downtown. 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 24 Multi unit mixed buildings. Sustainable growth by promoting one structure of both residential and commercial. 10/27/2014 8:27 PM Also, common green space areas. 25 small shops ala urban neighborhoods -cheese, wine, gardening, bike, hardware, galleries, small playground/parks 10/27/2014 2:16 PM just to sit and read or watch passersby, cafes/bistros/diners, art structures that encourage inter action such as fountains... 26 1 think the chauncey would be a great addition to our downtown.. please allow the zoning change and allow this 10/27/2014 1:49 PM great mixed use urban scale project to proceed. 27 A mix of residential and retail. ": 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 28 The mix of retail, housing and architectural design, as stated above. Theaters, galleries, and similar Urban 10/27/2014 10:35 AM amenities, but we need more space for our great downtown to grow, we need housing, office space and retail space, at this time we don't have enough space for sustained growth. 29 All would be good investment. The Chauncy project as proposed has all of these advantages and should move 10/27/2014 9:42 AM forward. 30 1 mile of downtown 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 31 1 don't think the greater downtown area can or should try to compete with chain stores. Coralville cannot be 10/26/2014 3:26 PM outdone in that area. Smaller specialty stores and restaurants that are either smaller chains or unique seems the best way to draw people not only from out-of-town but across town. Iowa City has always thrived on the arts and the City should continue making that a part of their plan for the greater downtown area. 32 Retail, entertainment, commercial, cultural, and residential. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 33 North Clinton/Dubuque is a natural fit for high density student housing as the east and west boundaries are 10/24/2014 4:37 PM already defined with University housing on the west and an arterial road, Dubuque, on the east. The Civic District should be strongly considered for young professionals/non student residents that want to be downtown. The requires building up, not building out. There should be a healthy amount of commercial and cultural. The Chauncy Project would be a great fit. The Downtown District will require a strong permanent resident population to attract and maintain businesses other than bars/restaurants. 34 If any of them require convenient nearby parking, forget it. " 10/24/2014 1:15 PM 35 1 understand that high end condos make development numbers works best, yet I think there is a market need for i 10/24/2014 11:35 AM some micro units that are affordable to young professionals and any opportunity for the city to help ensure some level of affordable housing for low to middle income helps create diversity. 36 since iowa city is a "bike -friendly town"(http://bikeleague.org/content/9-top-10-national-universities-now-bfus), we 10/24/2014 3:55 AM should make more "bike lanes": mini -streets on the street, with actual street lines as one would see on streets (saw them in Campaign -Urbana and found them adorably awesome). which would mean, take away cars and encourage more bikes and pedestrians to be out; this will lead to healthy living, too! 37 For the civic district commercial/cultural/institutional seems most appropriate. Residential does not seem like a 10/23/2014 5:09 PM good use of this area. 38 Have a mix of uses—that's great! but keep the scale low. Keep the character ecclectic and preserve some of the 10/23/2014 2:55 PM history. Keep the farmers market and the park and make them more of a feature. Enhance the washington street intersection with Van Buren and the Washington Street medians. The Civic area should have an open parklike feel and should not be in the shadow (metaphorically speaking) of a 10 story (or higher) building. Encourage senior housing near the City campus since you have the library, and Robert A. Lee, and Mercy Hospital. Encourage student -type uses more toward campus. Get rid of the city parking lot or screen it and have city employees and other permit holders park at the top of the ramp. Save the tower levels of parking for library patrons and folks coming downtown to do business. Also, do something to make the Rec Center lot more attractive—it is really not pleasant. Help get the coop out of the floodplain for heaven's sake!!! and help the bike library find a home in the area. 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 39 Residential, commercial office, commercial retail, neighborhood commercial, commercial restaurant, commercial 10/23/2014 1:29 PM lodging, cultural, and institutional are all appropriate in both districts. 40 No more bars, things that enhance the community and culture of iowa city and affordable housing are what we 10/23/2014 12:29 PM currently need. Maker's center would be an excellent addition as well as entertainment that does not involve alcohol. 41 Certainly the College/ Gilbert corner can be used for general mixed housing units (not just $350-500K condos. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM Parkland along Raltson Creek would augment the attractiveness of these housing units. 42 Residential/commercial 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 43 North Clinton/Dubuque Street: There has always been a tension in the existing North Side neighborhood 10/22/2014 1:10 PM regarding the presence of multi -family housing that is predominantly occupied by students who may not have the same "investment' in the North Side. Some of this pressure could be reduced by encouraging multi -family housing at more affordable rates. This could be a combination of owner -occupied housing and rental housing. believe this would produce housing opportunities needed in the community while protecting the integrity of the North Side. Civic District: Land values in this area are expensive given their proximity to the existing CBD and the presence of City buildings. This area is not a site that can likely be developed for more moderately priced housing. At the same time, higher density housing similar to Plaza Towers would provide other housing opportunites for a population that does not want a retirement setting or that prefers the vitality of downtown (where the lights are brighter), The presence of the existing Chauncey parking ramp, the creek and the lower grade relative to land futher to the east would reduce the impact on existing residential properties. Additional recreational opportunities in the area would also enchance downtown living. 44 All, although I hope residential is part of mixed-use buildings, higher density is appropriate. 45 Mixed use is best ... include ALL of the types. 46 mixed is ONLY thoughtful option. It's time to undo the segregated uses of the 1950s and 1960s. That kind of zoning was disastrous for cities. 47 Civic District: cultural and entertainment, residential North Clinton District: Residential 48 residential/commercial. 49 Students need a place to live, and the north half of the North Clinton/Dubuque district should remain largely student housing, as it is. The cultural and institutional use of the south end is also good. As parking tightens and their buildings age, the religous institutions at the south end (aside from the two chaplaincies) will be tempted to flee to the suburbs. The flight of churches from Downtown Iowa City is not a good thing — even though each of the churches that has fled have had good reasons to do so. 50 Restaurants, theater, art museum. Commercial office space. No higher density of housing. No high rises. 3/3 10/22/2014 12:41 PM 10/21/2014 10:40 AM 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Q5 Is there the opportunity to strengthen streetscape elements? Answered: 48 Skipped:7 Yes No I SurveyMonkey 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Yes 97.92% 47 No 2.08% 1 Total 4$ fk If yes, what are these opportunities? Date 1 wider sidewalks - more walkable "freshen up" downtown with new landscape, esp. trees 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 There always are. Trees. The Civic District due to surface lots - really lacks in this. 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 Powerwash sidewalks Lighting Greenspace 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Expand streetscape views for right of way- include street designs to these areas, signs, etc. 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 There are always opportunities. I think distinctive lamps and user friendly benches are nice. Pet waterers are 11/11/2014 1:24 PM good. 6 Make areas an extension of downtown and northside marketplace where possible, including streetscape 11/3/2014 1:40 PM elements. Consider bike lanes as well. 7 Green things up. Separation between sidewalks and street. More bike facilities, better lighting—like northside. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 Better lighting. Mini parks.bike fix stations. Better way for venues to post.., digital? 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 9 Preservation of existing buildings when possible, maintaining and expanding green spaces, lowering amount of 10/30/2014 8:19 PM signage / advertising allowed. 10 Use permeable paving around trees that are planted and make the mixture of trees more diverse. Give the trees a ( 10/30/2014 8:00 PM chance: more access to water than they get now will enable more kinds to grow downtown. 11 Edible landscapes! 10/30/2014 6:40 PM 12 Development of this area will expand the downtown IC areas and could be the next "North IC" development area 10/30/2014 5:26 PM to grow our city in the directions needed. 13 1 would like to see some connections with the river areas 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 14 Green areas, set -backs from buildings. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 15 See the streetscape plan 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 16 Large, even tall buildings are fine. They can have setbacks at street level, and allow for plantings and other 10/29/2014 11:35 AM features that add to the pleasure of walking in their midst, but low profile buildings close to the center of town are the wrong and old way to be thinking. 17 Everywhere - there doesn't seem to be much in either district. 10/2912014 10:11 AM 18 Yes - way finding, lighting, sidewalks and connections to Ralston Creek - if the Creek were ever treated as an 10/29/2014 9:50 AM amenity and cleaned up and improved. 19 Green, and places for activities are always good, accompanied by public art. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 20 elements that make the street a more pleasant place for pedestrians 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 21 Update lights, signs. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 22 Show Iowa City that progress can come without sacrificing the historical. Create contemporary, modern buildings 10/27/2014 8:27 PM to blend. 23 porous pavements on sidewalks to reduce snow/ice hazards, lighting, community gardens, art, maps/wayfinding 10/27/2014 2:16 PM integrated (vs looking like it doesn't belong). 24 look at plan 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 25 "Brighter" architecture is one thing. Glass and metal have really brightened up the Ped Mall so things aren't so 10/27/2014 11:01 AM brown. Quality retail is the best way to bring people onto the sidewalks. 26 The city is in the works of improving our streetscape, which is very impressive, but we just need to expand both 10/27/2014 10:35 AM to the east and south. 27 Lighting and the new building will improve the overall area 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 28 The street art including statues, banners, benches etc. should continue -- though I suggest other yearly statues 10/26/2014 3:26 PM beyond Herky. I don't know the feasibility of transforming the non -University into useable public space that is much more attractive than currently is. But if able to be accomplished, this has always struck me as an under developed possibility from the power plant and south. 29 Modernize it and get rid of vacant locations. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 30 Should just be consistent with the downtown master plan. Walking / biking being the main elements. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 31 bike lanes, better sidewalks and more blue light emergency buttons (there's not that many, if you notice ... just a 10/24/2014 3:55 AM few here and there - i think little of eastern illinois university (small charleston, illinois) had more than i see here) 32 Intersections and medians. Take a look at van buren and washington and Iowa Avenue --this is a great area. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM Decorative brick, nice lighting, plantings, simple benches, art. Treat this are like the northside shopping area. 33 Expand amenities seen in the Central Business District and Northside Marketplace --plantings, street furniture, 10/23/2014 1:29 PM lighting. 34 current space has beautiful mural which has been there for a few years now. 10/23/2014 12:29 PM 35 The civic area is particularly unattractive. 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 36 Additional trees, plantings, flower pots, pedestrian -friendly intersections, and outdoor dining should be included in 10/22/2014 1:10 PM any proposals for these two districts. 37 More ornamental street lighting, cohesive planters and paving (more brick?), aesthetically designed 10/22/2014 12:41 PM crosswalks/alley entrances. Expanding the "literary walk" area. 38 Utilize plantings, sculptures, distinctive signage and lighting. Require all designs to have "human dimensions" 10/21/2014 10:40 AM such as porches, street side entrances, sidewalks, landscaping, etc. Minimize the prominence of parking by putting it in back of buildings or requiring landscaping that softens the effect of multiple cars (a good example of the latter is the parking lot of Mercy Hospital's Emergency entrance along Gilbert Street... care was taken to create a buffer of plantings, a mini park with benches and planters). i 39 I'd like to see more covered walkways next to buildings. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 40 High quality building design and materials, 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 41 it fine as is. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts 42 Parking -lot views aren't attractive. Putting parking under new structures would be very wise. We have already begun this in (or near) both districts, and it works. 43 Keep the pavements clean and updated. Keep Jefferson and Market as two-way streets. Lights and holiday decorations encourage people to get in a buying spirit. Flowers in the spring and summer. 3/3 SurveyMonkey 10/20/2014 3:32 PM i 10/20/2014 2:02 PM Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Is there the opportunity to strengthen pedestrian and bicycle amenities? Answered: 47 Skipped:8 SurveyMonkey 1/3 44 3 47 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Yes 93.62% No 6.38% Total # If yes, what are these opportunities? Date 1 More bike parking 11/17/2014 10:50 AM 2 Bicycle parking in Civic District. Easily access to drive on Dubuque Street " 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 3 If it doesn't interfere with cars 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 4 Continue streetscape plans to keep continuous look 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 5 More bike racks. More enforcement of ordinances prohibiting bike riding on sidewalks in and around the ped mall 1 11/11/2014 1:24 PM (I realize that's not in these districts). 6 Widen sidewalks, decorative or brick paving, more bike lanes. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 7 More bike racks. Covered racks. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 8 Better / more bike lanes and bicycle parking, a covered bicycle parking area. More clearly marked cross walks. 10/30/2014 8:19 PM 9 More and better racks for bicycles and motor bikes. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 10 Bike lanes and parking. Bike service stations. Even just having a full-service grocery store in the walkable- 10/30/2014 4:44 PM bikeable part of town is an important element in empowering bicyclists and pedestrians. Reduce car traffic wherever possible to slow down traffic and make it safer. 11 Especially more and better bikeways, close -in bike parking, rapid pedestrian -friendly transportation to the hospital 10/30/2014 1:03 PM and across the river, perhaps to places like the center of Coralville (maybe using the river as a rapid linkage.) ALSO, A GOOD BIKEWAY EXCLUSIVELY FOR BIKES THAT RUNS FROM EAST OF DOWNTOWN, SHIFTING TO BURLINGTON STREET, ACROSS THE RIVER, THROUGH THE HOSPITAL/SPORTS CAMPUS ON MELROSE (INTO UHEIGHTS AND BEYOND TO C-VILLE). 12 Broader sidewalks. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM 13 See streetscape plan - 10/30/2014 3:26 AM 1/3 44 3 47 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 14 1 think the streetscape mentioned above will help with pedestrians, but I'm not well versed on how to improve 10/29/2014 11:35 AM bicycling needs. 15 This can always be done. 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 16 More bike lanes out of downtown and also would love to see some some bike locker opportunities, either on the 10/28/2014 2:02 PM streetscape or in the parking garage for downtown residents to store bikes downtown long term 17 safe and attractive paths and walkways connected to the country are huge 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 18 streetscape elements 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 19 More bike friendly roads. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 20 intermodal might decrease cars traffic -widen existing roads and/or sidewalks as has been done north of i80 on 10/27/2014 2:16 PM dubuque street. 21 look at plan 10/27/2014 1:49 PM i 22 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 23 bike lanes, boulevards, 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 24 Connect this area to the rest of downtown 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 25 Smart Growth for Iowa City. Make it a place where people want to Live and Work and be proud to say you live in 10/26/2014 4:55 PM Iowa City. 26 Though possibly an odd way of responding, it amazes me that bicycles are not more closely regulated downtown. ' 10/26/2014 3:26 PM This is a hazard to those on bikes too. Stop signs are usually not obeys, many go the wrong way on busy streets, !; and dash from riding on the street to sidewalks. I've been close to hit many times. For bikes and pedestrians and motorists to get along well safety laws should be a priority as the were, I think, until the current police chief. 27 Make it bicycle friend with wide sidewalks and a transition on on street paths. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 28 BIKE LANES! (http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/index.cfm) - iowa should be on this map! sample bike lane: 10/24/2014 3:55 AM http://www.nyc.gov/html/doVimages/bicyclists/ppw_crossing.jpg - something more detailed, 29 More bike parking (some covered would be nice). How about some place to sit or find cover while you are waiting 10/23/2014 2:55 PM for the bus. 30 A road diet and ample bike parking, a better way to limit bike storage in highly used areas (perhaps by requiring 10/23/2014 1:29 PM residential bike parking), wide radius "bump outs" at intersections, zebra crossings, etc. 31 accessible bike lanes 10/23/2014 12:29 PM i 32 People living in these "affordable units" and working downtown could do without automobiles, hence advocating 10/23/2014 9:41 AM bicycles and pedestrians 33 Improve sidewalks and add bike lanes 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 34 It would be great to minimize the need for addtional cars in these two districts by including additional pedestrian 10/22/2014 1:10 PM and bicycle amenities. These amenities would enhance the people -oriented nature of the districts and encourage people to enjoy the areas without concern for increased traffic. 35 Designated bike lanes (more than "sharrows") wherever space allows. Prettier crosswalks (again, paving comes 10/22/2014 12:41 PM to mind - the area at Iowa Ave. and Linn Street is a nice example. 36 Create bicycle paths, pull out lanes for buses, and add benches, decorative walkways/sidewalks with planters, 1 10/21/2014 10:40 AM etc see the suggestions for strenthening streetscapes above. 37 wider sidewalks, bike racks, seating 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 38 Its fine as is 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 39 These areas are already very walkable and bikeable, but in the Civic District, biking north -south is largely 10/20/2014 3:32 PM confined to Gilbert, one of the most bicycle unfriendly streets in town (North Clinton serves as a way for cyclists to dodge the heavier traffic on Dubuque, in contrast). It would be nice if there was an easy way, coming north on Gilbert, to dodge east onto Van Buren, perhaps following the creek (on the diagonal). The barriers to this are mostly south of the Civic District. 2/3 W Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey _._....... ...... _..... . ._.. 40 Don't use sharrows. They are horrid. I prefer wider sidewalks. Remember, a lot of people will continue to use 10/20/2014 2:02 PM cars. If you want people to shop and buy lots of stuff, don't discourage the use of cars. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Q7 In the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District, is there the opportunity to increase residential density (the number of dwelling units in a given area)? Answered: 40 Skipped: 15 Yes No SurveyMonkey 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Yes 82.50% 33 No 17.50% 7 Total 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 If yes, what are these opportunities? Date Perhaps be careful of obscurity gateway to downtown. I like the feeling of residential mix now - at least the 11/17/2014 10:49 AM properties that are kept neatly. E Encourage development of high-rise apartments/condos. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM Redevelop non -historic buildings into taller, larger apartment/condo buildings. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM Please no more new apartment buildings. Keep the older houses. Offer help for upkeep, or buy out the current 10/30/2014 8:00 PM owners, remodel and repair if necessary, and then sell them to families. Upscale housing is needed for professionals outside of the College attendees. Will increase economy and build a 10/30/2014 5:26 PM better mix of individuals into Iowa City living. BUT NOT FOR MORE STUDENT HOUSING. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM Isn't there enough saturation already? 10/30/2014 3:26 AM Verticality is a must as part of the building mix, and I think flexibility in zoning variances are in order to 10/29/2014 11:35 AM accommodate more density by going up. The downtown can be an even more exciting landscape with additional "high-rises." For other kinds of historic low profile landscapes and neighborhoods, people need only to journey out from the center of the city to areas where this character will inevitably (and appropriately) be maintained and cherished. (Obviously there are some downtown properties of historical significance that need to be preserved, E and I see this happening with the Englert, the MidWestOne building, and likely the Jefferson Hotel.) For the future, verticality is a must. The downtown can be an exciting landscape with additional high-rises. For other kinds of historic low profile landscapes and neighborhoods, people need only to journey out from the center of the 1 city to areas where this character will inevitably (and appropriately) be maintained and cherished. 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 9 This already has high density in it and across from it with the dorms. This isn't going to be single family homes. 10/29/2014 10:11 AM Students want to live close to campus - add density here, relieves pressure from other neighborhoods where single families live (or could live). 10 This area would be well suited for Mixed Use Residential - density is critical to ensuring an efficient use of the 10/29/2014 9:50 AM City's infrastructure already in place and to support the larger Downtown commercial base. Housing for both students and young professionals should be considered. 11 Yes, but with less college student housing and more units aimed at more permanent residents. Love the 10/28/2014 2:02 PM UniverCity program, that's a great idea. More of that would be so great! 12 1 feel it is essential to build up, not out 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 13 taller buildings 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 14 Increase vertical density. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 15 Through condo buildings AND town home units (5 plex) 10/27/2014 8:27 PM 16 re -zone to accomodate 4-6 story construction with a sensitivity to current aesthetic. 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 17 Building some higher buildings will increase density. This will hopefully add people without adding to parking i 10/27/2014 11:01 AM issues. 18 not sure, it seems like that's pretty dense, but I'm not sure of numbers. 10/27/2014 10:35 AM 19 The Chauncy project will provide much needed housing. 1 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 20 The current development plan for the old bus station parcel and I would say the Hieronymous property on Clinton 10/26/2014 3:26 PM street but am not sure the University is not planning to develop it. 21 High-end housing is needed to attract the people to the downtown so it can thrive. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 22 Go up. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 23 If I were king for a day, I would find clusters of old houses that are not in good repair nor have historical value and 10/24/2014 11:35 AM work to raze and create townhouse projects which could keep ownership costs down but create small niches for families among the college residents to help reshape neighborhoods. Mann is a critical piece of the puzzle, this area needs a school which attracts young families. I support the notion of taking down the old school, building a new learning environment on the city park property and then putting a new park on the old footprint of the Mann school. 24 it is already too crowded. the empty spaces, you will need to put storefronts (corner shop groceries like John's, 10/24/2014 3:55 AM art galleries, coffee shops, bars and dance clubs). if you want more housing, go to the south end: benton and riverside - make highrise apartmentsl start building UP and create a skyline in iowa cityl :) 25 1 think the areas close to campus are good for student housing. But preserve historic buildings. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM 26 Find a way to require surface parking be developed to a higher use so that residential units would be built. An 10/23/2014 1:29 PM ordinance setting the City as the only entity allowed to provide parking for hire. Continue to allow demolition of non -historic buildings through increased density in zoning. Conduct a historic property identification and evaluation inventory survey in the two districts as directed by Certified Local Government requirements. 27 If so, only by AFFORDABLE housing, Iowa City lacks affordable housing for young professionals, which is why 10/23/2014 12:29 PM many entering the job market are forced elsewhere. we have a surplus of 5+ bedroom houses, and single bedroom apartments well over 1000/mo. Where is affordable housing for people who work at the public library, university or other low paying but highly important jobs. Consider how many people live below the poverty level, a E student can't work enough hours to afford rent alone. i 28 More efficient buildings, ie commercial 1 st floor residential upper floors 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 29 Please refer to my response to Question No. 4. In addition, increasing residential density in this District would 10/22/2014 1:10 PM provide more of an 24-hour area that would encourage commercial development; it would also reduce pressure in the North Side to convert homes into multi -family housing or to remove existing structures for multi -family housing. 30 Yes! Taller buildings I would think is the most efficient and common-sense way to accomplish this. 10/22!2014 12:41 PM 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 31 1 would be very careful about this. This area has a strong mix already of historic houses and apartment buildings. 10/2112014 10:40 AM Greater density is not something I would encourage, or at least I would be VERY careful about so as not to disrupt the character of this area as an important transition zone between residential/neighborhood and the downtown/university district. 32 Taller, more dense buildings. But you first need to find a land owner who wants to do this and help make it j 10/21/2014 8:38 AM financially possible. 33 built up not out. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 34 Mostly at the north end, replacing old rooming houses and small frats with buildings more akin to the newer 10/20/2014 3:32 PM building on the southwest corner of Daverport and Dubuque. This fills a quarter block with parking underneath. It's rather characterless, but still, an effective use of space. 35 Do NOT increase the density of housing! 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts Answer Choices Yes No Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Gib In the Civic District, are there opportunities to increase mixed-use facilities? (Mixed-use development blends a combination of residential, commercial, cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated, and that provides pedestrian connections.) Answered: 43 Skipped: 12 Yes No SurveyMonkey 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Responses 95.35% 4.65% 41 2 43 If yes, what are these opportunities? Date Surface parking lot south of the parking garage. Mixed use - high density residential 11/17/2014 10:49 AM Not until all downtown storefronts have businesses (and some look like bad space). 11/17/2014 10:42 AM Get going on The Chauncey. That's the perfect example of how to help the downtown footprint step east across 11/11/2014 1:24 PM Gilbert Street. i Redevelop non -historic buildings into taller, lager mixed-use apartmenUcondo buildings, partially fill in surface 11/3/2014 1:40 PM parking lots with buildings that have underground parking, leave small amount of surface parking if needed. Make it an extension of downtown proper. Co-op. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM Please NO industrial stuff. More housing for middle income elderly people downtown: giving up driving but still 10/30/2014 8:00 PM being able to easily access the ICPL, restaurants, Credit Union, groceries (Co-op, Bread Garden) and the UIHC and Dental College via bus would be very attractive to a lot of people. And dilute the student and oligarchy population that is there. Office space, variety of housing accommodations, entertainment facilities. 10/30/2014 9:19 AM Yes. Innovative and appropriate partnerships are desirable - the Plaza Towers, 201 @Park, the new UIMA 10/30/2014 3:26 AM project are excellent examples! 1/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 9 I'm in favor of doing this anywhere it becomes possible downtown, especially in these areas of current concern, 10/29/2014 11:35 AM of course. The focus in mixed use (based on dramatic demographic changes coming) should be on incorporating ! condominiums for people to buy as they downsize and want to spend their later years close to Iowa City's best offerings. (The same is true of young professionals who want to live close in while building up equity in property, but walking -distance close to the amazing cultural scene that we have here.) 10 Yes -see comments above. ? 10/29/2014 9:50 AM 11 More buildings like plaza tower that are mixed used, appeal to mixed generations, provide additional amenities 10/28/2014 2:02 PM like hotels, grocery, entertainment, etc give Iowa City a metropolitan feel that is incredibly appealing to the type of urban population that we want more of downtown. 12 1 think the Chauncey is a perfect opportunity, blending residential, cultural and commercial. And it goes up, not 10/28/2014 1:06 PM out. It expands the mix downtown and brings a new excitement to the city. 13 taller mixed use buildings 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 14 Any development in this area should consider mixed use. Make the living exciting by bring a reason to live and 10/27/2014 9:33 PM visit these units by interesting other parts of the mixed use areas. 15 The current plans for improving this area should be approved. 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 16 The Chauncey. Moen has shown the success of plaza towers and park 201. Those projects and their successes 10/27/2014 8:27 PM speak for themselves. Plaza towers has become the hub for downtown activity. 17 diy shops to enhance the neighborhood connections, miniature versions of shops for bikes, cars, gardening, beer 10/27/2014 2:16 PM making so that it almost has a maker space feel encouraging the neighborhoods to seek out advice and how to for their own property(s). 18 chauncey plan allows of that 10/27/2014 1:49 PM 19 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 20 1 was under the assumption that we were moving forward to do that, which is exciting, I don't think those areas 10/27/2014 10:35 AM are very aesthetically pleasing as the planned developments. It would be a big improvement to have The Chauncey and New Pi developments done and help bring more people downtown, both as residents and shoppers. 21 The proposed Chauncey has all of this 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 22 As is occurring, buildings with businesses and offices on the ground floor and living spaces above. 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 23 The Chauncy please. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 24 It seems like this is being done with the new UI led properties. 10/24/2014 11:35 AM 25 with fraternities/sororities, religious groups and the library, there are plenty of volunteers to make things happen! 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 26 Sure, but don't bring the height of downtown across Gilbert St. Clean up the old bus station / Jon Wilson area but '. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM don't erect a building that overwhelms the park, the farmers market, and the civic uses. Keep it low. Provide opportunities for seniors and families who are attracted the the library, Robert Lee, and farmers market and coop. Leave the high-rises to River Crossing. No high-rises on Iowa Ave, either. Old Cap should be the focal point, not a ' glass and steel box. 27 Proceed with the Chauncey as designed and approved. Allow air rights to private housing and commercial 10/23/2014 1:29 PM properties over City owned surface parking. Industrial zoning probably is out of place as is intensive commercial uses. 28 cultural --walking paths. residential --affordable housing units. 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 29 More efficient buildings, ie commercial 1st floor residential upper floors 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 30 Absolutely. The Gilbert/College site is exactly where additional housing could be placed to further provide readily 10/22!2014 1:10 PM available residents to support the CBD and the proposed Clinton/Dubuque District. I suspect the impact that Plaza Towers and the Library had on Linn Street would also enhance the Gilbert Street area. 31 Planned developments like the proposals for College/Gilbert corner with bowling/movie theater, gallery, offices, i 10/22/2014 12:41 PM cafe, and residential. Can we get something like that in more locations? Is this being considered for the public parking lot area next to Bluebird Cafe/Riverside Theater? 2/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 32 Your statement says it well ... the combination integrates a variety of uses and provides pedestrian connections. 10/21/2014 10:40 AM This is vital to the success of a downtown. 33 complete the developer agreement for the Chauncey building ASAP and get is started. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 34 develop more mixed-use buildings at larger scale. less small scale buildings with level one commercial and two 10/21/2014 8:17 AM levels of student housing. 35 This is less clear, but proposals for short towers with apartments above commercial space make sense. The one 10/20/2014 3:32 PM proposal that has come and gone would have been an eyesore, but the basic idea is sound. 36 You could consider art studio/sales space below residences or commercial office space. Only make the space 10/20/2014 2:02 PM available to those who also sell their work. Encourage companies like Meta Communications to locate downtown. 3/3 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q9 In the Civic District, how can the Ralston Creek corridor be enhanced? Answered: 39 Skipped: 16 # Responses Date 1 Would be nice to feel like the natural area was more accessible - very overgrown - riprap is unattractive - could 11/17/2014 10:49 AM be address 2 Clean Creek 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Move faster to develop Chauncy project 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 Clean up the creek. Maybe provide more walking/biking paths along the creek. 11/11/2014 1:24 PM 5 Have a small green belt and trails follow the creek, occasional pocket park, perhaps. 11/3/2014 1:40 PM 6 More views of creek. Seating. Native plants. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 7 New pi! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 More maintenance on creek sides, benches, areas for people to relax. New Pi it's such an essential part of 10/30/2014 8:19 PM downtown, but better / safe pedestrian and vehicle traffic flow needs to be implemented in their lot and alley areas. 9 Clean it up every spring. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 10 Turn it into green space, flood -proof event space, or parking. Move New Pi and other businesses away from it 10/30/2014 4:44 PM and reduce the impact of flooding. 11 PRESERVING THE HISTORICAL FEEL RATHER THAN PLOWING IT OVER 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 12 Looks difficult to me --the creek there seems to be under existing structures for the most part. If a new structure 10/29/2014 11:35 AM sometime is put in place in this area that goes above the creek perhaps the structure can be elevated above the flood area, and then have people -friendly viewing areas of the stream on the creek level. 13 Give it room to breath - allow trails along it. Add some greenspace 10/29/2014 10:11 AM 14 It can be opened up to serve as an amenity to the public, allowing for paths alongside for the public and to 10/29/2014 9:50 AM restore it to it's natural state. l 15 Would love to see a walking path that runs the length, I creek is kinda hidden. 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 16 Beautify it with plantings, stone walls and footbridges. Keep it clean. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 17 open it up; bike trail along it 10/28/2014 8:45 AM 18 Clean it up and enhance it. Celebrate the creek! 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 19 I 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 20 Provide more drainage and flood mitigation systems. 10/27/2014 8:27 PM 21 river/creek-bike/walk trails, mini amphitheater/stage where existing new pi is located, 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 22 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 23 Walk ability, lighting, aesthetically pleasing buildings with multiple uses 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 24 1 am not sure. 10/26/2014 3:26 PM i 25 More development of recreation areas and removal of old structures. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 26 Cleared with a trail would be great. 10/24/2014 4:37 PM 27 what is "ralston creek"? 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 1/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 28 Clean it up. Art, and seating along the area between parking ramp and creek. Also it would be nice to have 10/23/2014 2:55 PM information about the creek—maybe a map or something. The Robert Lee parking lot needs some help. 29 Enhancement would be tricky and would require the cooperation of private land owners. However, an opportunity " 10/23/2014 1:29 PM exists to swap land with the New Pioneer Coop to provide air rights over city -owned parking and to construct downtown park amenities in place of the current store location. 30 See above 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 31 Clean up the creek 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 32 Accommodations should be made to enhance the riverbanks, provide picnic facilities and shelters and 10/22/2014 1:10 PM bike/pedestrian paths. 33 Not sure what's needed for the waterway to be protected. The walled area near the Co-op seems less than ideal ( 10/22/2014 12:41 PM and has caused flooding concerns in the past. Perhaps a larger culvert under Washington street, with nicely t designed bridge aspects? A flood wall with a mural? A mini skate park that doubles as spillway for the creek? 34 1 haven't thought about this much, but I would strongly encourage thoughtful consideration of this issue. Take 10/21/2014 10:40 AM care to preserve (or recreate) as much of the natural environment as possible, but also make the creek a community asset ... think "a natural park running through town." 35 Green space and park space. When the Coop Moves, that space should be a park/green space/flood plain. 10/21/2014 9:09 AM 36 clear out the weed trees 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 37 connect mixed-use with downtown. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 38 Turning the creek into a greenbelt instead of a ditch would be nice, but this is a pie in the sky idea that would 10/20/2014 3:32 PM involve pulling development back half a block from the creek and removing a century of fill (some probably toxic) from the land in question. The net result would significantly lower the upstream flash flood risk, and could pay off in the very long run, but in the short run, it would cost money we don't have. 39 Clean it up periodically. 10/20/2014 2:02 PM 2/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q10 What other factors should the City consider? Answered: 37 Skipped: 18 # Responses Date 1 Get more people living close to downtown - consider mixed use that includes high density residential - build up in 11/17/2014 10:49 AM civic district 2 Families still need vehicles 11/17/2014 10:42 AM 3 Continue improvements- those that don't keep business updated and clean 11/17/2014 9:20 AM 4 1) How can the City protect against erosion of tax base (i.e., keep more property from becoming UI owned). 2) 11/11/2014 1:24 PM How can the City best attract young professionals and empty -nesters - through housing, office space, and entertainment opportunities. 5 Expand downtown. Increase residential density, particularly aimed more toward young workforce, working -aged 11/3/2014 1:40 PM professional couples in mind. Probably more student apartments as well, but the professional age group is still currently the most underserved. Keep in mind the shockingly low vacancy rate of apartments/condos within a 1 mile radius of the center of downtown and encourage as much building for greater density as possible while r protecting historic character where feasible. 6 Keep TIF to a minimum. If you have to clean stuff up, fine. But realize if you TIF something in one place you eat 10/31/2014 8:54 AM into market on other properties. Why do offices need so much money to go downtown? You shouldn't have to pay to finish their space and provide free parking. 7 Add sound fixtures to the permanent stage! Thus it's an ongoing expense for artists. 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 8 Not spoiling the atmosphere of the town that we have now. It's not broken, so don't try to fix it. 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 9 1 view the Chauncy project as the most comprehensive and inclusive project presented. Moen Mgmt continues to 10/30/2014 5:26 PM remain forward thinking in ways that create a unique opportunity for the lifestyles of Iowa City residents and guests. Their other building projects brought in high end residents which enabled the retail market to change in downtown IC. Upscale restaurant needs, activity choices are not as focused on college acivities. We need to continue to growth of this level of building to build and expand on the college base. 10 Obviously the development south of Burlington should be considered over the next thirty years. 10/30/2014 1:03 PM 11 The civic mindedness of the developers' proposals, based on their previous work in the City and their presence in ': 10/30/2014 9:19 AM the City. 12 1 applaud the City Council and City planners for not allowing themselves to be trapped in old zoning boxes in 10/29/2014 11:35 AM public high -use areas. 13 A permanent home that's specific to the Farmer's Market - maybe something that allows for a few year-round 10/29/2014 10:11 AM farmer's market shops. 14 Encouraging energy efficiency within buildings is important. But it isn't as important as encouraging the densest 10/29/2014 9:50 AM projects (and efficient buildings) in the City center, which in the end, keep population and employment bases centralized to utilize infrastructure already in place, reduce carbon emissions from cars, and encourage a healthy citizen base in walkable communities. 15 Lots of emphasis on pedestrians and safe and enjoyable movement of walkers and bikers. 10/28/2014 1:06 PM 16 Don't be afraid of higher density. Give citizens more reasons to live downtown. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 17 inter modal, move to electric light rail, bus or large vans 10/27/2014 2:16 PM 18 NA 10/27/2014 11:01 AM 19 I think the City has done a great job of looking forward, gathering great proposals and developing our core to 10/27/2014 10:35 AM strengthen our whole community. 20 Please move the Chauncey forward it is long overdue and will be a great addition to downtown. 10/27/2014 9:42 AM 1/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 21 Do you aspire to help create places people LOVE? i 10/26/2014 4:55 PM 22 Congruency between new buildings themselves and the architectural history remaining in the area. 10/26/2014 3:26 PM 23 Madison WI, they did a nice job. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 24 Increasing the commercial tax base in order to provide some top notch social services and increase the borders 10/24/2014 4:37 PM of the SSMID. 25 Affordable housing, unique housing stock and blending different economic classes together should be the overall 10/24/2014 11:35 AM goal. The more people live proximate to downtown the more vibrant it can be. People want to get away from the suburban sprawl, car intensive model. If people can afford to live in a manner where they can work, educate, shop and play without a car, this community can really thrive. 26 ART GALLERIES! and integrating the college kids with the "townies". 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 27 Keep it funky and local and eclectic. Keep it local. Green it up. 10/23/2014 2:55 PM 28 The City should take into account that it has provided TIFs to competitors to the New Pioneer Coop and chosen 10/23/2014 1:29 PM against including them in recent development. The complaints of a transition zone, to me, are a moot point as there are lower intensity areas already in place due to current zoning in the blocks separating the College Green neighborhood and the Civic District and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District and the Northside Neighborhood. 29 affordable housing, increasing cultural and non-alcoholic entertainment and value, emphasis on history of Iowa 10/23/2014 12:29 PM city and fame as literature UNESCO site. 30 The skyline tapering from the 12 and 14 story buildings in the heart of downtown to the 2 story houses in the Van 10/23/2014 9:41 AM Buren -Dodge Street area. The present commitment of the city for a 15-20 story building on the College/ Gilbert site is not acceptable. 31 The civic district often feels unsafe. 10/23/2014 12:12 AM 32 Don't be afraid of higher density and diversity of uses. To the extent the City can facilitate for-profit development, " 10/22/2014 12:41 PM mixed use should be the key -- not more apartment buildings. 33 Iowa City has made some mistakes in its town planning/urban development, but it is strong when it listens to the 10/21/2014 10:40 AM residents of a given area. Give everyone a chance for input (as you're doing here --bravo!!!), use balanced and informed judgement in writing guidelines, making plans, etc. give the residents ample opportunity for review and input, and LISTEN to them, making adjustments as necessary. Put COMMUNITY AND CHARACTER first! 34 That small vocal segments of the public really do not know what they are talking about. 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 35 density, cost. 10/21/2014 8:17 AM 36 I've run out of ideas. 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 37 City planners should listen to all points of view, not just those people who agree with the planners' points of view. ,' 10/20/2014 2:02 PM When the planners solicit input, it too often appears their materials are designed to seek a predetermined response. Some critical self reflection of success and failures by city staff is also important. 2/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey Q11 Other comments Answered: 29 Skipped: 26 # Responses _ Date 1 Really like the Chauncey plans - do more like that in civic district to bring people to urban core 11/17/2014 10:49 AM 2 1 think things are generally on the right track. I'm 51 and have been in Iowa City and working downtown about 25 ! 11/11/2014 1:24 PM years. The movement of what I'd call 'the downtown' south across Burlington is finally taking shape, and it's going to be awesome. I think if I eat right and make it to the gym a bit more, I'll live long enough to see if the requirement that various residential buildings downtown have retail space on the ground floor makes sense. I will '? say that many, many of those required storefronts are empty or turn over. A lot. BUT, consistent with requiring property owners now to set those spaces aside for the time when the market demands them, if the City encourages more density in development downtown - high-rises, multi -use facilities, etc. - the effort will complement that prior planning. Thanks for the opportunity. 3 More tall buildings because they are the most efficient use of space in addition to being the most environmentally ' 11/3/2014 1:40 PM friendly. Building "up" instead of "out" not only adds vibrancy but is also the more environmentally -sustainable practice. 4 Keep it green. Open. Don't make it all hardscape. Buildings should be no taller than 5-6 stories. 10/31/2014 8:54 AM 5 Please consider easing busking restrictions. It's sucked the soul out of town. Weird is ok! 10/30/2014 8:23 PM 6 Permeable paving!! 10/30/2014 8:00 PM 7 Please include New Pioneer Coop in the plans! They and the Iowa City Farmers Market have been the brightest 10/30/2014 6:40 PM shining stars in Iowa City for a long time! 8 We are truely a blue zone community and more zoning to create well rounded urban living is essential. 10/30/2014 5:26 PM 9 Please please please make sure that New Pioneer Co-op is included in long range planning for the downtown " 10/30/2014 4:58 PM area! It is essential to the spirit of Iowa City as an independent minded community. 10 Iowa City is increasingly a magnet both for retirees and for young professionals anxious to avoid the commuting 10/30/2014 9:19 AM life. Population movement from the suburbs back into cities is a nationwide phenomenon to which Iowa City should be hospitable. As a university town is it is ideally placed to accommodate this demographic shift which, among other benefits, reduces the carbon footprint of the population by reducing the need for automobile transportation. 11 A new demographic day is coming, and more and more people (beyond the ever-present burgeoning hoard of UI 10/29/2014 11:35 AM student renters) will want to take up residence as close to the center of town as possible. At present almost all habitable space other than Plaza Towers and a few other condos are available. Our city continues to be listed as one of the top 10 places in the U.S. in which to retire/reside because of our amenities. But close to the center of the action, where? 12 The City should approve the Chauncey and New Pi proposals in the civic district area. They are great projects 10/29/2014 9:50 AM that add to the commercial core's viability. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 13 If I can provide any more feedback, I'd love to help. Andy Stoll, downtown resident andy@stoll.net 10/28/2014 2:02 PM 14 Keep the growth going. There are some exciting developments happening in Iowa City. See them through. 10/27/2014 9:33 PM 15 Keep us moving forward on downtown development! 10/27/2014 9:04 PM 16 small shops and cafes exist throughout europe that encourage strolling, looking at a city view watching people 10/27/2014 2:16 PM play chess/checkers or botche ball (boule) sip on a glass of wine or a cup of coffee in the afternoon promoting interactive play and conversation(s) among multiple ethnicities, perspectives, culture... idyllic but not accomplished unless tried. 1/2 Comprehensive Plan Update - Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts SurveyMonkey 17 1 have run RAYGUN on the Ped Mall for the last 4 years, and with stores in Des Moines and Kansas City, we've 10/27/2014 11:01 AM been able to compare those 3 markets. Iowa City is the weakest market, and I think the crux of that is trying to create a downtown that better balances students and residents. Too many students scare off the residents, and the residents usually spend more money. However, Iowa City wouldn't be the city it is without the university. Adding a more "grown up" side of downtown — taller buildings, on -street -retail, etc -- may be a good way to advance downtown beyond just the Ped Mall. 18 The vocal minority that opposes all development does not speak off all of us and slows down the progress the 10/27/2014 9:42 AM city is making. 19 Chop. Chop.Keep this going and get it done. 10/26/2014 3:14 PM 20 again, start building UP and proactively design a skyline for Iowa City's hilly landscape. 10/24/2014 3:55 AM 21 It was a shame that you didn't ask the public for input before the chancey debacle. That was bad planning. Also, 10/23/2014 2:55 PM it would have been nice to have more notice of the meeting. And you don't even have a link on your home page. 22 It is good these areas are being looked at and incorporated into the comprehensive plan. 10/23/2014 1:29 PM 23 Will the City Council actually pay any attention to this new plan? 10/23/2014 9:41 AM 24 Thank you for the chance to weigh in on this areal It was good to look at what's there now and see the potential 10/22/2014 12:41 PM for really positive improvement for some denser development with diverse offerings, not just bars or multi -family. 25 Thanks for the opportunity to offer my thoughtsM I care deeply about this subject and the areas in question. Many !, 10/21/2014 10:40 AM people do ... listen to them. 26 Development money is scarce and Iowa City must compete with many other towns and cities for that money. It's 10/21/2014 9:09 AM important that Iowa City captures development dollars and use them rather than let them "leak" to other communities. 27 This is a very odd survey. It seems more like an opportunity to write an opinion piece, not a survey, 10/21/2014 8:38 AM 28 ditto 10/20/2014 3:32 PM 29 There are other important areas of Iowa City besides the downtown and surrounding areas. Please keep it 10/20/2014 2:02 PM convenient for people to travel across town and to commute into Iowa City. If you make traffic too slow, people won't want to cross town much or companies will locate businesses outside of Iowa City where it is easier to get to. 2/2 October 31, 2014 N O Mayor and City Council -- �- c City of Iowa City ` o 410 E. Washington Street >::; "i — Iowa City, Iowa 52240 � ca r" -v M Mayor and City Council Members, . = Thank you for inviting the community to comment on the Civic and North Clinton/Dubugde Street Districts and the comprehensive plan vision for these areas. As you know, the Iowa City Downtown District is a non-profit entity with a mission to champion the Downtown District as a progressive, healthy, and culturally vibrant urban center of the region. The ICDD Board of Directors has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for these areas and proposed development plans within the Civic District. We are unanimous in our support of Increased mixed-use density in both the Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts. New, dense infill development that brings additional residents, employees and exciting entertainment and cultural uses like bowling, cinema space, and other amenities to our near -in environments is a win for our commercial core. Similar to the newly selected site for the University of Iowa Museum of Art and the Voxman School of Music underway, the Chauncey and New Pi developments will support our existing businesses with an influx of new people that will help keep the Downtown and Northside Neighborhood businesses economically viable. The ICDD also believes in a "2% Solution" for supporting a vibrant downtown (Bruce Katz, Brookings Institute.) This entails providing opportunities for 2% of our community's population to live in our City core. New developments that include a mix of housing units tailored towards a mix of incomes and household types will help us achieve this goal. The ICDD is growing in a positive direction and the "natural" boundaries of Downtown are evolving. Community members are already calling areas to the east of our boundary to Ralston Creek and along the Burlington Street Corridor "Downtown." We believe that accommodating equally dense developments in these close -in areas is a sustainable and efficient approach to growth that best utilizes public infrastructure already in place. Thank you very much for your hard work, patience, and vision for the sustainable growth of Iowa City. Sincerely, '�44— eZ --re Nancy Bird Executive Director Iowa City Downtown District Iowa City Downtown District 14 % S. Clinton Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 319-354-0863 John Yapp From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 8:03 AM To: Tom Markus; Doug Boothroy; John Yapp Subject: FW: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Fyi From: Kieft, David W [mailto:david-kieft@uiowa.edu] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 7:52 AM To: 'Marc Moen' Cc: Jeff Davidson; Geoff Fruin Subject: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Marc: University of Iowa leadership has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for the "civic district" and specifically the two proposed development projects, The Chauncy and New Pi's new location. The University is supportive of both projects. Both will bring additional housing and retail opportunities to downtown and the University area, which is something the University supports; but more importantly, the University is in favor of the programmatic aspects of The Chauncy. The bowling alley and expanded location for Film Scene are both unique venues which will serve UI students, faculty and staff. They also contribute to the marketability of the University and Iowa City. These are the types of spaces other developers have not proposed in the many recent development projects that have come before the City. I have copied City leadership on this email. David David W. Kieft University Business Manager & Director of Real Estate University of Iowa 301 University Services Building (USB) Iowa City, IA 52242-5500 John Yapp From: mark@shopactiveendeavors.com Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:13 AM Subject: CB -10 Zoning Dear Council Member, We are writing you to express our support of the expansion of the municipal campus area to CB -10 zoning. Iowa City is in dire need of expanding and further developing its downtown area. We believe the Chauncey and New Pi projects are well thought out and essential for further growth. If we are to continue developing a vibrant, energetic, and dynamic urban feel for our downtown we need projects such as these. We have witnessed a terrific rebirth and resurgence of our unique downtown in the past few years and these developments will help us continue to grow and create a place where our citizens can live, work, and play... the place we all want Iowa City to be. Thank you for your vision and perseverance through this difficult process. Best regards, Mark Weaver & Eadie Fawcett Weaver Mark R Weaver President Active Endeavors -Iowa City 319-337-9444 office 319-400-2414 cell Serving Iowa since 1986 www.shopactiveendeavors.com www.active-sandals.com October 31, 2014 N Mayor and City Council o City of Iowa City - 410 E. Washington Street >..:1 —r 0 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 C-) W r— -t7 Mayor and City Council Members, 3 7 Thank you for inviting the community to comment on the Civic and North Clinton/DubugGe Street Districts and the comprehensive plan vision for these areas. As you know, the Iowa City Downtown District is a non-profit entity with a mission to champion the Downtown District as a progressive, healthy, and culturally vibrant urban center of the region. The TCDD Board of Directors has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for these areas and proposed development plans within the Civic District. We are unanimous in our support of increased mixed-use density in both the Civic and North Clinton/Dubuque Street Districts. New, dense infill development that brings additional residents, employees and exciting entertainment and cultural uses like bowling, cinema space, and other amenities to our near -in environments is a win for our commercial core. Similar to the newly selected site for the University of Iowa Museum of Art and the Voxman School of Music underway, the Chauncey and New Pi developments will support our existing businesses with an influx of new people that will help keep the Downtown and Northside Neighborhood businesses economically viable. The ICDD also believes in a "2% Solution" for supporting a vibrant downtown (Bruce Katz, Brookings Institute.) This entails providing opportunities for 2% of our community's population to live in our City core. New developments that include a mix of housing units tailored towards a mix of incomes and household types will help us achieve this goal. The ICDD is growing in a positive direction and the "natural" boundaries of Downtown are evolving. Community members are already calling areas to the east of our boundary to Ralston Creek and along the Burlington Street Corridor "Downtown." We believe that accommodating equally dense developments in these close -in areas is a sustainable and efficient approach to growth that best utilizes public infrastructure already in place. Thank you very much for your hard work, patience, and vision for the sustainable growth of Iowa City. Sincerely, 'A4- 6 ----Ze Nancy Bird Executive Director Iowa City Downtown District Iowa City Downtown District 14 % S. Clinton Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 319-354-0863 John Yapp From: Geoff Fruin Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 8:03 AM To: Tom Markus; Doug Boothroy; John Yapp Subject: FW: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Fyi. From: Kieft, David W [mailto:david-kieft@uiowa.edu] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 7:52 AM To: 'Marc Moen' Cc: Jeff Davidson; Geoff Fruin Subject: Comprehensive Plan for Civic District Marc: University of Iowa leadership has discussed the City's Comprehensive Plan review for the "civic district" and specifically the two proposed development projects, The Chauncy and New Pi's new location. The University is supportive of both projects. Both will bring additional housing and retail opportunities to downtown and the University area, which is something the University supports; but more importantly, the University is in favor of the programmatic aspects of The Chauncy. The bowling alley and expanded location for Film Scene are both unique venues which will serve UI students, faculty and staff. They also contribute to the marketability of the University and Iowa City. These are the types of spaces other developers have not proposed in the many recent development projects that have come before the City. I have copied City leadership on this email. David David W. Kieft University Business Manager & Director of Real Estate University of Iowa 301 University Services Building (USB) Iowa City, IA 52242-5500 John Yapp From: mark@shopactiveendeavors.com Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 11:13 AM Subject: CB -10 Zoning Dear Council Member, We are writing you to express our support of the expansion of the municipal campus area to CB -10 zoning. Iowa City is in dire need of expanding and further developing its downtown area. We believe the Chauncey and New Pi projects are well thought out and essential for further growth. If we are to continue developing a vibrant, energetic, and dynamic urban feel for our downtown we need projects such as these. We have witnessed a terrific rebirth and resurgence of our unique downtown in the past few years and these developments will help us continue to grow and create a place where our citizens can live, work, and play... the place we all want Iowa City to be. Thank you for your vision and perseverance through this difficult process. Best regards, Mark Weaver & Eadie Fawcett Weaver Mark R Weaver President Active Endeavors -Iowa City 319-337-9444 office 319-400-2414 cell Serving Iowa since 1986 www.shopactiveendeavors.com www.active-sandals.com MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 2, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Robert Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Jason Harder, Duane Musser, Nancy Carlson CALL TO ORDER Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL A. The Commission moved by a vote of 7-0 to recommend Council approve REZ15-00002, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) to Mixed Use (MU) for 4.26 acres of property located at the northeast comer of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street subject to a Conditional Rezoning Agreement requiring: 1. Staff approval of a landscaping plan in conjunction with the site plan for Lot 1 showing a minimum S3 screening along the west and north sides of the parking area, and a minimum 15 foot setback of the parking area from the Dubuque Rd right of way with additional setback where shown on option 3. 2. Parking along the north and east property lines of Lot 1, identified as'Phase 2 Parking' on the. Site Concept Plan, remain unpaved unless approved by the Director of the Department of Neighborhood Services based on evidence of need. 3. General conformance with the site concept plan known as option 3 shown at the April 2, 2015 meeting. Additionally approve SUB15-00004, a preliminary plat of Pleiades First Addition, a 2 -lot, 7.15 acre subdivision located at the northeast corner of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street. B. amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District. 1. The portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District, be added to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B. 2. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(i): Develop Zoning Code standards in the CB -2 and Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 14 CB -5 Zones when CB -2 and CB -5 properties are on the same block as residential properties to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, open space and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block. Develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for multi -family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. 3. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan be amended to update the Central Planning District Map. 4. Consider creating a form based code for the commercial properties in this portion of the Central Planning District. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. REZONING I DEVELOPMENT ITEM (REZ15-000021SUB15-00004 Discussion of an application submitted by Focus Commercial Real Estate, LLC for a rezoning of 4.26 -acres of land located at 1406 and 1506 N Dubuque Road from Low Density Single- Family (RS -5) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone and for a preliminary plat of Pleiades First Addition, a 2 -lot, 7.15 acre subdivision. Miklo explained that the Commission received the staff report at a previous meeting regarding this application, however the applicant has since provided some photos showing the relationship of the cedar trees to Dubuque Road and how they would not necessarily screen the residential across the street. The applicant has also submitted three options for landscaping along Dubuque Road, which the applicant will address. Staff reiterates their recommendation of approval of REZ15-00002, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) to Mixed Use (MU) for 4.26 acres of property located at the northeast comer of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street subject to a Conditional Rezoning Agreement requiring: 1. Staff approval of a landscaping plan in conjunction with the site plan for Lot 1 showing a minimum S3 screening along the west and north sides of the parking area, and a minimum 15 foot setback of the parking area from the Dubuque Rd right of way. 2. Parking along the north and east property lines of Lot 1, identified as'Phase 2 Parking' on the. Site Concept Plan, remain unpaved unless approved by the Director of the Department of Neighborhood Services based on evidence of need. 3. General conformance with the site concept plan dated March 5, 2015. Staff recommends approval of SUB15-00004, a preliminary plat of Pleiades First Addition, a 2 - lot, 7.15 acre subdivision located at the northeast corner of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street Freerks questioned if all of these options had a 15 foot setback, noting it appears some are more. Miklo said the applicant could address that but believes that options 1 and 2 have a 15 foot setback and in option 3 for the portion across from the single family homes, it is increased to to be Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 14 several feet wider. Eastham asked if there would still be a berm along Dubuque Road. Miklo said the applicant could address that as well, it is not clear from the plans the Staff received. Thomas asked if there were any detention on the stormwater. Miklo answered that it was addressed in the staff report that this area is within the area that is served by the detention facilities in Hickory Hill Park so no onsite detention is required. Freerks opened public hearing. Jason Harder (2004 Crestline Drive, Muscatine Iowa) with Focus Commercial discussed what they had done with this project, from the beginning to now. They chose this property, although it was expensive and more than they needed, because they think it is a great project not only for the area and Iowa City but for this neighborhood to bring a service oriented clinic to the neighborhood. The building started as a rectangle, and to be efficient started out in the middle of the lot, so the distance from the parking to the front door was not too long. They worked with staff on possible zoning options, as there was more than one, with the intent of trying to be a good neighbor and wanted to do the opposite of the old HyVee across the road, to not butt the building up to the residential with all the parking out front. Therefore they designed the building to not just be a big rectangle, to pull it as far away from the residential areas as possible, which creates a building that is not an efficient layout and creates parking issues, but chose these options anyway to show they are trying to be good neighbors to the residential surrounding areas. Next, they looked at the lot, and discussed their client's needs, and attempted to figure out the accurate parking needs. They would rather err on the side of having too much parking, because if they did not have enough parking people would be parking on the street or the HyVee parking lot, which is not being a good neighbor. They have reduced the number of parking spots from 223 to the 160's now though. They don't want to put in more parking than necessary, but also don't want to have a situation where there is not enough. They have agreed to S3 screening, which is called out in the City Code as not required; only S2 is required. S3 is fairly dense and tall and will try to accomplish that through berming and vegetation, not just vegetation alone. Harder noted there is tree preservation on lot 2, they created the balance when they chose to shrink the parking lot, and also wish to design the building with as many doors into the building as the developer will deem appropriate. They could have chosen to drive the cost of lot 2 up to counter the high costs of the lot 1 needs, which would result in having duplexes or multifamily on lot 2, but that would not result in being a good neighbor. So they made it a single family lot to create more buffer, there is at least a 150 foot buffer in the narrowest part of lot 2 from the existing single family to the edge of the S3 screening. They have worked with Staff, from a 10 foot required setback along north Dubuque Road to 15 feet (Staffs request) which created more space. It does impact more trees but it creates more space for screening along Dubuque Road. Harder said they took note of what the Commission said at the last meeting and have developed three options, specifically looking at the northwest corner of the property, trying to protect the residential area from the parking lot. Option one is the applicant's preferred option, it is 15 feet Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 14 back, the sidewalk jogs out towards the street, and leaves plenty of space to create berming and create the S3 screening through trees, vegetation and maybe some planting beds. The berm will allow for permanent screening year round, it doesn't come and go with the vegetation. The S3 screening is so dense that from the street, with a 6 foot high screening requirement you won't see what's on the other side of it. They would prefer to keep the parking close to the front door, on the backside, because it really cannot be seen with the berming and vegetation. Harder noted there was conversation last time also about the cedar trees, but this option does not keep those trees. So they created option 2, which would keep the cedar trees, but does not have a berm. Keeping the cedar trees takes up valuable real estate that a berm could be built on. Additionally it will be harder to add vegetation around the cedar trees due to the roots so that would mean the headlight shielding vegetation would be pushed right next to the edge of the parking lot. The cedar trees provide zero screening from the parking lot. Additionally the cedar trees will not protect screening of the building, as the building is not at that end of the lot. So keeping those trees does not contribute to the goal of screening the parking lot. Harder introduced option 3, which shows the best way to screen the parking lot (from option 1 with the berm and vegetation) but also to lose the parking lot on the backside which creates more green space. There is not enough space without becoming too intrusive into the lot to create a berm with the adequate headlight screening and save the cedar trees. So if they were to eliminate those parking stalls on the backside of a 6 foot high screening for the protection of the residential areas, then option 3 is the best. However, they do believe strongly that after already shrinking the parking spots from 200 plus down to 160 they would need to forgo the landbanking of spots and include all the spots in the first phase. He said this option would lose the cedar trees, but gain a berm where they could plant new trees. Freerks noted that there are various types of screenings, even within the categories of S2 and S3 and it's not always just about headlights. Harder agreed, saying headlights are the hardest thing to scree, parking lot lights can be controlled with timers. Theobald asked for clarification on options 1 and 3 - seeing there is more greenspace on option 3 but otherwise what is the difference or point of option 3? Harder noted that at the last meeting there was concern about there even being parking spots in that area, so close to existing neighbors, so that is why they are introducing option 3. He stated that option 3 is not their choice, but wanted to show that they did listen to the concerns brought up at the last meeting. Thomas asked how the vegetation was different on option 3 as it looks similar. Harder answered that the vegetation in options 1 and 3 are the same. As S3 screening it creates a very solid screening. Thomas said they were the same with the exception of the expansion of the planting area. Harder confirmed that was the case, and that option 3 would lose parking which is not as desirable to the applicant. Eastham asked if option 3 would then add a dozen or so parking on the north border next to lot 2. Harder replied yes, because that would be closest to the building front door. Theobald asked if both option 1 and 3 included a berm and Harder confirmed that was the case. Theobald asked if there are any plans looked at saving the Norway spruce or the white pine that are actually more valuable trees than the cedar. There is a large white pine located alongside the building. Harder answered no, but was unsure exactly where all those trees were located. Theobald noted the large Norway spruce looks to be located about where there is a green space. Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 14 She noted on the preliminary plat map approximately where the trees she was questioning were located. Harder said that in all honesty they did not look at saving those trees, but with some more homework they can look and see where those trees will fall in the footprint and see if they might fall into greenspace and be able to be saved. Harder said he is happy to answer any of the commission's questions, he has team members with him tonight that can address specific items as well, they really want to work towards moving this project forward. Dyer asked if they had elevations of the building. Harder believed those were shown at the last meeting, however noted the building is in programming with the architects, it is a budgetary 14 million dollar building, it will be a high-end attractive building. Miklo showed the concept drawings of the building and pointed out that the mixed use zone requires some articulation of the building so there won't be blank walls. Freerks stated that normally they require 20 feet buffer from commercial parking across from a residential area, mixed use is the only situation where only 10 is required. She appreciates that they expanded to 15 feet. Mixed use is only 10 feet because that is usually in the downtown area, and that might be something the Commission will need to revisit in the future. Miklo pointed out that option 3 would result in more than 20 feet setbacks for the portion of the property directly across from the single-family zone. Theobald corrected a previous statement, there are two Norway spruces and the better looking of the two is more in the corner where the crabapples are, so it might be a nice focal point for whatever landscaping is done at that end. Eastham commented regarding his appreciation to the applicant for trying so diligently to put a good project together that does meet the need for medical space as well as neighborhood compatibility. He noted he was not aware there might have been an option to put the building more in the center of the lot, which may or may not have worked out very well, but appreciates them looking at all possibilities. Freerks noted that Harder has addressed previous questions and concerns and sees no reason not to try to move this forward this evening. Hektoen noted that the staff recommendation requires substantial compliance with the March 5 site plan, and that has now changed, so if the Commission makes a motion, they need to pick one of the options. Miklo agreed that the Commission would need to pick an option (1, 2 or 3) and tie it to that site plan. Eastham asked if they could discuss the options before having a motion. Freerks replied that yes, they can. Freerks noted that are three options available, and there is a home directly across from where that green space has been placed in option 3 so that is a nice option perhaps if it is landscaped a bit more in some fashion that does not need to be outlined in any detail this evening. Freerks noted this project will be a lovely addition to Iowa City and that neighborhood. Martin noted that having the berm is what is really important in her opinion Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 14 Thomas agreed that the berm from a screening standpoint is most important. He also appreciated Freerks mentioning that in the mixed use having more space, more landscaping on option 3; in this situation has some value. Martin is not opposed to option 3 but it seems awkward with just grass there. Thomas noted it just looks unfinished in the current plan. Freerks noted they could say the additional green space needs to be landscaped in some fashion. They do not need to outline it exactly, it is always a given to try to maintain any trees that can be saved and are beneficial to a design. Eastham stated that option 1 seems to have the advantage to him at least in that the applicant prefers that option which is not inconsequential. Additionally option 3 does put 10 or 11 parking spaces on the north boundary which is next to a residential area. Freerks noted that would initially be a vacant lot, there currently is no home there. It is quite a large lot and the residential would be far enough away. Her bigger concern is for the residential already in the area, across the street. Martin asked for clarification that lot 2 is not to be built on. Duane Musser, MMS Consultants, stated that lot 2 would be placed for sale for a residential home. With option 3 those parking spaces that would no longer be landbanked could potentially be right next to a single family home versus along Dubuque Road and separated by the right-of- way. Freerks noted there is a lot of space on lot 2 and feels that the land banked area shown in options 1 and 2 will become parking spaces in the future anyway. Musser noted that lot 2 will be sold as a single family home lot, and they will have no control over where they place the house. Martin noted the parking lot would be in place first, so the buyer of lot 2 would know what they are getting into. Freerks closed public hearing. Theobald made a comment about the landscaping, stating she did not have an objections with either option 1 or 3, she prefers option 3, but would like to see exploring saving those two lovely trees. Miklo asked Theobald for more clarification where the trees were on the property. Freerks stated she was uncomfortable having the trees noted as a requirement, but to request that it be explored. Eastham made a motion to approve REZ15-00002, a rezoning from Low Density Single Family (RS -5) to Mixed Use (MU) for 4.26 acres of property located at the northeast comer of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street subject to a Conditional Rezoning Agreement requiring: 1. Staff approval of a landscaping plan in conjunction with the site plan for Lot 1 showing a minimum S3 screening along the west and north sides of the parking area, and a minimum 15 foot setback of the parking area from the Dubuque Rd right Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 14 of way with additional setback where shown on option 3. 2. Parking along the north and east property lines of Lot 1, identified as 'Phase 2 Parking' on the- Site Concept Plan, remain unpaved unless approved by the Director of the Department of Neighborhood Services based on evidence of need. 3. General conformance with the site concept plan known as option 3 shown at the April 2, 2015 meeting. Dyer seconded the motion. Freerks noted it will be a wonderful addition to Iowa City, the architecture would be nice along that area as well, and to have a medical clinic in that part of Iowa City. Swygard questioned the motion Eastham made, noting that the subdivision portion was not included. Eastham amended his motion to also approve SUB15-00004, a preliminary plat of Pleiades First Addition, a 2 -lot, 7.15 acre subdivision located at the northeast corner of Dubuque Road and N. Dodge Street. Dyer seconded the amendment. Thomas noted it was nice to see at a gateway into Iowa City a project that looks like it's raising the bar in terms of architectural design. Freerks stated she was happy to see the applicant put in some effort and give options and that the end result will be better. Dyer noted she was concerned about the excessive amount of parking at the last meeting and wanted to say she appreciated the applicant's consideration of that by removing some of the parking. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS Martin recused herself from the discussion of this item and left the room. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District. Miklo noted again this was an item the Commission has discussed at previous meetings so he would not go into a lot of detail on the staff report. He will address some key items, staff had outlined some zoning options that might be explored in the future and implementing amendments to the plan and finally to explore height step downs for the commercial zones where they are adjacent to residential zones. Staff did point out that they did not have time to do a detailed analysis to come up with specifics, but they did look at how other cities deal with building heights when higher density area and lower density areas are adjacent to each other. They will do that analysis at the next level, when they actually draft the code language but the concept is where Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 14 there are shorter buildings, the two story buildings on Washington Street, you would require that the buildings next to that for a certain number of feet be limited in height to either two or three floors and then as you move away a certain distance you could move up to the four floors that are allowed in the CB -2 zone or the five floors allowed in the CB -5 zone. The details, the actual numbers, would come back to the Commission as a code amendment. What the Commission is being asked tonight is to amend the Comprehensive Plan to accept that concept to allow Staff to go along to the next stage. Miklo stated secondly Staff feels in the long term a form -based code might be a solution for this area as well as other areas around downtown. However to implement a form -based code would take a considerable amount of time and Staff feels there will be some redevelopment activity within this neighborhood before they will be able to get that done. That is why Staff is suggesting doing something fairly soon in terms of amending the Comprehensive Plan now and then having to come back to the Commission with code amendments to CB -2 and CB -5 zones. Miklo pointed out this area includes the properties on the north side of Iowa Avenue, and then everything east of Van Buren Street. He also stated in the long-term they would be looking at a form -based code for the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, but in the short-term they would come back to the Commission with perhaps revised standards regarding setbacks, a step-down in height adjacent to residential, and then the possibility of not requiring the commercial on the ground floor when it's in the same block face as a residential zone. 1. Staff recommends the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St which are not in the Central Planning District be added to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(i): Develop Zoning Code standards in the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones when CB -2 and CB -5 properties are on the same block face as residential properties to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block face. Develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for multi- family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text be amended to remove the text regarding further study of this area in the last paragraph of the Introduction Section on pages 1- 2, and update the Central Planning District Map. Dyer asked about the language difference between block and block face, for example on College Street where the Community Mental Health Center is, would that mean the side facing College Street could be residential and the side facing Van Buren would be mixed use? Miklo stated that was a possibility. He also noted that when referring to block or block face that also applies to height, whether you want lower heights where there is residential on the same block, even though it's not on the same block face. Freerks felt that is something that could be changed, to have the second line changed from block face to just blocks because otherwise Iowa Avenue could be affected by that because block face means you must have a residential structure along that face and not in the same block. Miklo explained that block face means the frontage from street corner to street corner, whereas block is the whole square block. Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 14 Eastham noted that at the last meeting they heard from the director of the mental health center about their plans to relocate and the real estate person that was with them indicated that those properties would have more value to them if there was not a requirement to do commercial zoning on the first floor. So as Eastman understands the Staff recommendations there will be code revisions eventually that would potentially address those issues but wonders what could be done in the meantime. Miklo said other than amending the code, the other option to remove the requirement for commercial on the ground floor is to rezone the property to a residential zone. Eastham noted it is important to let the director of the community health center know the Commission heard his concerns. Swygard noted that the rest of that block is all residential Freerks said that when thinking of stepping down from College Street, to move more towards Burlington Street where there is a more natural lower grade where the stories could be used to create more density while maintaining and keeping the homes as they are along College Street. Miklo agreed but noted that they cannot be that precise without a form -based code. Freerks also noted she is interested in adding in open space under recommendation 2. A. because that is something they discuss over and over. The need for space between structures and around structures, not just setbacks from the street. Eastham asked whether the phrase in the staff recommendation regarding "other techniques to promote compatibility" would achieve that. Freerks did not think that phrase was specific enough. Freerks noted that she feels the Commission needs to move forward on this so code can be written as properties will be selling and there needs to be a direction with best possible outcomes. Freerks opened public hearing. Nancy Carlson stated she has one comment regarding the IC2030 plan where it talks about parks and open space goals and strategies and it states "develop a system for collecting open space fees as land is rezoned for higher density development in the Central Planning and Downtown Districts, areas underserved by parks and open space". Carlson stated they have been underserved by open space for years and years, the big goal now is to increase the density downtown which means to put more people in downtown, but no discussion of increase in open space for these people. She questions if they are interested in more than quantity of life in the downtown area, are they interested also in quality of life and having a nice environment for people to live downtown. That is very important to her. Carlson also stated her appreciation for the Commission, as they have been dealing with this issue for two months. She feels there are some areas in the City government that are dysfunctional and that have their own agenda, but she does not feel the Commission is one of them. She noted that when people come to the Commission, you listen, you attempt to come to a conclusion that takes everybody's concerns into consideration, and wanted the Commission to know how appreciative she is of their time and effort. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved that the Commission recommend approval of the Staffs recommendations in the Staff memo of March 27, 2016 with regards to the portions of Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 14 blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St which are not in the Central Planning District be added to the Central Planning District and to include all three staff recommendations into this motion. Dyer seconded the motion. Eastham moved to amend the term block face in item 2A to just state block. He support that change. Theobald seconded that amendment. Swygard asked if they wanted to add in item 2.A. something regarding open space after landscaping and before other techniques. Swygard moved to amend the item 2.A. to add the term open space after landscaping and before other techniques. Martin seconded the amendment. Freerks wished to point out that in item 3, the Comprehensive Plan text be amended to remove language regarding further study of this area and questioned the meaning of that item because they did ask to have it studied further in the plan earlier. Miklo clarified that what has been done over the past several months is that further study, after this point they would not be studying the plan anymore but as noted in the staff report they would go into more detail regarding the area when drafting amendments to the zoning code to implement the plan. Eastham asked for more discussion on that point. Noting Thomas made some comments at the last meeting regarding item 3. Thomas said that he questioned what the actual language was in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan text, and asked for that to be stated in the recommendation. Thomas did research and find the actual language and brought a copy to the meeting, and passed it out to the other members of the Commission. His thoughts on the text is that clearly they are no longer two areas, and if they do address the area east of Van Buren and north of Iowa Avenue, what is still left is the 3 municipal block area, that would still be outside the area of agreement. He said that there is language in the IC 2030 plan that is relevant to the unanswered questions they are facing in the Civic District area. It states the areas have the potential to redevelop at higher density due to their proximity to the downtown and university. While they both have potential to redevelop and comply with policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to assure quality design and appropriate transition to the lower density residential neighborhood areas that border them. The text then goes on to state Staff recommends a process to appropriately address how these areas redevelop over time. And then it ends with once a redevelopment plan is completed both areas should be added to the Central District Plan area map. Therefore Thomas feels that the Commission is working towards completion of that but are not completely there. While the area has potential to redevelop at higher density there is still the issue of transition and quality design. He noted there is also the mention of a process that be initiated to appropriately address how these areas redevelop overtime. He feels that discussion hasn't really yet taken place. He has listened to the discussion at Council regarding the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 14 that the Commission voted down, that was the first time there was discussion of the Recreation Center being a potential development site. Thomas said his expectation when he read this, the notion of a redevelopment plan, that there would have been a more robust analysis of the potential of the area. It is an area where the land is basically all consolidated under one ownership so it has enormous potential with regards to moving forward with a plan that wouldn't have the snags as properties with multiple ownerships would present. It would put out on the table what the City's plans there with facilities; it would have been an effort more similar to what was seen with the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Then there would be a better idea what the direction would be for those three blocks. It could present an opportunity to address the issue of affordable housing, what to do with Ralston Creek as an open space in that area, a number of issues that he feels they were not given much opportunity to have anything of substance with what this area will become. Freerks asked if Thomas' recommendation would be to just remove that copy at this time, since they are just talking about the area around those 3 municipal blocks. Thomas is suggesting they could edit item 3 to acknowledge the progress they've made, they've addressed the area west of Dubuque Street, and addressed the peripheral area to the Civic District, but still have left the three municipal blocks and there is language in there that pertains to those blocks. Freerks questioned that before they would add that to the Comprehensive Plan they would have to have some public discussion. Thomas noted that it is already in there and it needs to be left in, not as part of the text noted to be removed in Staff recommendation item 3. Freerks feels there needs to be more public hearing and public notice on the three municipal block area. Thomas questioned clarity then on what was being recommended by staff as he thought there would be changes to the text. Freerks answered that they would just be removing the text regarding the three block area discussed this evening. And therefore she does not feel comfortable tonight changing language on an area they are not even voting on. Eastham noted that in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan it says on the two pages Staff references, the last sentence of the partial paragraph on page 2 reads "once a redevelopment plan is completed both areas" and the areas the paragraph refers to are the entirety of the Civic District as well as the Dubuque Street/Clinton Street district. It goes on to state "both areas should be added to the Central District map" and as Eastham sees it right now they are just looking at one part of one of those areas. So his recommendation would be to just add that part of the Civic District to the Central District map. He also noted he is not comfortable with changing the language in the 2030 plan. Freerks agreed and thought perhaps they need to remove that item from the staff recommendation, not from the comp plan. She believes more discussion needs to happen in a public forum. Eastham said if they were to remove item 3 from the recommendations then are they saying they don't think this portion voted on this evening should not be added to the Central District map. Freerks disagreed and said it was important to add the area voted on this evening to the Central District map, so the wording on recommendation 3 needs to be changed. Swygard moved to amend the item 3 so there is a reference to creating a form -based code in the district for commercially zoned properties in this portion of the Central District. Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 14 Eastham seconded the amendment. Eastham moved to amend item 3 to state to recommend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan be amended to update the Central District Plan map as shown on exhibit B. Dyer seconded the amendment. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. Martin rejoined the meeting. Set a public hearing for April 16, 2015 for discussion of amendments the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Multi -family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Miklo noted the Staff memo explains the proposed amendment and it will be available to the public over the next couple of weeks. The Commission will hold the public hearing at the next meeting and there may also be a zoning change associated with this amendment on that agenda as well. Eastham moved to set a public hearing for April 16, 2015 for discussion of amendments the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Mixed Use to Multi- family Residential for property located south of Court Street, west of Taft Avenue. Theobald seconded the motion. Hektoen noted that she owns property in that area and will not be advising the Commission with regards to this amendment. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: February 3, February 19, March 16 and March 19.2015 Miklo noted that the March 16 and March 19 minutes were not available at this time. Eastham moved to approve the February 3 and February 19 meeting minutes as amended. Martin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Eastham moved to defer the March 16 and March 19 meeting minutes. Swygard seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. PLANNING & ZONING INFORMATION Planning and Zoning Commission April 2, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 14 Theobald asked about plans for a University power plant on the westside. Miklo answered that he was not aware of the plans. Theobald had read in the paper that the University was planning a new westside power plant. She feels it could have an impact on evelopments to the west, as it will be across from West High School. Eastham noted that at the Council meeting last week they were considering appointments to the Commission and there was a discussion where the word dysfunctional was used to describe this Commission. Freerks and Eastham agree that is not an accurate term to describe their Commission. Eastham noted that perhaps the Council used the term dysfunctional as a positive term and that he would do his best to live up to their dysfunctional standards. Freerks noted that she has received many positive comments on the way the Commission conducts business in the most open fashion possible and prides themselves in that very much. She said perhaps the reason it might seem dysfunctional to others is because they work to do all their business out in the open and that means things don't happen quickly and swiftly, they explain things and talk about things, and then get them done eventually and hopefully in the right fashion. She noted that perhaps City Council and others do a lot of work not during public meetings. They are a political body, the Commission is not. Additionally they no longer have informal meetings on the Mondays prior to the formal Thursday meetings that was taken away with some budget cuts, so they use the Thursday meetings to discuss and talk through some of the points. Freerks agreed with Eastham that she was slightly offended, but thinks it is naive for someone to say that. Eastham agreed and noted that if any Council member wants to meet with him personally, or talk to the Commission as a whole, they are welcome. He noted that this Commission is the best group he has ever been a member of that diligently tries to follow the rules, all have read the zoning code, all have read the Comprehensive Plan, the elements they are responsible for implementing, and he feels they do a better job of following the zoning code and following the Comprehensive Plan and are not second to any other government body in that regard. ADJOURNMENT Swygard moved to adjourn. Theobald seconded. Motion carried 7-0. MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 19, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks, Phoebe Martin, Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Robert Miklo, John Yapp OTHERS PRESENT: Stephen Trefz, Bob Richardson, Dave Biancuzzo, Pam Michaud, Nancy Carlson, Helen Burford, Alicia Trimble, Duane Musser, David Dunlap, Jo Dickens, Terry Dickens CALL TO ORDER Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL The Commission moved by a vote of 7-0 to recommend approval that the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District) be included in the Central Planning District. A. The North Clinton /Dubuque Street properties be added to the Central Planning District Land Use Map, as shown on Exhibit A B. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: a. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors b. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Street and Clinton Street to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus c. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and other area streets are redesigned/reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design d. Improve east/west connectivity between Dubuque Street and Clinton Street corridor and north side neighborhood The Commission moved by a vote of 7-0 to recommend approval of updating the Central District Planning map in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 25 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS Freerks explained that the Commission would discuss the two items separately. Martin stated she sits on the Board of Directors for the United Action for Youth, and they have just announced publically they are selling their buildings on Iowa Avenue so Martin will not be part of the discussion on item two. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District). Yapp showed a map of the area, and stated that staff is recommending that this area be added to the Central District Plan. At the Commission's work session Monday night the Commission asked Staff to add to the goals to improve east/west pedestrian connectivity between the Clinton/Dubuque Street corridor and the north side neighborhood and staff has added that to the complete streets goal. The Commission also had a question about updating the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and the language Staff was focused on refers to the desire to initiate a process to address how the area is redeveloped over time. Upon completion of this process, when City Council considers these areas, Staff would recommend that would include removing that language from the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan and amending the Central District Plan map in the Comprehensive Plan to identify these areas as part of the Central Planning District. Yapp continued with the staff report to state that regarding historic preservation, at the last Commission meeting the Commission had asked that the Historic Preservation Commission review this area, the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District, and the Historic Preservation Commission found that the Sanxay-Gilmore house at 109 East Market Street would qualify for historic landmark status and should be given attention for historic preservation. Staff notes that the Central District Plan already includes a goal of supporting the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan which includes identifying and designating of historic buildings. Yapp stated that regarding the remainder of the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District the Historic Preservation Commission did not find there was a concentration of historic properties that would quality that area for a conservation or historic district. Yapp noted that the Historic Preservation Commission's review was limited to this specific area and later this year they will be conducting a survey further north on Clinton Street, Dubuque Street and the side streets that could subsequently be considered for landmark status. Yapp noted that City Staff member Bob Miklo was at the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and could answer any Commission questions. Yapp stated that Staff does recommend for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District) be included in the Central Planning District. A. Staff recommends the North Clinton /Dubuque Street properties be added to the Central Planning District Land Use Map, as shown on Exhibit A B. Staff recommends the Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: a. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors b. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Street and Clinton Street to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 25 c. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and other area streets are redesigned/reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design d. Improve east/west connectivity between Dubuque Street and Clinton Street corridor and north side neighborhood C. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan Freerks asked if the area around this is surveyed and it is determined that there might be properties that are in this outlined area in discussion this evening that might eventually be in part of a conservation or historic district, how would that be handled. Miklo asked if Freerks meant the areas farther to the north and outside the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District being discussed this evening. Freerks confirmed that was correct and wondered how it would be dealt with. Miklo stated the Historic Preservation Commission plans to evaluate properties where they already have surveys or information and identify properties that are eligible for the National Register. Once that work is done they will decide whether to move ahead with proposals for conservation and historic districts or more likely, individual landmarks. Miklo stated this area was surveyed and as a result of those surveys they did identify the Northside Historic District and the Jefferson Historic District. For the area along Clinton Street, the Historic Preservation Commission has already determined there is no historic district, maybe a conservation district, but more likely scattered individual landmarks. Freerks reiterated her question of if there were some property in this area that would be worthy of conservation, can it be included in the conservation area, or would the vote tonight prohibit that from happening. Miklo stated it would not prohibit that option, although he felt that it is just unlikely that a conservation district will be proposed there. Hektoen stated that once this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is adopted and the boundary goes away as the new area is all part of the Central Planning District. Eastham asked for clarification on the first goal of reviewing the multi -family design standards since there are no design standards that accomplish that purpose at this time will there be enough time to review existing standards or create new standards so the purposes of that goal can be realized. Yapp confirmed they would add that to the Staff work list, although was not clear on the question of time needed to accomplish this, it would just depend on other priorities for the Commission. Yapp stated there are multi -family design standards that Central District Plan properties are subject to. He noted that does include some street tree and screening standards but they are not necessarily designed for streetscapes. Yapp stated a lot of the public comment that was received early in this process emphasized the importance of these streets, particularly Dubuque Street, as a gateway to the area. So the recommendation is to review those design standards and propose amendments to them to improve the goal of attractive streetscapes particularly in gateway corridors. Miklo added that by adding this area to the Central Planning District, the standards that are already in place for multi -family uses would apply. They currently do not apply to this area. Freerks asked if there was a plan for the Sanxay-Gilmore house, or other possible landmark buildings. Miklo stated that the Historic Preservation Commission is in the process of identifying individual buildings that could be landmarks and once those are identified they will come up with a strategy on how to proceed that may include working with the property owners to try to voluntarily get them listed as landmarks. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 25 Eastham acknowledged that currently there are no mechanisms for providing for height bonuses or density bonuses for owners of properties that have historic properties or are up for historic designations, so there are no incentives. Yapp replied that it depends on the zone; there are bonuses in the PRM zone which much of this area is. Yapp said it allows for transfer of development rights which states if you don't develop a historic property you can sell or transfer what otherwise would fit on that property to a nearby property. Freerks opened public hearing. No one came forward. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to recommend that the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton/Dubuque Streetreet District) be included in the Central Planning District. C. The North Clinton /Dubuque Street properties be added to the Central Planning District Land Use Map, as shown on Exhibit A D. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: a. Housing and Quality of Life Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors b. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Street and Clinton Street to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus c. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and other area streets are redesigned/reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design d. Improve east/west connectivity between Dubuque Street and Clinton Street corridor and north side neighborhood Swygard seconded the motion. Eastham clarified that the Commission is accepting all three staff recommendations that were in the March 17 memorandum. Thomas stated his motion does not include the third recommendation from the March 17 memorandum regarding the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan. Swygard confirmed that was her understanding for her seconding of the motion. Freerks questioned why they wished to keep that recommendation out of the motion. Thomas felt that item should be treated separately and not as a part of this motion. If that was to be included in the motion, he would later ask to amend a motion. Eastham said the Commission could vote on the motion as stated, if voted down then a new Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 25 motion could be made. Or take the current motion and add to it if the majority of the Commission believes that should be the case on how to deal with the recommendation of how to amend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. Thomas stated the IC2030 plan is something he prefers to separate out and the language as it stands should remain. Eastham clarified that the language in the IC2030 plan as it currently stands calls for additional study of this area. Thomas agreed, the current language says a lot, and doesn't believe that approving the staff recommendations one and two is in any way inconsistent to what is in the IC2030 plan. Freerks believes the change in the Comprehensive Plan was so that it stays consistent and notes that this area is added to the Central District Plan. Yapp agreed with that and also to remove the reference that this area needed further study. Freerks asked Thomas if that was the part he was referring to, the area needing further study. Thomas said the introduction focused on both areas, and the Commission has not yet discussed the second area (east of Van Buren and north of Iowa Avenue). Eastham asked for clarification from the staff if the recommendation is to remove language from the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan only for this area, the Clinton St/Dubuque Street. area. Yapp confirmed that is correct, only changing the language for this area on this agenda item. Eastham stated that the language in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan mainly addresses how these areas appropriately develop over time. Yapp confirmed that was correct. Miklo stated that staff would recommend amending the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan to add this area to the Central District Plan map. Eastham asked Yapp why the staff feels there needs to be no further process for planning on how these areas should be redeveloped over time. Why take out that recommendation. Yapp replied that staff has started the process, they have recommended goals related to this area for how it redevelops over time and once this area becomes part of the Central Planning District, it will be subject to all the policies and goals embodied in the Central Planning District. Freerks stated that if they do not make this change to the IC2030 Plan, then there would not be the proper map in the plan. Thomas said they could add the map change into the motion. Hektoen stated the Commission could pick up item three in a subsequent motion. Freerks noted that she would like to see the Commission pursue the single property in some fashion that is contributing historically in this area, looking carefully about how this is being redeveloped, and feels this change needs to be made. Swygard asked when the multi -family design standards are revised, would they come before the Commission. Yapp confirmed they will. Eastham affirmed he would like to pay close attention to how the Historic Preservation Commission decides on the designation of the one property discussed in this area that has historical significance. He also shares in the wanting to have a good effort made in developing multi -family design standards that are appropriate to a gateway street. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Freerks asked for a motion to clarify what to do with point 3, the cleaning up of IC2030 Comprehensive Plan map for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 25 Hektoen stated the Commission should make a recommendation on both parts of number 3, the text and the map. Thomas asked for clarification, stating recommendation number one corrects the land use map. Yapp stated that recommendation one does not change the Comprehensive Plan, it only refers to the map in the Central District Plan. Freerks stated that if the Commission were to make recommendations on both parts of Staff recommendation three, the text and the map, that would need to be broken into two recommendations. Eastham agreed and said logically there are two parts to that recommendation, to update the text and to update the map. Thomas moved to recommend updating the Central District Planning map in the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan. Eastham seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 7-0. Swygard move to recommend updating the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text to amend and remove the text regarding further study of this area. Martin seconded the motion. Thomas stated that the language in that paragraph seems to have the two areas in consideration combined and as it stands now, the Commission does not have the precise language and he feels he needs to see the precise language to approve. Thomas stated that with respect to the IC2030 Plan they are moving forward in this particular area, the two areas referenced in the introduction, but that language in the last paragraph speaks of them together and in so far as the Commission does not have that language in staffs proposal he cannot accept it. Freerks stated that when the Commission met on Monday at the informal meeting they had stated Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change. What is being proposed this evening is removing text regarding further study so that is different from what was discussed Monday, which is the point Thomas is narrowing in on. Freerks agreed, saying that if there would be studies of the surrounding areas, and knowing there would be growth in this area, it needs to be looked at collectively and as a whole. Eastham asked for clarification that this motion was to remove text regarding further study of this area only, and Freerks confirmed it was for this area only. Eastham agreed that the language in the staff memo applies to both areas. A vote was taken and the motion was denied 0-7. Martin recused herself and left the meeting room. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the portions of blocks north of Iowa Avenue and east of Gilbert Street; and east of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street, which are not in the Central Planning District. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 25 Yapp began the staff report with a map showing the areas on the north side of Iowa Avenue and along the east side of Van Buren Street and stated that one of Staffs recommendations was to review the CB -5 and CB -2 zoning standards as the properties in this area are either zoned CB -5 or CB -2 and are adjacent to residential properties. The Commission requested more detail and the factors Staff recommend considering when there are commercial zoning on residential blocks would include setbacks adjacent to residential properties; side, rear and front setbacks. Yapp noted that the City Code does currently include setback requirement for the side and rear setback and that setback for the commercial property be the same as what is required on the adjacent residential properties. Freerks asked Yapp to confirm that the new building on Washington Street near the Civic Center, that was built where the Red Avocado had been, was an example of what would happen in this area being discussed tonight. The language is already in place regarding setbacks, which the building on Washington Street followed, that building followed the current requirements. Yapp noted that Staff is recommending that those requirements be reviewed, for the side and rear setbacks. Currently there is not a setback requirement for the frontage in situations where there is commercial property adjacent to residential properties, or on a residential block. Eastham asked if the Staff recommendation would apply to situations where property is adjacent to residential property and also where there is residential property on the same block. Yapp said the Staff recommendation states that where there are commercial properties on the same block as residential properties. Yapp noted it is difficult to get into specific standards because right now they are discussing a goal, the next step should this goal be approved, would be to develop the specific standards. Secondly, landscaping and streetscaping within that setback area and thirdly step-down in heights adjacent to residential properties, the commercial zones allow a taller height than residential properties on the same block, one way to address that would be stepping down height on properties adjacent to residential properties. In reviewing the first floor land use, the commercial zone properties require commercial land use on the first floor and that is a typical requirement in a central business district and the intent is to encourage first floor commercial activity, street life is the term used, but that may not always be appropriate on a residential block. Yapp discussed reviewing building articulation standards; currently the commercial zones require a modulation of the building which is a breaking up of the building into modules of 50 feet in width. The residential properties on these blocks, the typical width is between 24 and 40 feet, so different scale than the 50 foot modulation. Multi -family design standards in the Central Planning District require a building module of 30 feet which is more in scale with residential properties. Lastly, applying multi -family design standards to the structures on these commercial properties would be another way of helping ensure the residential character of those properties. Yapp stated that Staff did review other options as a goal for the CB -2 and CB -5 zoned properties. These options included developing a new zoning classification, creating an infill overlay zone, rezoning the properties, or doing nothing and accepting the CB -2 and CB -5 classifications as they have been for decades. Ultimately Staff recommended the goal of pursuing zoning code amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 zones for the reasons that amendments embodied in the zoning standards are more predictable for property owners and designers. Amendments to the zoning standards would not just apply to the properties in this particular area being discussed tonight, but would also apply to other CB -2 and CB -5 properties in similar situations when they are on residential blocks. The options of creating a new zone or creating an infill overlay zone would take far more time to be integrated into the zoning Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 25 ordinance. Properties would still need to be rezoned if that was the goal, and the process of rezoning would have an unpredictable outcome. Staff notes that rezoning the CB -2 properties in this area, on the east side of Van Buren Street, was proposed in 2005 and was strenuously opposed by property owners and was defeated. Yapp noted the Commission asked about a timeline for such a code amendment if this goal is approved. Staff encourages the Commission to recommend this is a high priority if that is the Commission's desire. At the work session, the Commission also asked about the possibility of adaptable reuse. Staff reviewed the Central District Plan and it does include two existing goals for adaptive reuse. One for investigating incentives for property improvement and rehabilitation of residential properties and the City does have several rehabilitation programs for residential properties both for low and moderate income households. And secondly, encouraging investment and reinvestment in commercial areas that provide goods and services to Central District Neighborhoods. The City does also have a program for commercial properties specifically a fagade improvement program. Yapp stated that regarding the City Code, Iowa City is very flexible in reuse of non -conforming structures in that any non -conforming structure may be reused for any permitted use. A non- conforming structure may also be enlarged provided degree of non -conformity is not increased. Yapp noted that several years ago the City amended its non -conformity use section to allow non- conforming development to be invested in and enlarged without having to come into full compliance with site development standards and a 10% rule was adopted that is embodied in the Code that any site improvements should not exceed 10% of the cost of the project. Staff believes those things do encourage reuse of non -conforming structures as opposed to tearing down and rebuilding in order to meet code requirements. Ultimately though it is up to the property owner. Freerks noted that depending on the base zone the potential for redevelopment at a much larger scale wins out most of the time. Yapp agreed, that is an economic factor. Staff recommend on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment for that portion of these blocks north of Iowa Avenue and east of Gilbert Street and East of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street, which are not in the Central Planning District (AKA portions of the Civic District) 1. Staff recommends that the Central District Plan be amended as follows: A. Adding the portions of blocks north of Iowa Avenue and east of Gilbert Street; and east of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street to the Central Planning District as shown in Exhibit B 2. Add a Housing and Quality of Life Goal to the Central District Plan to consider amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones related to design and land use compatibility issues on block faces with residential development to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping and other techniques to promote compatibility with other residential properties on the same block and to develop a mechanisms to provide an exception for the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor and to provide for multi -family design standards to apply. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 25 3. Staff recommends the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text be amended for removal of further study of this area and map be amended for consistency with this proposed change to the Central District Plan. Freerks questioned the use of the language building height step-downs and feels it will not help in that tiny area, what needs to be looked at is building height. To allow for the maximum height, but requiring a step-down is not the answer and has not worked in other areas. The idea is to be able to walk along the area and not have it seem so jarring and blend into the neighborhood. Dyer asked if by step-downs it means that upper stores would be indented further than the ground floor. Yapp clarified that it would mean that where the property is adjacent to a residential property the first section of the building adjacent to the residential would be lower in height and as you get further away from residential one could build to the height allowance in that zoning classification. Thomas believed there would have to a consolidated lot for that to be effective. Freerks still believes the area is too small for step-downs to be effective at all. Yapp said the key would be what is the distance of the step-down, 20 feet, 30 feet, 40 feet etc. Freerks believes it would have to be substantial. Yapp noted that is the level of detail that would be developed. However Freerks reiterates the height is key, and should add to the height limitations. Thomas questioned exhibit B and if that was being shown as mixed-use. Yapp confirmed it was mixed-use. Thomas asked if mixed-use was the language in the Central District Plan and Yapp also confirmed it was. Thomas noted there seems to be a disconnect in the language for mixed- use in the Central District Plan and in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones. Freerks agreed, having brought that point up in Monday's work session meeting. Yapp stated from Staff perspective the land use map should show the future desired land use for this area. Thomas stated that mixed- use description under the Central District Plan states it is intended for low to medium density residential uses including single family duplexes, townhouses and multi -family and small scale retail uses, etc. and what CB -2 and CB -5 seem to fall under would be the urban commercial rather than the mixed-use. Freerks opened public hearing. Stephen Trefz, Executive Director of the Community Health Mental Health Center (CMHC), stated that the CMHC is a not-for-profit mental health provider that has provided services for the past 45 years, meeting the needs of the community, behavior health care needs. Currently they serve approximately 2600 individuals per year. The CMHC is located in four buildings on three separate parcels on the corner of College and Van Buren Streets, in the area designated for possible changes. His goal tonight is to discuss what they do, what the plans are for the property and affect the changes to the Comprehensive Plan could have on their ability to continue those services. Trefz stated that their annual budget has been reduced by over $200,000 a year with recent MHDS redesign and the loss of county funding. Their income has further been reduced by becoming primarily a Medicaid provider. They are redesigning their agency to meet the changes which are occurring at an unprecedented rate and magnitude. Part of their plan requires that they operate more efficiently than they can in their current four separate buildings. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 25 They are in a survival mode as a result of budget cuts and a need to find a way to stay afloat. That means they are being forced to utilize their most valuable financial asset which is the existing downtown property. They are putting that property on the market because they can no longer afford to leave a financial asset un -utilized while being forced to cut staff and services. They are in the due diligence phase of purchasing the old Towncrest dental building on Arthur Street which will allow them to operate much more efficiently out of a single building. The proceeds of the sale of the downtown properties will be used for substantial remodel on the new property including several expensive improvements, elevator, restrooms and things directly related to the Americans with Disability Act. Whatever is left over will be used to fill the gap in the budget and expand the number of those they serve. Trefz said they are looking forward to being part of the Towncrest redevelopment and a revitalized medical neighborhood. They believe for many reasons this location will help them provide outreach services and a new health care model which is based on keeping individuals well. The proximity to the Free Medical Clinic, Southeast Junior High, and Mercer Aquatic Center provide excellent examples of the array of opportunities. All of this planning is premised on being able to maximize the value of their current assets and to continue to provide care. CMHC has enjoyed an excellent relationship with their neighbors over the past 35 years and want to continue to be a good neighbor throughout this process however it is vital that they make the most of this one-time opportunity to maximize the value of the property. What they have heard from City Staff is some folks in the surrounding neighborhoods have expressed a concern about large commercial spaces overwhelming residential properties immediately next door. This concern seems to align with the feedback they have received from interested purchasers of the property who would rather not build commercial spaces which have traditionally been difficult to lease. Those developers have told CMHC that their property would have more value if the ground floor property could be developed as residential units without increasing the overall density. Therefore the interests of the CMHC align with the concerns of the surrounding neighborhoods and developers therefore support the Staff's recommendation to develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land use on the first floor of CB -2 and CB -5 zones provided it does not decrease the density. They believe in making these changes it will allow appropriate and compatible infilling of a great near downtown neighborhood as well as allow for not-for-profit to move to a medical neighborhood and continue providing behavioral health care. They look forward to being a good neighbor as the City makes plans for the Central Planning District, as well as the redevelopment of the Towncrest Center. Bob Richardson stated he has been a resident of Iowa City since 1970 and wanted to share his concern regarding how everything has changed around what Irving Weber, a great historian in this town, and taking everything he held precious and turn into these big glass boxes and false fronts that have no really appearance of family life to them. He has looked at the maps and feels the green space on the map is too little and why there is a need for so many high density places that don't have any areas where people can congregate. Richardson stated that next to the Co- op is a good example of where there was a space that used to have really nice front porches and open eating areas, people could sit outside and talk, and the new building has dominated the area and it is just jarring against the other houses that are left in the neighborhood. There are storefronts there but if one wanted to have an outside eating area that is not available. There is just one little spot of green, but the whole back yard is paved, the neighbors used to have space Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 25 for the kids to go out and play, that is no longer there. These downtown areas are turning into just brick and mortar concrete messes. Yes we have a pedestrian mall, which is nice, but once outside of the downtown area it's getting rubber stamped and looking really boring. Richardson feels the City could do better and have a city that is appealing. For example, Lucas Street, back in the 70's it was Victorian homes, every single one of them had a porch and now it's just apartment blocks and there is no place for anybody to sit out on a front porch and talk to passersby. Dave Biancuzzo, commercial real estate agent with Caldwell Banker in Iowa City, a seven year member of the Board of Directors of the Iowa City Association of Realtors, and is representing the Community Mental Health Center and the sale of their property. He began by thanking the City Staff for working with him and the CMHC with questions regarding this area and particularly John Yapp who has been very generous with his time in answering questions and his knowledge of the plan changes that are happening. Tretz already shared a lot of the reasons that led up to the reason the CMHC wishes to sell their property, and with working with developers and talking to the City we hear some of the same concerns that were just raised about these large commercial spaces that are looming over single family residential spaces. That is obviously a concern of the staff and as they are working through how to get around that they realize there is not a way around that in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones and there is not a mechanism by which they can change that. The way the code is written now it essentially mandates that those types of buildings go into the CB properties. Biancuzzo reiterated that developers do not really seem to care for having to build a commercial property in the main floor because the further you get away from the core of the downtown the more difficult they become to lease and tend to languish a bit and you end up with these expansive open spaces that no one seems to like. So the issue is how we create a mechanism then that we can build a product that is going to more along the lines of what the neighborhood would like to see. Biancuzzo stated the developers would be happy to build it if they didn't have the commercial space and it helps the owners of those properties too because they recover their value by being able to build residential on the main floor which has more of market. Therefore you can get the density of residential you need in order to preserve value without having to go to the height. Biancuzzo supports the recommended changes but also shared a concern about the step-down in height because that would be a little bit difficult to build and could create some danger for the people living in the highest floor, but other than that supports the changes that Staff is recommending, they are good changes for the neighborhood, the marketplace would accept them and it would be good for the owners of the property. Hektoen asked Yapp to clarify the exemption and that Staff is not contemplating proposing a complete exemption for commercial on the ground floor. Yapp confirmed that is correct, it would be a partial exemption; it would be a mechanism to consider exemptions. Freerks believes it could be a possibility in this case and that is why they are discussing why maybe mixed-use is a better zone here. Yapp agreed and said he is looking into what the actual code language might look like. Hektoen asked Yapp to clarify that point earlier today and they discussed that if it will be a commercial zone perhaps it needs commercial in it. Yapp said that some of the things they have discussed at the staff level, for example, parts of Van Buren Street are commercial frontages along those blocks so depending on the frontage type, if it is a commercial frontage it is appropriate and desirable for commercial uses on the first floor but along a residential block Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 25 face it may not be appropriate. Hektoen stated that is a goal in the Comprehensive Plan, it is not recommending any particular language. Pam Michaud, her home is 18 feet to the side of the Washington Plaza that people refer to bleakly these days. It's the 500 block of Washington Street that replaced the Red Avocado and three bed and breakfasts and a chiropractic health center. As they were knocking down those four Victorians and excavating 20 feet undermining her 80 foot fence, so that is precariously balanced now and has not been fortified since, there are underground parking spaces and a totally underutilized service parking space that should be made into a park, or a pergola or some sitting space in the back. Michaud noted she is glad everyone is so concerned about their property values, she is currently a member of the Unitarian Church and they have the same argument that they are growing and how to accommodate it. The funding for the CMHC should come from a county and state level, they should not have to look for destruction and move to the east side. That is a financial matter however she has talked to the building departments over the past three years concerning the excavating next to her house and her concerns. She was repeatedly reassured that there would be setback to the property, the house next to it (520 Washington Street). However what happened was the commercial was on the sidewalk and then the residential is setback. So there is this box sitting out on the sidewalk next to a 1950 architect design house and then you have a steep rise. Michaud stated she appreciates the City is trying to control that steep rise but agrees that all residential would be good because the first floor of the 500 block of Washington Plaza has been unoccupied largely for the last 18 months. It has been argued many times that downtown Iowa City needs first class office space and that could have been first class office space but no one chose to rent it. There is still empty space in the Washington Plaza building. A beauty salon is going in, but how feasible will that be with high rents. Michaud stated the other issue with the commercial floor is that they require a 14 foot ceiling height and that is a huge jump from an 8 foot ceiling height. So the expectation, yes there are commercial spaces on Van Buren that include a mental health office but those spaces are human scale walkable, they might have an 8 foot ceiling or a 10 foot ceiling but they don't have 14 foot ceilings. There might be empty space there but it doesn't have the vaulted look or empty useless space. Michaud also questions why everyone has dark windows because that just dissuades people from even thinking it's open. Michaud stated that her property value is another issue. She has been in her home 24 years and it looks like she has an addition on the back of her house, and it's a huge one, a four story addition. It was not carefully added onto that block and her fence is still undermined and she has received no satisfaction from the builder. Michaud believes he should not get any more permits within Iowa City because he did not answer her certified letter two years ago. Michaud reiterated the setbacks should be the same as the front wall of the adjacent residences regardless of whether it's commercial or residential. Nancy Carlson stated in her copy of the 2030 plan she looked through to see what the citizens of Iowa City were very interested in, what concerns they had, and what kept popping up over and over again was that they liked the small town feel of Iowa City. From one paragraph of the plan "preserve the resources and reinvest in established neighborhoods. Adopting strategies to ensure the stability and livability of Iowa City's historic and established neighborhoods helps preserve the culture, history, and identity of Iowa City". Carlson stated that Iowa City's identity is that of a small Midwestern town with a vibrant cultural atmosphere. We need to remember once we lose that small town atmosphere we will be like a lot of other places we will lose our Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 - Formal Meeting Page 13 of 25 uniqueness which has made us what we are. One of Carlson's concerns is the fact that the CB - 5 on the north side of Iowa Avenue abuts the Jefferson Street Historic District. And then farther to the east it abuts a conservation district. In CB -5 the height can be up to 75 feet but to encourage developments that contain features providing a public benefit a bonus in floor area ratio or dwelling unit density may be granted. So how big can these buildings be? And if you look at what happened to Michaud's house and the surrounding houses, with a CB -2 building right around the corner, the question is with the CB -5 what is going to happen to the rest of the area. Carlson stated her other concern was Iowa Avenue. Iowa Avenue is a boulevard that was planned by the founders of this city. The original intention was Iowa Avenue was to be the boulevard from the State Capital to the Governor's mansion (which was never developed). The boulevard is still there and is an area that could have great potential. She is concerned about putting in additional large scaled buildings would do to that boulevard. She understands the concern about historic buildings and historic districts but Freerks made a comment at one of the meetings regarding the ambiance and context and the boulevard on Iowa Avenue, it is one of the features that define Iowa City. Helen Burford began by thanking everyone for taking the time to address the needs and the compatibility between CB -2 and CB -5 and how it can interface with residential development. Burford questioned whether the proposed amendment and adding the housing and quality of life goals which address setbacks, building heights, and other regulations to build framework to ensure any of these blocks in question will protect the integrity of the existing detached homes and reinforce their role in the Central District Plan. So the question is without looking at rewriting the code, this is an opportunity to do what was done with the Riverfront Crossing Plan, and introduce form -based zoning. What assurances will we have by making these amendments that we really will step towards a way of communicating to both the landowner and the interface with the city and how it adjusts amendments by making this one amendment? What are the assurances that there will be the next steps to have more clarification? Freerks replied that her understanding is that making it a goal puts it on track as something that needs to be done soon and the outcome is decided upon from the public input. Burford asked if there would be any sort of timeline. Freerks stated that there is no specific timeline and no assurance. Adopting an amendment or goal is better than nothing. Burford stated that the form -based zoning was used to as an insurance policy for the Riverfront Crossing development because it articulates everything very quickly. Freerks stated that involved a consultant and years of work. Yapp noted the elements that were discussed, the setbacks, the landscaping, the residential appearance of the facades, the articulation of the building are form -based requirements. It may not be called a form -based code, and that is to be determined when the ordinance language is written, but they are form -based type regulations. Freerks also noted the whole area is not CB -2, just areas of the block, some areas are still residential. Burford appreciated the response and said it did answer her question but wanted to ask again if anyone could put any timeline on this. Freerks stated they could not at this time. Eastham agreed saying some would like to, but there is no mechanism for that. Freerks said the Commission will can state soon and this is important to them and they want to make sure the correct and successful decisions are made. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 14 of 25 Alicia Trimble, Executive Director of the Friends of Historic Preservation, said a lot of what she wanted to ask has already been addressed and thinks that while discussing some of these amendments, even for public comment, there needs to be something more concrete. If there are to be height limits, or step-downs, the public needs to know what those are so they can have all the information available to comment on. Freerks stated that will happen when the code is changed. Yapp agreed, right now it is a general goal to pursue this, if accepted ultimately by the City Council, the next step would be developing the specifics. Trimble stated her other concern is the breakup between buildings. Washington Street development kind of has those breaks, but it really doesn't, it seems too artificial. So her concern about these types of buildings next to residential is even if they have some type of break, if they don't have an open courtyard they dwarf the adjacent houses. Trimble also commented that it does make sense to have some exceptions for residential to be allowed on the ground floor. As you move from a commercial district downtown to a residential district it would make sense to have a transitional area where not everything had to be commercial on the first floor. Baincuzzo wanted to address the comment about the mixed-use zoning. The mixed-use zoning is actually a great idea in theory, the problem with a mixed-use zoning is it has a much lower density than the CB -2 or CB -5 so from a developers standpoint you are much better off just building the commercial space almost as a lost -leader to get the additional density then you are to down -zone to a mixed-use zoning. Looking at the map and seeing how much CB -2 and CB -5 there is along the residential areas what you will end up with is developers and property owners saying they can get better density and better property values from the CB properties, so they would not want to voluntarily down -zone to the mixed use. In theory mixed-use is best to address the issues discussed this evening, but the goals of this amendment are a good compromise and he fully supports it. Freerks noted that some of the things in the goals of this amendment may have an impact on density. Setbacks and green space that are requested to have a better transition will affect the density. Baincuzzo agreed but stated that from a developer or property owner standpoint if they can make up for the loss of density with more residential and less commercial, as the amendment exemption would allow, then that is a great compromise. Richardson brought forth a suggestion for the Commission to put a statue of Irving Weber on a rotating pedestal and require all the buildings that are above two stories to have an Irving Weber statue in front of them, spinning, because Richardson is sure Irving Weber is spinning in his grave right now. Michaud asked about a complete street concept for this area, she has been to many of these meetings but hasn't heard about a complete street concept. Yapp explained that a complete street is a corridor that has facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit and streetscape elements to make it a street corridor that can function for all modes of transportation. Michaud explained that for a while she was at peace with the Washington Street Plaza until they took down the last full grown 50 foot tree and replaced it with cute little crab apple trees that will always look like weeds in front of a huge building. Preserving the parkway and the full grown tree canopies over the streets, College Street in particular, is necessary for the street ambiance and they should not remove full grown trees. Michaud said she has received all kinds of excuses from the forestry department and other inspectors saying it was a 50 year old tree, well a maple tree is not dead at 50. Twelve huge trees were lost on her block, all different species, so she Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 15 of 25 advocates for keeping the mature trees. Additionally the Red Avocado was a quaint restaurant with a contemporary crowd, not college students, and it closed at 10 p.m. The D.P. Dough is open until 4:00 a. m. so if there is to be commercial in residential areas, there needs to be a scale. The City needs to be sensible about the distance between the commercial and the residences and no bars next to residential if you cannot get rid of the commercial. Right now it is limited to 500 feet from the nearest bar, which is Gabe's. If there was a bar east of Gilbert Street, there would be demonstrations at City Hall. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham made a motion to defer this item until the next meeting. Swygard seconded. Eastham stated he would like to spend another meeting on this issue due to receiving the staff memo today that included more details. Freerks noted the Commission did ask for those additions at the work session on Monday and Staff obliged. Eastman thanked Staff for responding so quickly but stated he needed more time to absorb the information. Thomas agreed that having just received the memo today he needs more time. Additionally he is not advocated for mixed-use, that was not his point, but there was a reference to what happened in 2005. The loss of the Red Avocado, that block, happened subsequent to 2005. In 2005 Thomas does not feel anyone was aware, even Council, what that CB -2 zoning could do. But now that we do know, it is a huge difference. Thomas feels they are making good progress and have a better idea of the areas that need special attention. To consider whether they really need commercial in this area makes a huge difference in the building sizes and the streetscapes effect, to have residential on the ground floor is extremely important and feels it will affect how the value of the building can be preserved. However, if the goal is to keep the zoning the same, which is the path of least resistance, he needs more confidence that it will work and to have some idea in massing if this form -based code is to get it right. It is not a large area, but it is an important area. With all the backlash of the building on Washington, this area needs to be completed correctly and contribute to neighborhood stabilization and revitalization. Thomas believes they are making progress, but needs a better sense of what the outcome will be. Yapp noted that Staff will not have any ordinance language by the next meeting. Freerks and Thomas both commented they understood that. Thomas stated that Riverfront Crossings gave them an idea that there was a lot in the master plan graphics that gave a good idea of where they were going. So that when the Commission was endorsing the master plan there was a physical form to the master plan, it wasn't simply language. Freerks stated that perhaps what was missing from what the Staff has put together is scale, and scale is so important in these areas. Keeping it at human scale, a walkable area, green space, those types of terms to showcase the mixed-use. Planning and Zoning Commission March 19, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 16 of 25 Swygard agreed and is very cognitive of the setback piece, especially for this area but it has happened in other parts of town, such as the Oakknoll Facility addition and Dyer was particularly concerned with that back northwest corner and everyone should go take a look at that and how close it is to those homes on Oakcrest Street and we need to do better than that. Swygard is in favor of not requiring the commercial on the bottom floor for all the properties. A lot of other cities are facing a lot of empty commercial spaces in their mixed-use buildings (Minneapolis and San Francisco) because they can sit empty while the residential supports the buildings. Freerks had a question on Iowa Avenue, it is an important corridor and with properties coming up for sale, and if that area was considered changing within what was being discussed this evening. Is it a residential block because of where the UAY homes are. It appears to be the same thing there. Yapp replied that the State Historic Building is public the remainder of the block is CB -5 with non-profit office uses and a mixed-use building on the corner of Iowa and Van Buren. Freerks asked for Staff and the Commission to look at that block. Eastham agreed that block should be used as an example of what the amendment will do. Eastham asked if CB -2 and CB -5 currently do not allow for residential use on the ground floor. Yapp confirmed that is correct. Eastham said comments from the folks from the CMHC was a preference for residential units for the resale of the buildings they are trying to sell and right now they don't have that as an option. Yapp confirmed that was also correct. Eastham noted that does show the need for a timeline and need to get code language in place sooner than two years from now. Thomas noted that his hope is that CMHC project could be a catalyst for moving along the zoning code language. Dyer asked if there was a reason for doing this amendment rather than doing the rezoning. It seems backwards, because the concerns are with zoning. Hektoen stated the zoning code has to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This is a large task, so it is being presented as a change to the Comprehensive Plan first, and then the code changes will be next. Hektoen said it is all a public process that will come back before the Commission for further review in the future. Eastham noted that he thought the Staff at one time has broached the idea of making changes in the CB -5 and CB -2 zone provisions that would apply specifically to this area and some other areas and don't have to apply to every area. Freerks stated that was correct. Yapp agreed that was the intent. Yapp stated that a comprehensive plan goal of not requiring commercial on the first floor is quite a change and having that kind of goal go through the public process is important before a lot of time is devoted to developing actual code language. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0 Martin rejoined the meeting after a recess. MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 16, 2015 — 5:30 PM — WORK SESSION E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp OTHERS PRESENT: Freerks called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton St, Jefferson St, Bloomington St and Dubuque St (AKA the North Clinton 1 Dubuque Street District). Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the portions of blocks north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert St; and east of Van Buren St and north of Burlington St, which are not in the Central Planning District Yapp noted the Commission has raised concerns regarding the interface between existing commercial zoning along the same block face as residential zoning, particularly on the blocks east of Van Buren Street and asked Staff to consider adding language to the Comprehensive Plan and Central District Plan to indicated a goal that would be sensitive to this interface. In looking into this further, Staff summarized some of the issues within infill redevelopment which includes physical restraints, regulatory issues, and economic issues. Regarding physical restraints, redevelopment of infill properties on small sites requires a successful melding into the fabric of the other structures on the block in order to be perceived positively. Issues such as setbacks, building heights, land use, appearance of the front of the building, and the street scape are some of the typical concerns with infill redevelopment within the blocks. Opposition to infill redevelopment can center on design compatibility issues, increased density, and different housing types and land use types from what existed previously. Regulatory requirements can work against consistency with existing structures on the block. For example, in terms of setbacks, the CB -2 and CB -5 zones have a maximum 12 foot front yard setback. The intent of that is to encourage buildings closer to the sidewalk and more accessible from a pedestrian standpoint. However in residential zones, east of Van Buren Street, residential zoning Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 - Work Session Page 2 of 8 in the same block face, setbacks are a minimum 15 feet or 20 feet depending on the type of structure. So one is a maximum of 12 foot and the other is a minimum of 15 to 20 foot and these are inconsistent with each other if not incompatible. Similarly in the central business zones, they require commercial or office use on the first floor of the commercial building. This is an inconsistent land use with residential structures along the same block face. Part of the issue with infill redevelopment is economic; redevelopment land costs are often higher with infill sites and construction costs can be higher due to working with a much smaller site than a similar site on the edge of town in an undeveloped area. It's more complex in staging materials, dealing with the existing infrastructure. Yapp noted the code does have some special exceptions or modifications to code requirements for things like setbacks or parking reductions, but those take time and the results can be uncertain. This can lead a property owner to just build what they can under the existing zoning classification. The benefits if infill development in general terms can include the redevelopment of underutilized property, establishing new land uses, redeveloping functionally obsolete structures, and increasing densities within a walking distance to downtown. In general, infill development can reduce the need to new development on the fringe of the city, and infill development reuses existing city structure. To be successful these things should be balance with compatibility with other structures on the same block face. Yapp stated that Historic Preservation Commission did discuss these areas. In the North Clinton/Dubuque District, the one property they identified as being eligible for landmark status in the North Clinton/Dubuque area was the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 Market. They did not find sufficient properties to constitute a historic or conservation district in this area. Yapp noted the Historic Preservation Commission's review was limited to this area that is under consideration in the Comprehensive Plan; however they do intend to do a larger study around this area later this year. There may be additional historic properties located in the larger area. In the Civic District, the Historic Preservation Commission determined the properties at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue (the United Action for Youth properties) have some architectural significance but they did not rise to the landmark status that the Commission recommended at this time. Additionally they did not find properties to constitute a historic or conservation area. The Commission was sensitive to the need for an interface between properties in the historic district and conservation district around College Street Park and the properties between Van Buren Street and Johnson Street and did discuss the idea that Staff is recommending in reviewing setbacks, landscape standards, etc., for CB -2 and CB -5 zoned properties. Regarding the area east of Van Buren Street, north of Iowa Avenue, staff recommends that those properties be added to the Central District Plan and that a goal be added to consider amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 zones regarding design and land use compatibility issues on block faces with residential uses. Yapp noted that if that code amendment were adopted, it would apply to all CB -2 and CB -5 properties on block faces with residential uses, not just this area. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 — Work Session Page 3 of 8 Eastham asked Yapp to restate the recommendation for more clarity. Yapp said Staff is recommending a goal be adopted make amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 zones related to design and land use compatibility issues on block faces with residential uses. Yapp also said Staff is recommending updating the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan for consistency with this amendment change. Freerks thanked Staff for reviewing all the issues, but still feels there is an issue that this is labeled as mixed use on the plan. In the Central District Plan piece, on pages 62 and 63 there is a map that shows the areas urban commercial, even though we talk of them as mixed use. They are not zoned mixed use; they are zoned CB -2 and CB -5. Is the right thing to do rezone the area? Freerks noted that she knows that was tried in 2005 and was not approved. Yapp agreed, Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend this area be zoned mixed use in 2005, which was defeated by the City Council due to property owner objections. Yapp said the question could be if a property owner applied for a mixed use rezoning that would be consistent. Yapp said this plan should show the long-term goals for these properties, which is not necessarily the current zoning. Freerks thinks a rezoning is in order. Yapp stated that CB -2 and CB -5 zoning designations are a type of mixed use zoning and would allow many uses. Freerks disagreed and thinks the Central District Plan needs to be reviewed, especially pages 60 — 64. Freerks concern is they are trying to find a way to make something work and mask the real issue of what should be done in the area. Eastham agreed with Freerks and would much prefer having a comprehensive plan vision, use statements, scenarios, for this area that match available zoning or have zones available that actually do what that comprehensive plan calls for. Freerks stated it seems as if they are trying to find a way to make CB -2 and CB -5 work when that is not what the area needs. Freerks noted her desire is for adaptive reuse and so that is what could be successful in this area as well. Yapp asked if showing the area as mixed use on the maps is inappropriate. Freerks said mixed use is the correct thing to show; therefore a rezoning is more appropriate than trying to make the urban commercial fit. Yapp said those zones can be amended on a residential block. Hektoen noted this discussion should be more for the meeting on Thursday. This evening's meeting should be questions for staff to address to clarify issues before Thursday's meeting. Eastham said his request for Thursday would be under the Staff recommendation is for staff to outline what they feel those amendments to the zoning might actually be. Yapp agreed and said those are outlined in the memo as setbacks, height, landscaping, etc. Eastham also said he feels Staff needs to suggest a timeline, as this should be done within three to four months. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 — Work Session Page 4 of 8 Hektoen said the timeline could be discussed at Thursday's meeting as well. Thomas agreed that it is hard to approve without better understanding of looking at the setbacks, looking at the massing, setbacks not only related to the front, but also the sides, and the amendment language related to design and land use compatibiIty issues on block faces with residential development needs to clarify if that is frontages, what describes block face. Yapp said that was not the intent, the intent is along the entire property, front, sides, rear setbacks. Hektoen stated there are already side setbacks for CB zones but Freerks questioned if that was compatible and said maybe lot coverage might be a better way to term it. Dyer stated her concern regarding the back, rear setbacks, when going up against Johnson Street historic properties. That big building on Washington Street just encroaches on the properties and is offensive. And if we are discussing abutting properti6s against historic districts we need to be considering the entire block. Yapp said he is happy to add more detail to the staff recommendation but they are not writing ordinance language at this time. Thomas noted that they need to try to anticipate what this provision will lead to however. Dryer agreed and said this process leads to the other problems arising or identifies them. Thomas noted that with respect to an issue he raised at an earlier meeting, a transportation goal, with respect to Dubuque Street in particular, there is language in there regarding it functioning as a gateway to the downtown and the University. Thomas is concerned about the east/west connectivity. Yapp noted that in the Central District Plan there is an existing goal that states, "provides functional connections between commercial areas and surrounding neighborhoods to ensure good access to pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles". So it is not specific to east/west. Thomas asked if that could be amended. Yapp replied that if there is a consensus of the Commission. Thomas said that because in the central areas, because of these major arterials, there are connectivity problems, even in the neighborhoods, not just the transition from commercial to residential. Staff will look into that issue for Thursday's meeting. Eastham said that in both staff recommendation it states to make amendments to the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan, he would like the specific text of what those amendments. They show the map changes, but do not show what the new text would be. Yapp replied it would be to remove the text regarding these areas being added to the Central District Plan. Hektoen said there is a paragraph in the IC2030 that states these areas need to be studied further, that is the language to be removed. Freerks reiterated her concern that if this area was better used as mixed use, then that is what it should be zoned as and not just amending the current zoning to fit. She is unsure of how that will really work. Thomas agreed, they need to see what the amendments will translate to in land use and rezoning. Freerks recalled at one time they discussed rezoning the area and perhaps that is the best path, a form -based code type. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 — Work Session Page 5 of 8 Hektoen noted it is difficult to remember exactly what can be done with a comprehensive plan amendment and amendments to the CB -2 and CB -5 zone would have an immediate effect. Eastham asked what were the property owner's objections to the mixed use zone. Yapp replied it is a significant reduction in allowable density and size of building and would devalue the property. It reduces the residential use, potential use. Eastham noted they have to get back to the three blocks in the Civic District that was deferred last time. Hektoen said Eastham can make a request to add something to the agenda at Thursday's meeting, for the next meeting. REZONING / DEVELOPMENT REM REZ16-000021SUB15-00004 Discussion of an application submitted by Focus Commercial Real Estate, LLC for a rezoning of 4.26 -acres of land located at 1406 and 1506 N Dubuque Road from Low Density Single - Family (RS -5) zone to Mixed Use (MU) zone and for a preliminary plat of Pleiades First Addition, a 2 -lot, 7.15 acre subdivision Yapp presented the background on the application. This is a property at the northeast corner of Dubuque Road and North Dodge Street, this property is currently zoned RS -5. The applicant has submitted a two lot subdivision; lot one would be on the corner, fronting on Dubuque Road, lot two would be to the north. The applicant has applied for mixed use zoning designation on lot one, lot two would remain RS -5 single family. The North District Plan does identify that corner as mixed use, the southern portion, the applicants application for mixed use does go a bit further north than what is on the comprehensive plan. What they are proposing is a medical clinic on lot one. Staff has recommended some conditions of the rezoning because the mixed use zoning boundary would extend further north. The Code normally requires what is called S2 screening around a parking lot which is a mixture of low shrubs and canopy trees. Staff is recommending S3 screening along the Dubuque Road frontage and along the north property line. S3 screening is a denser evergreen screen that grows up to five or six feet in height because there are single family homes in the area. The access point for this property will be opposite of the driveway to HyVee. Staff has also recommended 15 feet between the property line and the beginning of the parking lot along Dubuque Road. They are also recommending land banking part of the parking lot. The applicant doesn't have final building designs yet so it is unsure how much parking will be needed, but it is clear the amount of parking indicated well exceeds what the minimum requirement would be. Therefore Staff is recommending that not be allowed to be paved initially and only be allowed to be paved on evidence of need such as parking lot is full and people have no place to park. The mechanism of land banking the parking is after discussions with the applicant who really wanted a lot of parking but admitted they were unsure if they really needed it. Eastham asked if they would do the lighting in the proposed parking area and then if extended, add the additional lighting. Are there any issues with that? Yapp doesn't believe so; all Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 — Work Session Page 6 of 8 regulations regarding lighting will be followed. City lighting standards do require that lighting be down cast and shielded. A Commissioner asked if there were any parking lot maximum limitations due to business sizes. Yapp replied not in this zone. The only zone where the City has maximum parking limitations is Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone. Freerks asked about the grove of mature trees along north Dubuque Street that could buffer headlights there from the house across the street and is asking if there is a way to bank that row of parking along where those mature trees currently are. She would like to know if that line of trees is considered a grove by City standards. Yapp said they would look into that prior to Thursday's meeting. Thomas agreed with that idea, and also it appears that the most critical issues with adjacent properties would be along the Dubuque Road and whether in the wider setback berm would help with that. Yapp is working with the applicant on these issues. Eastham asked if the landscaping proposed in this parking area is similar to the landscaping that was required for the HyVee parking lot. Yapp would have to refer to the HyVee parking lot plans. Freerks noted the Commission did work there to preserve some of the existing mature trees. Eastham asked if there was a concept plan for the building. Yapp replied that he does have a rough concept plan for the building, and the applicant has indicated there will be a lot more windows than what is shown on the concept plan. Freerks noted that the design standards will address building issues. Dyer noted again the parking lot seems too large. Freerks agreed and likes the compromise that the full parking lot will only be built if needed. Especially since they are extending the area of the lot that should be considered mixed use. Eastham asked what the number of parking spaces being proposed, Yapp replied 223, but just the first phase would be 161. Staff is recommending not paving 62 of the spaces. Thomas asked if the landscape plan would change before Thursday's meeting, as this time he is not seeing any trees or screening shown. Yapp noted this was the applicant's concept plan, not the full site plan, but they will have to meet right-of-way requirements. Thomas noted it would be nice to see the whole picture at this time. Eastham asked if the applicant has already waived the timeline once, and Yapp replied yes, this application came in last January and they waived it to this Thursday. ) Yapp noted that Staffs interest in the landscaping was on the northern border along the residential. Dyer noted if there is going to be residential in lot two of this plan that needs to be a concern as well. Freerks agreed it would be better to have a more specific site plan to view all this. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS Swygard submitted changes to the February 19 meeting minutes. Planning and Zoning Commission March 16, 2015 —Work Session Page 7 of 8 Eastham and Thomas also submitted some corrections to Staff. ADJOURNMENT Martin moved to adjourn. Eastham seconded. Motion carried. MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 5, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Jann Ream OTHERS PRESENT: Jim Mondanaro, Rockne Cole, Beth Stence, Laura Bergus, Connie Champion, Ritu Jain, Nancy Quellhorst, Marc McCullum, Al Raymond, Joe Tiefenthaler, Jon Fogarty, Pam Michaud, Andrew Sherburne, Helen Burford, John Hieronymus, Duane Musser, Angela Villhauer, Beth Hieronymus, Joe Hughes, John Wyler, Brian Boelk, Nancy Bird CALL TO ORDER Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL The Commission moved by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative) that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of SUB15-00001, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a preliminary plat of Highlander Fourth Addition, a 17 -lot, 39.98 acre commercial subdivision located north of Northgate Drive subject to resolution of deficiencies and discrepancies noted below. The Commission moved by a vote of 6-0 to recommend approval of amending Portable Sign requirements in City Code Section 14-5B'Sign Regulations;' Table 5B-4'Sign Specifications and Provisions in the CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10 Zones' as shown in Table 1. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JANUARY _15, 2015 Eastham moved to approve the minutes. Thomas seconded. Motion carried 6-0 with corrections noted Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 2 of 24 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District). Yapp presented a map of the area. Hektoen asked if anyone on the Commission needed to disclose any conversations they have had regarding this item. There were none. Staff is recommending adding the North Clinton/Dubuque Street District to the Central District Plan including the addition of three goals to the Central District Plan: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design Yapp explained that at the previous Commission meeting, as well as the work session held, there was discussion regarding historic properties. While the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify potential historic properties, the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. Identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Eastham asked what would be added to the Comprehensive Plan if this were approved. Yapp answered that the map showing the Central District Plan would be updated, showing the addition of the new area, along with the three goals Staff has recommended. The impact of adding this area to the Central District Plan is that the area then become subject to all the policies and goals within the Central District Plan. Eastham asked then if that would include the language regarding the possible historic eligibility of 109 E. Market Street. Yapp said it would not include the language regarding that specific property because the Central District Plan refers to the Historic Preservation Plan for specifics. The Historic Preservation Plan does not currently include that specific property (109 E. Market Street) but it does identify that larger area as one that has had a historic survey for which Site Inventory Forms have been documented. Freerks asked if the Historic Preservation Commission would be looking at these properties, and Yapp confirmed the Historic Preservation Commission would be discussing this at their meeting next week. Freerks opened public hearing. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 3 of 24 Jim Mondanaro spoke to support Staff's recommendations for the new P&Z. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham stated he was interested in the Historic Preservation Commission's opportunity to give their advice on this issue, and therefore moves to defer until the next meeting. Thomas seconded the motion. Eastham reiterated his motion to defer is to give the Historic Preservation Commission the opportunity to give their advice on the possible historic value of the properties in this area. Hektoen informed the Commission that to designate properties as historic is a rezoning action, and this issue is just discussing a comprehensive plan action. Freerks understands, and is not saying hearing from the Historic Preservation Commission will have any impact on the decision, but adding a few weeks to allow making sure all the pertinent information is gathered is the right thing to do. A vote was taken, motion to defer carried 6-0 Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Yapp began by showing a map of the larger Central District Plan, and showing that the Civic District in respect to that. Yapp stated the first focus would be the three blocks, south of Iowa Avenue, west of Van Buren Street, and Staff is recommending those three blocks be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. At this time, that area is largely occupied by municipal functions, the Unitarian Church property is at the northwest corner of this area. Next Yapp showed a map of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan indicating suggested building heights within that area, as well as for the three municipal blocks. The Downtown Plan recommends taller buildings on corner locations with mid -rise buildings along the block face. Staff is showing taller building 7-14 stories at the corners of College and Gilbert Streets, and Burlington and Gilbert Streets. Along the east half of the majority of the blocks would be building heights of 4-6 stories, and 2-4 story heights along the Iowa Avenue frontage. The difference for the Iowa Avenue frontage is due to looking at the Iowa Avenue Corridor, the majority of the buildings in that area are 2-4 stories in height. Staff has also noted a key historic building in that area, the Unitarian Church at 10 S. Gilbert Street has had an Iowa Site Inventory Form prepared and it is clearly eligible as a historic landmark. Consistent with the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Master Plan there are policies, including the use of transfer of development rights, bonus incentives and the reduction of parking requirements, which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. Given that the City controls approximately 2.5 acres of surface parking lots within the Civic District, it may have role in providing sites for development transfer if the parking lots are to be developed. Yapp next showed the land use map for the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and stated that Staff is recommending those three municipal blocks be shown as mixed-use designations. This would encourage both the municipal civic activities that currently exist and allow for mixed- use designation in the future. Dyer asked about the property along Iowa Avenue, heights being limited to 2-4 stories, but there Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 4 of 24 could be a bonus granted for preserving the Unitarian Church? And therefore if a development preserved the church, it could then be higher in that location. Yapp confirmed that the intention was to allow additional height along the Iowa Avenue frontage if the church was preserved. That would all of course have to be reviewed and approved by the City Council, including a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Dyer stated that then would defeat the purpose of keeping buildings along Iowa Avenue low. Yapp replied that the scale of the buildings would still be in line for the area, the intent was for a possible additional stories in the context of preservation. Hektoen stated that the code currently allows for certain density bonuses designation of an Iowa City landmark at a ratio of 3 square foot area to 1 square foot area reused. So there is a defined ratio that is allowed in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones. It is not the same as the density transfer that is allowed in the Riverfront Crossings form based zones. This area will still be zoned CB designations, not the Riverfront Crossings designations. Eastham asked if the Unitarian Church property is currently zoned CB -5, and is about 8000 square feet, so what would the maximum height be allowed under the current CB -5 zone. Yapp replied 75 feet with bonuses. Eastham then asked about the proposed height legend shown on the map, asking if it doesn't limit building height in any of those areas, the only limitation on the building height is whatever zone, and changes to the underlying zone could change the building heights. Yapp confirmed that is correct. He stated that comprehensive plans are not regulatory, they function as plans, the regulations would come into play if and when zoning requests for these properties at which time the Commission would review the rezoning request in the context of comprehensive planning document. So for example, if a rezoning request was received for a location that indicated 4-6 stories in height as appropriate, the Commission could either recommending rezone that to a zoning the allowed 4-6 stories in height or if a CB -10 zone was requested for example, the Commission could apply a conditional zoning agreement to limit the height to be consistent with whatever the adopted plan is for that area. Hektoen reiterated by adding this area to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan that does not mean these properties will be added to the zoning for the Riverfront Crossings area or be rezoned to a Riverfront Crossings zoning designation. This is just the master plan, not the zoning code. Thomas asked at this phase if the impacts of the proposed heights of the buildings looked at from an environmental impact position such as traffic and parking. For example, a cluster of 7- 14 story buildings could demand quite a bit of traffic and parking needs for that particular area. Yapp stated the appropriate time to evaluate those types of demands is when there is a rezoning request with an actual project to evaluate. Freerks opened public hearing on the inclusion of the three municipal blocks into the Downtown Riverfront Crossings District. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street), chair of the Iowa Collation Against the Shadow, stated that at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting there was a lengthy discussion of the transition zones and Ralston Creek being a natural barrier of a transitional zone and encourages the Commission to address that issue. Cole also noted that in the Staff report, exhibit C, outlines the possibility of 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 5 of 24 encourages the Commission to explore, especially how it pertains to Robert E. Lee, and if Staff is aware of any plans for the City to sell the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center to allow that sort of development. That would be a major departure in that particular area, people can differ on beliefs of what are appropriate building heights, but his group is particularly against such tall buildings and feels that height is a big deal and should be taken into consideration and if there are three tall buildings in a block and a half, especially within such a proximity to Iowa Avenue, and the view of the Old Capital, even a 75 foot building is a major departure of what is there now and a change to the sight line. Cole requests the Commission defer decision on this until the Staff can answer what they are going to do with the Robert E. Lee center, and the public has adequate input. Cole did commend the Staff, Commission and previous City Councils for adopting the Riverfront Crossings Plan, a lot of it made sense, that to the south of Burlington you would have more dense vertical development to take pressure off the neighborhoods. That was a good plan and feels this Commission should stick to it. However he feels that same theory is now being used to put pressure back on the neighborhoods and if there are 3 15 -story buildings within a block and a half next to a historic district, that is a major departure and this Commission should allow adequate public comment on that and delay decision on that, and the Staff should publicize that because this is the first time the public has seen a concept of possible 15 story development at the Robert E. Lee Center. Beth Stence (310 Golfview Avenue), is representing Trinity Episcopal Church at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets and is urging the Commission to vote against the proposed amendment Staff has recommended for the Civic District. She stands before the Commission on behalf of Trinity because they believe the changes that will follow from the revised Comprehensive Plan will significantly harm cultural institutions like churches and infringe on spaces that promote public discourse. She asks the Commission to take a moment to imagine if right outside the space they are meeting in tonight there were tall buildings, up to 15 stories, sunlight becomes scarce, making it harder for greenspaces to thrive, making outside public areas and the exteriors of existing buildings gloomy. Imagine the increased pressure on public parking as these large buildings do not supply adequate parking of their tenants. This becomes a barrier to events at surrounding businesses and cultural institutions, especially for those in the community that are not young or able-bodied. Rather than continuing to be an area where our community can congregate and thrive, it becomes an area to simply "get through". In the future, if this becomes part of the Comprehensive Plan, we anticipate specific zoning change requests would come before this Commission. The Planning and Zoning Commission has previously argued against CB -10 type development in this area and the Church agrees with that previous decision. Changes to zoning that favor revenue generating development over the impacts to faith, cultural, and community facilities and public greenspaces will harm the quality of community life so she asks the Commission to consider all the impacts that could derive from this potential change and vote against the planned amendment. Laura Ber4us (2231 California Avenue) and has lived in Iowa City for 34 years. She expressed she is really excited about the potential for downtown Iowa City to grow up, as so many parts of town continue to grow out. She used to live in the lot that is at the east of the very eastern edge of this district, and other locations in the downtown area. Where she is currently living there are developments with lots of cookie -cutter buildings and not a lot of architectural differences or types of uses, so what really excites her about the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is it would allow higher intensity, and higher density uses. She does agree that taller buildings do need to be considered with respect to the environmental impact, but when discussing places where people can gather, or people can congregate, people can live and participate in all kinds of community activities and higher intensity, higher density, mixed-use Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 6 of 24 areas actually gives those type of opportunities. She hopes the Commission will consider that as this amendment is not talking about buildings with one type of use, as no one probably wants downtown to just be a whole bunch more bars or more apartments, the whole point is mixing up the uses. Bergus reiterated she supports the staff recommendations and appreciates the opportunity to speak tonight. Connie Champion (430 S. Summit) totally supports the amendments to the Civic District and thinks it is exciting and has been dealt with for several years now. She likes the mixed-use, the density, the lack of urban sprawl it brings, and people like to live close to the core of the city. Ritu Jain (829 Kirkwood Avenue) is speaking on behalf of the CBC and is also a downtown business owner and feels developments like this would actually enhance the city. There have already been some high-rises downtown and it has changed the face of downtown and the community building for the downtown has been great. She hears a lot of people want to be living downtown and mixed -uses like this are bringing those people from what they call the suburbs to the core of the city, so she is definitely in favor of this plan. Nancy Quellhorst, representing the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber supports the Staff's recommendation for the Civic District Plan, they feel it is important that the Civic District remain in the Downtown Planning District and to be added to the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan and the Downtown Master Plan. Employers are losing opportunities to expand because they are struggling with obtaining talent acquisitions. It has been noted that mixed-use projects downtown are critical to attracting the workers that are so important to the success of businesses. These workers have a great desire for high density housing in an urban environment. It is also attractive to retirees who are increasingly attracted to walking ability and access to downtown amenities. The Civic District Plan fosters smart growth, yields affordable infrastructure and the highest revenue potential for the city which is very important to funding our social services and community needs. Quellhorst suggests that both Plaza Towers and 201 Washington, which are both high rise structures, have not created a gloomy environment at all and on the contrary have increased the vibrancy of the downtown area and that is very critical to attracting the workers needed to sustain the community. Marc McCullum (113 South Johnson Street) commented that at the last meeting Nancy Bird spoke about diversity in the downtown area, the blend of old and new, and the concern he has about this proposal is we are just going to get new. There is not anything being put in place to preserve the diversity in the neighborhood. He would encourage the Commission to think about why they would up -zone an area next to a historic neighborhood. He agrees with the ideas of walkable neighborhoods, but also need for small businesses and for density but doesn't feel it always has to be in a high-rise. McCullum does think the City should be looking at the Robert E. Lee area, and was surprised when the RFP for College & Gilbert they didn't look at that block as a bundle. He feels that area should be visioned like the East Village in Des Moines, with low- rise structures replicating areas of the downtown area, such as the 100 block of Dubuque Street where there are small retail outlets. The question is really how this development will play out next to a 150 year old historic park and historic neighborhood. His concern is losing all the historic structures in this area, seems like every church is being looked at as a lot development and it is a challenge to know how to allow some things to go forward without taking out the whole neighborhood. Al Raymond (1045 Westside Drive) wished to echo the sentiments of Marc McCullum, and that the folks opposed to this are not necessarily opposed to what it might bring to Iowa City. He Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 7 of 24 was a little hesitant about the high-rises that went up in downtown but they have not become part of the skyline and they do add something to that part of the city. His concern with this amendment is it will stick out like a sore thumb. This area already feels like it's fading out of downtown and into residential and this would create a disjoint that doesn't make sense. Additionally to say we need density to encourage people to come here and work, he would like to see that data backed up. Raymond encourages this decision to be deferred until there is more clarification on these issues. Beyond that, this all feels like a retroactive justification for the Chauncey Building. The City chose a project that didn't make sense to a lot of the community, that didn't even make sense to some of City Council, and now after the fact we are seeing adjustment to the Master Plan to kind of shoe horn this project in. He also feels some of the area in the Riverfront Crossings area south of Burlington would be excellent for these types of projects. Joe Tiefenthaler (222 Washington Street), Executive Director at Iowa City FilmScene and one of the Co -Executive Directors of the Mission Creek Film Festival, said that is seems at the last meeting and this one there is discussion about losing cultural centers. Tiefenthaler has worked in literary non -profits since graduating college and was headed to New York but was called back to Iowa City for the rarest of opportunities, a full-time arts job opening in Iowa City. Those type of positions aren't open or created very frequently and therefore Iowa City has lost a lot of talent to the coasts over the years. He chose to return to Iowa City for a chance to hone and build on a home grown not-for-profit cinema wing to the vision and commitment the Moen Group has shown for this community and for its growth. Growth in population, in opportunities, employment and business, and the art entertainment scene and mixed purpose and opportunities all imperial. In their first year, FilmScene has seen more than 30,000 movie goers through their doors. That is over 600 people per week, citizens and families that are seeing movies on critical topics, issues, kid's programming, special appearances and discussions, focusing on filmmakers, musicians, Ul professors, community leaders and national experts. These are films from Palestine and Japan, from Poland and Chile, and films made right here in Iowa City. There are films and events that would not otherwise be possible without FilmScene. One possible benefit of the rezoning would be the Chauncey project and FilmScene, to see what they can do with two downtown locations and two screens, helping to redesign downtown not just in north and south terms, but in the vibrancy of east and west, helping to redesign Iowa City as an arts employer. Tiefenthaler has lived on or around College Green Park for 15 years, those are beautiful homes and they deserve preservation, but if those homes another block away are such a dissent for mixed-use zoning that is a different meeting and a different motion and he is fully in support of this recommendation for this rezoning. Jon Fogarty (708 Whiting Avenue) recalled the discussion last month to consider the daily impacts of these decisions. The truth is, you have to do this, we have no options, there are no other plays in the playbook, it is this or nothing. The proposed developments and the ideas in the three blocks are going to be magic and far better than anything else that is happening in Iowa City and it will save us. If you believe that, you might as well imagine Iowa City's downtown surrounded by a wall placed on a great mountain that is a giant horseshoe shape. The mighty Ralston Creek was discussed the last time as a buffer zone, and if you through in that 20 foot wide street that is Van Buren, you can't see that CB -5 development on Washington Street because of that magnificent buffer, transition zone, and that is what we need to be speaking about, the transition zone. There needs to be a transition zone from the larger developments and the historic neighborhood. The CB -5 development that is on Washington Street did not change the fabric of the neighborhood one bit, and those houses that were taken down, the houses next to it, and the houses up the block and around the corner are all Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 8 of 24 replaceable and that is why we have no options. Fogarty stated that was a big mistake and they did lose some of the fabric of the neighborhood, and it was preventable. These buildings aren't magic and they don't have to go there, and everyone that shares his viewpoint would be in favor of finding alternate locations. The title for the option is on the slide, that is what Riverfront Crossing is supposed to be about, or is that to be talked about and otherwise ignored. There are some great things going on in Riverfront Crossings and that area needs it, it is an area of downtown that has long been neglected, and presents a great opportunity for us to make this Central Business District probably three times as large as it is today. Growth, commercial, residential, you can put it there, it is a huge opportunity, and we need to seize it. The focus on these three blocks here, like they are the real estate messiah is baffling. Fogarty stated it has been seen over the past two years what happens if these options aren't explored, and the consequences to the day to day neighborhood. Washington Street is now radically different and all the things people love about downtown Iowa City and take place in this Civic District will be directly impacted. Just to imagine 4-6 story buildings on Van Buren where the Co-op and radio station currently are and to see a 6 story building rather than the Victorian houses. Ultimately what is being asked for is to consider the options and consider the impacts. The Victorian homes are not replaceable, and the fabric of a neighborhood is not redeemable. Pam Michaud (109 South Johnson) stated that the 4 story apartment building that was built in an insensitive block, the east wall of that building is 18 feet from her home's west wall. There is no buffer zone. The website of Neumann Monson says very politically "It is to build architectural enhancements to the surrounding neighborhoods not to fight or be distracting from the neighborhood". That did not happen. The public cannot trust that sentiment or the glossing over of the title of this amendment which is Riverfront Crossings Plan. Two years from now people will say "that was always Riverfront Crossings, you just misunderstood". Michaud says let's just call it correctly and say it will be CB -5 and that's it. What is next to her home is a 4 story building 45 feet tall. If you want 75 feet, just add 30 to that. That is monstrous next to a historic district and that is what you'd be adding by Iowa Avenue and Washington Street. That is not a sensitive transition zone to two-story Victorian houses. Michaud is happy to live in a historic district, and abide by the guidelines, and they have to ask for permission for a lot of things, and should get some respect and transition zone for that. Michaud is asking the Commission to defer this item based on the public input and the galloping development can gallop south of Burlington. The Comprehensive Plan was just updated six or seven months ago and now it's going to be changed dramatically. That is inconsistent and is not respecting all the work that went into the Comprehensive Plan for Iowa City. It's a laissez-faire movement. Andrew Sherburne (1204 Sheridan Avenue) is one of the co-founders of FilmScene and has lived in Iowa City for 11 years, having come here for his wife to go to school and never really planned to stay but rather move back to St. Paul where the arts opportunities are plentiful and lots of mixed-use areas, where we thought we could raise our children and experience the best of what a city has to offer. But something changed, and there was a certain gravitational pull in Iowa City and that Iowa City does have those cultural opportunities, you can find the same things you can find in a big city, but you can find it in a community that is tighter -knit and closer together. When we decided to stay in Iowa City and raise a family here, we knew we wanted to live near downtown. We wanted to be as close as we could be to those cultural opportunities and that is how we selected our home, and why we live within walking distance to downtown Iowa City. Founding FilmScene for him, and for this entire community, there was no other place an art house cinema could go but into the downtown. It's the cultural heart of the city and a place where the art can deliver 32,000 people the opportunities that FilmScene has delivered over the past year. And it's a place where the community can deliver just as much to them. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 9 of 24 Sherburne stated they were proud to be in downtown and this rezoning opportunity will allow them to strengthen what they've built over the course of the last few years. And not only have that, but to strengthen the gravitational pulled of Iowa City that draws us all closer, that brings us all in from far away, a signature development like the Chauncey will be a calling card for Iowa City and will provide that cultural home for FilmScene and allow them to expand and provide common spaces and housing so people will be able to live closer to these opportunities. Sherburne encouraged the Commission to follow the Staff recommendations, and he supports the rezoning. Freerks closed public hearing. Thomas moved to defer this discussion and decision until the Commission can hear from the Historic Preservation Commission. Eastham seconded. Yapp confirmed that the Unitarian Church property is the only property identified as historic in that three block area. Hektoen asked if the Historic Preservation Commission is looking at that property or if it has already been designated. Yapp replied that the Commission has requested to look at the entire area to see if any properties should be identified and will be doing so at their next meeting. Thomas also wants the Historic Preservation Commission to look at the amendment and see if they have any concerns about adding these three blocks to the Downtown District. Eastham stated that the Master Plan for the Downtown District does have language that says the historic character of the Downtown District is an important asset for the community as well as the businesses and people located there. There has also been a lot of discussion if buildings on College Street could be taller in height and if it would affect historic character. Eastham would like to ask the Historic Preservation Commission to give some advice or guidance on those questions. Freerks stated that this area is really about some parking lots, civic buildings, parking ramps, a park, and it is pretty clear there is a historic structure here. Yapp stated that in the context of the Comprehensive Plan identifying the Unitarian Church property as a key historic structure is about the most significant thing we can do for a comprehensive plan. Hektoen reminded the Commission that what they can do with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, again this is not a rezoning. The language in the Comprehensive Plan is already as strongly worded as it can be regarding this historic parcel. Freerks agreed, but wanted to make sure that if they defer they would be receiving additional information in the future to help formulate a decision. Miklo added that the Historic Preservation Commission's role is focus on historic buildings and district and it seems like what you are asking for is them to evaluate, which is the Planning and Zoning Commission's role. Eastham clarified he is asking for the Historic Preservation Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 10 of 24 Commission have an opportunity to inform the Planning and Zoning Commission about the historic aspects of these proposed plans. Miklo stated that is a valid question for the area to around these three blocks, and the area east of it, but for these three blocks it is not necessary. Hektoen stated the Historic Preservation Commission with regards to this particular application to amend the Comprehensive Plan; it is not their role to consider the impact of surrounding development on even further away historic buildings. Their expertise is to evaluate the historic significance of a particular property. This is the reason the Comprehensive Plan amendments come to P&Z first not Historic Preservation Commission. Freerks is concerned that with regards to this three block area, there is not any more information the Historic Preservation Commission can give to assist with the decision. Thomas asked if Trinity Church was identified as a historic structure, and Freerks answered yes however the real issue is the underlying zoning of the area and is unsure what the Historic Preservation Commission can give as added information. Theobald is in agreement with Freerks and doesn't see how the Historic Preservation Commission can assist with this particular area. A vote for deferral was taken failed 3-3. Eastham moved that the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District) be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Additionally under the Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with the proposed addendum to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan. Swygard seconded the motion. Eastham said he had tried to think about why these three blocks need to change from their current usage under the current comprehensive plan to something different, especially for higher density residential and commercial uses .He said he could not convince himself that there is an important rational reason to change the present character and use of these particular three blocks. He noted there are three major streets involved here, College, Washington, and Iowa Avenue and if he walks along any of those three streets heading west from College Green Park or about College Green Park the character of those streets is substantially different than the character after crossing Gilbert St. and entering the downtown district. He said that after crossing Gilbert St. he knew he was in the downtown district. Not crossing Gilbert St. felt like not walking in the downtown district and there is a transitional area east of Gilbert. He said these three blocks actually would do fairly well in the central district zone in terms of their eventual development. Thomas said his comments relate to the notion of transition, which we've been discussing for some time now. The way he has come to understand the notion of transition is, and it's basically been a City policy for 20 -some odd years, that as the Downtown expands beyond its current boundaries, it should preserve and reflect the character of the Downtown itself. And what is that character? That character is essentially a two- to six -story building. That is why the CB series (CB -2, CB -5 and CB -10) was developed. As the Downtown expanded, the C13-5 and Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 11 of 24 the CB -2 would provide for a quality to that expansion which would be very reminiscent of what you see in the Downtown itself. That was the idea behind this notion of the transition: as the city expanded, it shouldn't become denser than the Downtown itself. It should at most reflect the density of the Downtown. That quality was initially called for to the east and to the south. For years, the concept south of Burlington was the same thing. All properties, basically at the periphery of the Downtown, should be zoned CB -5. Expand the Downtown but keep the character of the Downtown. Ten years ago, that concept changed south of Burlington with the Hieronymus property: perhaps what we should be doing is actually going with CB -10 density south of Burlington. That area is of such a quality that going to CB -10 densities isn't going to radically affect it because it had basically been given up to redevelopment. The second argument was that it would preserve the residential neighborhoods north and east of the Downtown Planning District. Thomas stated that this concept has been maintained up through the (College/Gilbert) RFP of 2 '/2 years ago. The rezoning in 2005 for the MidAmerican and Unitarian sites was both CB -5. The MidAmerican site is part of what would become the Chauncey. That's how he understands the transition. It's an acknowledgement that the Downtown actually expands all the way to Van Buren Street. The question is, should it be the character of the Downtown as we know it, or something at a higher density? He argued that, unless the notion of a transition is to actually increase the density of the Downtown as it expands, the notion of a transition is of course to establish a gradient where it is no more than and eventually less than what you see in the Downtown. Eastham said that is a great expression by John, and he pretty much agrees with him. He wanted to add to what he said earlier by noting that the Riverfront Crossings District actually provides a huge opportunity to accomplish many of the goals that people have said they want for the Downtown District including higher residential density and access to office space. Those improvements are also available to a certain extent in the Downtown District under the master plan as it exists now which calls for much more dense redevelopment in the Downtown District. Freerks said she wouldn't necessarily disagree with a lot of the things Thomas said. City Council will do what it wants to. Thomas said he is only speaking for himself. He has been consistent on this since the (College/Gilbert) RFP came out. This was based on reading the documents. He is sorry that this has gone on and spent a lot of effort on everyone's part. He believes in the Downtown. He moved to Iowa City because he wanted to be near the Downtown. He understands density, but he also understands that there are places where certain kinds of densities are best suited for other locations. He said, if you read our Comprehensive Plan, it reflects that. Freerks stated there have been comments from people that it is a good thing though to add more density in areas where there are amenities, such as the Robert E. Lee Recreation Center or the Chauncey Swan Park. Thomas said CB -5 density allows up to 75 -feet. That's a six -story building. Since we began this discussion, we've approved the Riverfront Crossings regulating plan. With its base and bonus heights, most of Riverfront Crossings allows buildings over 6 -stories. This is an area that extends %-mile south of Burlington. It's a large area. A vote was taken and the motion failed by a vote of 1-5 (Freerks affirmative). Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 12 of 24 Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan Land Use Map as an addendum and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit B. Additionally staff recommends IC2030 Comprehensive Plan text and map be amended for consistency with this proposed addendum to the Central District Plan Yapp showed a map (exhibit B) which was the area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this larger area and the North Clinton/Dubuque Street area as areas that should be examined more closely and amended into the Central District Plan. This area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street, staff does recommend it be added to the Central District Plan making it subject to the Central District Plan policies. Staff recommends identifying the area as mixed-use in the land use map; the area is already largely mixed-use, containing residential, office and commercial development. Much of the area is currently zoned both CB -2 and CB -5. Yapp showed a map showing potential building heights within the larger area and the historic districts around and north of College Green Park. Swygard questioned if there were any single family housing zoned in these areas. Yapp does not believe so, it is all zoned multi -family. Freerks pointed out that the area is actually not representative of the underlying zone, due to the neighboring historic areas. She believes the whole area needs more reflection on the transition as one walks down College Street or Iowa Avenue and reusing the homes as commercial rather than building new CB -5 building therefore maintaining the feel of the area. This would include setbacks from the street, areas between structures, green space and so if we can't call them historic structures in this area, we find a way to maintain that sense and feel in the area and CB -5 does not do that. Eastham asked why designate these areas as mixed-use and Yapp replied because that is how they are being used. Freerks added that mixed-use needs more limitations for this area due to what might go there given the opportunity. This is the opportunity for the Commission to set as part of the goals to look at setbacks, greenspace, and whatever might replace these mid -block sections stay in character with the area. Freerks opened public hearing on this portion of the current Civic District. Marc McCullum stated he proposed some time ago a village type overlay, because of the rampant redevelopment the community is losing a lot of the little boutique stores and things like that and anything to encourage that would be good. Another thing to consider is the bundling of parcels in these areas to assure the development of scale. And perhaps if there is a restriction to do that, perhaps through special exception, that would then give the City a little bit more control over what happens there. Helen Burford (528 East College Street) stated she often feels her home is in the buffer zone of the historic district and supports what Ann just said because there has not been a significant consideration of what it means to recognize the historic areas, the setbacks that are needed, and in order to maximize the value of space you have to bundle parcels and then other considerations are needed to make them economical viable. Burford stated she believes this iteration of the plan does not address that. Planning and Zoning Commission February 5, 2015 — Formal Meeting Page 13 of 24 Pam Michaud stated they truly are the buffer zone and are exposed to a lot of different types of folks that come and go in downtown from rocket scientists to people that are struggling with their lives and there is room for all. Michaud shared her confusion on the map and the areas shaded brown. Some height restrictions are 2-5 stories and others are 4-6. It is hard to understand why there would be a 6 story building on the 500 block of Iowa Avenue, how did that line get established, and same with Washington. Why is that bumped up more than Burlington Street. The other point she would like to clarify is the three houses that she and her neighbors occupy are RM -12 and the RSN-20 is Washington and Johnson, just that one corner lot next to her RM - 12 (a very small one-story house). While that might not be the Commission's purview or concern, those houses are really small heights that cannot be replaced even if they are developed. Michaud mentioned that the streetscape is extremely important, we know how we often lament with Project Green and these wonderful green organizations and how we lost the Dutch Elms, well there is a beautiful tree canopy on the 500 block of College right now. And if a community is thinking of landscaping and canopies you can't replace an 80 year old tree. We need to keep the tree we have, with the setbacks Ann emphasized. It is a beautiful 500 block, and it contains about four mental health center buildings that are very functional, there is a beautiful 1880 brick house that has been kept up and is a multi -family building and another adjacent to it. So that whole 500 block of College on the south side is intact with original buildings setbacks and gardens and what she misses the most about her Washington Street 500 block are the gardens, not the Victorian houses. The space between the buildings is important and when you put in a block long building it is so depersonalized, so upscale in density, you lose the human scale. So that is why she would question why the Iowa and Washington Streets are anything over four stories. Freerks closed public hearing. Eastham moved that this discussion and decision be deferred until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Swygard seconded the motion. Freerks stated she feels the Commission needs another informal work session meeting on this item. Freerks believes the three block municipal area will be what it is, and the wheels are already in motion for that area, however the Commission can work to help assure the surrounding area is protected and maintained. That even if buildings in that area need to be replaced, to replace them in a fashion where they are not so jarring. Freerks would like to give Staff time to come up with ideas to make sure we can maintain this beautiful part of the community. Eastham made an amendment to the motion to defer this item until the March 5, 2015 meeting. Miklo pointed out what happened on Washington Street in the CB -2 zone was the cause for the concern for the future of this area and Freerks is requesting Staff look at form -based codes or some other way to allow for redevelopment for non -historic properties in a way that protects the integrity of the neighborhood. Swygard seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 3, 2015 — 5:30 PM — WORK SESSION E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Mikio, Kent Ralston OTHERS PRESENT: Freerks called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEM Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District). Yapp explained that this district is generally north of Jefferson Street, between Clinton Street and Dubuque Street, and showed the area on a map. Staff is proposing to add the blocks (bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District) to the Central District Plan. The area is made up largely of institutional buildings (churches and The University of Iowa) and multi -family mixed use buildings. A question arose during Commission discussion regarding the definition of Mixed Use. In the context of the Central District Plan, Mixed Use is defined as: low to medium density residential uses including single family, duplexes, townhouses, and multi -family; and small scale commercial uses, offices, personal services, and other uses that serve residents and visitors to the area. Buildings can be mixed-use or single- use buildings. An area may be primarily commercial in nature or may be primarily residential depending on the market. Development is intended to be pedestrian -oriented with buildings oriented to the street ... With regards to historic property, the Central District Plan Map does not specifically identify Historic properties, but the plan does contain polices for the preservation of historic properties. These policies are a based on the adopted and periodically updated Historic Preservation Plan, which is also an element of the Comprehensive Plan. A goal of the Preservation Plan is to identify historic properties. Staff conducted research of the area, searching for identification of historic properties: Iowa Site Inventory Forms, which document the historic and architectural values of individual buildings, were reviewed for each property in the N. North Clinton/Dubuque Street District. Historic properties at 30 N. Clinton, 130 Jefferson Street and 115 N. Dubuque Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 - Work Session Page 2 of 9 Street are included in the Jefferson Street Historic District and are therefore already protected by the Historic Preservation Commission. The only other property that is identified as being individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places is the Sanxay-Gilmore House at 109 E. Market Street. A copy of that Iowa Site Inventory Form is available upon request. Although four other properties in the district have some historic merit, the forms indicate that they are not individually significant enough to be listed on the National Register and there is not a sufficient grouping to form a historic district. Eastham questioned the exact area of the district, as it appears to be different on various maps and asked for clarification on which map represented what the staff was recommending. Yapp clarified that there were some discrepancies on how the "gap" areas were identified on the Comprehensive Plan maps and the actual Central District map. Eastham also asked about the historic preservation review and if the Historic Preservation Committee has reviewed the two areas. Miklo answered that they had not had it as an agenda item, but they are aware of the areas. Eastham asked then for confirmation that staff is recommending that the Commission act on these two amendments to the Comprehensive Plan before the Historic Preservation Commission makes any decisions on the historic designation of the buildings in these areas. Miklo stated that there are already historic designated houses in the Central District so those will remain regardless of this decision, and also that Commission can make recommendations to Council at any time for historic designations. Eastham noted that he was uncomfortable with making a decision about the amendment before the Historical Preservation Commission discussed the areas, and Freerks agreed it seemed as if they were moving too fast and perhaps not with all the necessary information needed. Hektoen stated it was precedent that P&Z has made recommendations and then HPC has made designations after. Freerks just noted that the P&Z Commission is trying to be more careful about changing overlays and moving areas around without having all concerns addressed. Eastham again stated he felt P&Z could defer these amendments until after the HPC had an opportunity to discuss the areas. Miklo feels that is not necessary because the Central District has policies regarding historic buildings already those will cover any new areas added into the Central District. Eastham said that if staff already conducted historical research of the areas, as stated in the staff memo, then that shows some concern. Hektoen clarified what Miklo was saying that this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan does not change any kind of analysis with regards to their historic value or if they should be preserved or designated doesn't have an implication on this. Miklo stated that as with the Downtown District Plan, where the historic buildings are identified on the map, they have done the same with this Central District by identifying the one property that is already identified as historic on the map. Freerks stated that there has been lots of conversation and input from the community requesting clarification regarding timelines of changes and to look at historic possibilities before changes happen and therefore need to look at situations where there may be historic structures and not make changes without having given time to HPC to review as well. Although the two Commissions are separate and their decisions do not have to have a direct impact on the other, Freerks believes decisions should be conscious of each other. Miklo said he feels the amendment document does take the historic properties and the possible historic properties into consideration. Eastham stated he feels the HPC should still issue an opinion of the areas, and the possible historic buildings in the area, before decisions on changes to the district are made. Thomas stated he felt that any area that falls into the University Impact zone is an area that falls into pressures where time may be a Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 3 of 9 factor. Additionally due to the recent conversations regarding the South Dubuque Street area, it seems like this is an opportunity now to address the historic preservation aspects to avoid having to deal with it in the future, when it might be too late. Hektoen asked what the Commission is asking staff for with regards to this amendment. Eastham answered that if in the future a rezoning application comes forward, the Commission is required to look to the Comprehensive Plan for guidance, and if the rezoning were to affect a historic property, the Commission would like that noted in the Comprehensive Plan if that property is designated as historic. Freerks and Eastham both noted that they would like to see the HPC give an opinion on the property at 109 E. Market Street. Miklo stated it is clearly eligible for historic designation as indicated in the Iowa Site Inventory Form. Freerks asked Miklo for confirmation that making this amendment does nothing more to increase development in this area, and he confirmed that was correct. Hektoen stated the amendment actually brings this area into the goals and policies of the area, which includes protection of historic preservation. Yapp also stated the specific goals that staff are recommending in the amendment would be added to the Central District Plan: A. Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of an attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. B. Transportation Goal #3(k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Stand Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned 1 reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design. Yapp asked if it would be helpful to forward the sections of the Historic Preservation Plan to the Commission, and Freerks agreed it would, the more information the Commission can have the better informed their decisions can be. Thomas said he would be interested in the Historic Preservation Commission's thoughts regarding the sequencing, if there was anything more they could identify or make reference to as amendments if this area goes into the Central District Plan. Thomas also raised a general concern regarding reviewing the multi -family design standards and his assumption is that housing will go towards student housing given the location. He asked if the City has had any conversations with the University with respect to developing design standards with that in mind, knowing there will be a very specific user here. Yapp said there have been general conversations with University staff regarding general design standards. Thomas asked for more specific standards, knowing these buildings will be housing students the lifestyles of the tenants will be different. Yapp said they have discussed with the University a concept of a living learning community for students in a building that might be privately owned but to be designed to function as a living learning community. Thomas stated his other concern was regarding the transportation goal, which he supports. However, we may want to add an additional goal: improving Dubuque Street's east -west pedestrian connectivity between the North Clinton/Dubuque St. District and the Northside neighborhood. Eastham asked about the design standards that could be included in the code, if provisions Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 4 of 9 specifically for student housing can be added. Miklo stated that the area already has planned designed standards to reflect green space and parking issues, but the staffs intent, assuming the proposed goal is adopted, is to follow up with more specific recommendations on additional design standards. Discussion of proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Martin stated she sits on the Board of Directors of The United Action for Youth that is housed on Iowa Avenue and questioned if she could participate in the conversation. Hektoen stated Martin can participate as long as she feels she can be impartial. Martin stated she can be impartial, but just wanted it stated for the record. Yapp began by showing a map of the area to help explain that staff is proposing to take the Civic District and put the three municipal blocks south of Iowa Avenue and west of Van Buren Street and make those part of the Downtown District section of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. And then the areas north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street become part of the Central Planning District and identify those as mixed-use. Currently this area is part of the old Downtown Planning District from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. For the area proposed as the Central Planning District, those areas are currently used as mixed-use areas and are currently zoned CB -2 and CB -5 which is central business support zones. Mixed- use allows for commercial, residential, and office land use on those properties, and that is how they are used now. The three municipal blocks proposed to be added to the Downtown District, the rationale behind that recommendation is the intensity of the uses on those blocks is primarily municipal functions, City Hall, Police Station, Fire Station, Recreation Building, Chauncey Swan parking facility, Chauncey Swan Park. These are sites that hold many different events and functions including Farmer's Market, athletic events at the rec center, meetings in City Hall, so it seems more appropriate as a downtown type designation. Those municipal blocks also front onto Gilbert Street, a four -lane arterial street, to the south end which is Burlington Street, also Highway 1. Given the input staff received from the Commission at the last meeting, staff wanted to articulate more clearly what is recommended for building heights similar to how the Downtown District and Riverfront Crossings Plan identifies building height scenarios in that plan, staff has done the same for these blocks. The Downtown District Plan recommends taller buildings on corners with shorter buildings along the block face, so this plan show taller buildings on corners of College Street and Gilbert Street and also the corners of Burlington Street and Gilbert Street to be 7-15 stories which is consistent with the Downtown District and River Crossings Plan. Staff recognizes the need for the height transition and show the east side of the municipal blocks as 4-6 stories. Translating that to future zoning, that could be either a CB -5 zone or a CB -10 zone with a height limit which can be done through a conditional zoning agreement. Miklo pointed out the north area, along the Iowa Avenue frontage, noting that importance of the Iowa Avenue corridor as it is the view path of the Old Capital, and staff recommends 2-4 stories height limits for buildings that front onto Iowa Avenue. Staff has identified the Unitarian Church property as a key historic building, and again the Riverfront Crossings Plan does identify key historic buildings in that plan, the Unitarian Church property is clearly eligible for historic designation, so it is appropriate to show that on the map. Yapp pointed out the two asterisks on the map, staff looked at the policies in the Riverfront Crossings Plan, which includes policies for preservation of historic property and as incentives would offer density bonuses and parking reductions. One way the City could potentially participate in that would be to allow a more significant structure on the Iowa Avenue frontage, which is now a surface parking lot, in exchange for preservation of the church Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 5 of 9 property. Yapp handed the Commission a memo prior to the meeting starting with a revision to provide more detail about the historic policies. The Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Plan contains polices which are intended to promote the preservation of historic buildings. The plan states that incentives and policy options that encourage preservation should be implemented. The current zoning code allows for a density bonus for adaptive reuse of historic structures, and Yapp pointed out the church property is currently zoned CB -5. The CB -5 and CB -2 zones allows for additional square footage in buildings developed in the vacant portions of the property. Yapp pointed out that in this particular case the vacant portions of this block face are owned by the City as parking. The current zoning however does not allow for this bonus in the CB -10 zone nor does it allow for the type of historic preservation density transfer to a separate development project which is part of the form -based code in the Riverfront Crossings Zone. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to amend the zoning code for the central business zones to allow for this type of transfer of development rights for historic buildings similar to the Riverfront Crossings Zones. Given that the City controls the surface parking lots in the Civic Districts, the City may have a role in providing locations for this transfer. Yapp next showed the Commission a building height transition map, a corrected map was handed out prior to the start of this evenings meetings because on the map included in the packet the Unitarian Church property was identified as a 2-5 story in potential height and that was based on the current zoning, but after reviewing that property, staff realized as part of their Comprehensive Plan amendment they propose a 2-4 story height limit, again with a possibility of going taller if the church is preserved. Regarding more specifically historic properties in the Civic District, staff reviewed the Iowa Site Inventory Forms, and based on the available forms only the Unitarian Church at 10 South Gilbert Street is clearly identified as being eligible for the national registry. The properties at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue may be eligible based on architectural elements, those are the United Action for Youth properties. For properties that do not have Site Inventory Forms, 505 Iowa Avenue has potential for National Registry eligibility. The other properties in this district, in Staff's opinion, have been altered to such an extent they do not meet the criteria for eligibility. Miklo added that a professional architectural historian prepared the reports, so it was not just staff opinion. Miklo added that everything except the south side of the 500 block of Iowa Avenue has a Site Inventory. Martin asked about the United Action for Youth buildings, stating that they have been extensively remodeled, but because the fronts have retained the original architecture they may still be eligible. Miklo confirmed that was correct. Freerks stated that making a change in this area may have an impact on the future of the area in a way that the other comprehensive plan amendment may not. She questioned about the properties along College Street, there are blocks that have a certain distinction and with the current zoning in that area Freerks needs clarification how this amendment works with regards to transition from the mixed-use properties to the historic properties or the homes in that area. Homes are setback further from the street than any of the commercial properties. Yapp replied that he had not reviewed all the setbacks for that area, and would need time to review. Freerks believes that the setbacks are as important as the height limitations and perhaps the Commission needs to look at the zoning in these areas to help with the transitions in these areas. Thomas added that especially in the area where they are discussing central business zones abutting residential zones there needs to be a side yard transitional edge. Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 — Work Session Page 6 of 9 Eastham agrees that the "feel" of walking down College, Washington, or Iowa there is a distinct difference once east of Gilbert Street. Thomas asked for confirmation on his understanding of the history of discussions of planning in the Downtown District, his recollection is that densities higher than CB -5, meaning CB -10, east of Gilbert Street were first introduced in the College/Gilbert RFP and this discussion today is a follow up to that. Yapp confirmed that is generally correct, in the past the City and the public have always seen those three municipal blocks as City Campus, then after the City went through a facilities study and realized it did not need all that property to be part of the City Campus, and introduced allowing mixed-use development on those three blocks. After that discussion, then there was the issuance of the RFP for the College/Gilbert property. Thomas stated he could not discover any discussions regarding buildings east of Gilbert being larger than 6 stories and asked if staff recall of any such discussions. Yapp could not recall any specific discussions. Yapp added that the three blocks west of Van Buren Street, the City blocks, they are already part of the Downtown Riverfront Crossings Parking District and that was a zoning code change implemented after the Riverfront Crossings Plan was adopted and that parking district does allow for a reduction in required parking for things like historic preservation of buildings and for properties that meet other public goals. Swygard asked Yapp what some of those other public goals might be. Yapp replied an example would be affordable housing and economic development. In this context historic preservation and affordable housing are the two main allowances for a reduction in required parking. Eastham asked with regards to historic preservation, the Riverfront Crossings Plan states "protecting historic character and key historic structures" is an overriding goal to consider. Eastham feels the phrase historic character is not the same as a specific building. Eastham also pointed out on the map, the two blocks between College/Burlington and Gilbert/Van Buren there are two parts identified for higher building heights and those do appear as corner areas of the blocks but the one on the south side of College and Gilbert seems to be larger than just the corner but seems to be more of a quarter of the block and questioned why that area was larger than just the corner. Yapp answered that since it's directly adjacent to the Chauncey Swan parking ramp is one factor and it is also adjacent to Chauncey Swan Park, a designated open space. Eastham also pointed out in the Staff memo, there was rationale for providing more density in this part of the Civic District and a need for more Class A office space in the Downtown District but there is not much analysis as to what the yield is for the additional Class A office space. Miklo replied that much of the "older" downtown has older buildings and in those buildings they are not designed for Class A office space. The Downtown Riverfront Crossings Plan suggests is for preservation for much of the older downtown as opposed to redevelopment to provide for that Class A office space. In the Riverfront Crossings form -based code there are provisions for height bonuses if a developer creates Class A office space but that does not apply to downtown yet. Hektoen stated that in the CB -10 zoning there is a provision for height bonuses for Class A office space. Thomas said we had a proposed building height plan in the Comprehensive Plan for Downtown/Riverfront Crossings. He put a fair amount of stake in that plan in terms of what it Planning and Zoning Commission February 3, 2015 - Work Session Page 7 of 9 meant for future development. From what he has seen thus far, however, the plan's principles aren't necessarily reflected in the proposed development projects south of Burlington. "Where the rubber meets the road" is the regulating plan, which in Riverfront Crossings are the base heights and bonus heights. In the Downtown, the regulating plan is the zoning code. The proposed building heights diagram doesn't have regulating power. It's a suggestion and isn't necessarily adhered to. There is no guarantee that what you see will be implemented. Yapp pointed out that all the properties currently zoned public will have to be rezoned to be developed and at that time the Commission and the Council can impose height limitations or other limitations or setback discussions at the time they are actually zoned and what is embodied in the zoning for the area is what regulates the area. Hektoen pointed out the Comprehensive Plan is meant to guide the rezoning process not define it. Eastham asked a question about the height limitations, Yapp explained that east of Van Buren Street the height limitations are based on the existing zoning. The height limitations can be changed if the zoning is changed. Miklo stated the height legends on the maps gives guidance to the Commission and Council for future decisions of the areas. Freerks reiterated that her concern is not only height limitations, but also setback requirements and transitions from commercial to residential areas. Yapp agreed to provide the Commission with the setbacks for the areas before Thursday's meeting. Yapp explained that there is a provision in the zoning code for setback averaging and he will look at that and see how it might function in this area. Freerks also suggested perhaps dividing the Civic District amendment into two separate items due to the areas that are more residential and have possible historic properties and how the transition from the areas is maintained. The Commission agreed they would like Staff to prepare the area as two separate items for a motion for Thursday's meeting. Yapp recapped what the Commission is requesting for Thursday's meeting; pertinent policies from the historic preservation plan and how they would affect these two areas, provide the existing setbacks and building placements in the different zones in this area and how those relate to each other, they will provide language of how a comprehensive plan functions, what it covers, how it relates to a zoning code, and finally dividing the agenda up into potentially three different motions. Freerks reminded that at Thursday's meeting they will hold public hearing on these agenda items. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS None ADJOURNMENT Martin moved to adjourn. Swygard seconded. Motion carried. MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 2015 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Charlie Eastham, Ann Freerks Paula Swygard, Phoebe Martin, Jodie Theobald, John Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, John Yapp, Robert Miklo, Kent Ralston OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Cilek, Marc Moen, Sarah Clark, Rockne Cole, Alan Swanson, Jim Knapp, Casey Cook, Amanda Van Horne, Ann Christensen, Mark Nolte, Marc McCullum, Tim Conroy, Pam Michaud, Cecile Kuenzli, Ethan Diehl, Rudolf Kuenzli, Matthew Fleming, Mary Bennett, Nancy Bird, John Fogerty, Joyce Summerwill, Amanda Ward, Joseph Knock, Dick Summerwill, Joe Hughes, Deanna Furhmeister, Dan Furhmeister :_ •uuTTLe_ I LeiM The Commission moved by a vote of 7-0 to approve REZ14-00023, an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development -Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive Freerks called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. There were none. Comprehensive Plan Item A public hearing for discussion of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the blocks generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street (AKA the North Clinton / Dubuque Street District): and the blocks generally bounded by Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, Van Buren Street, and Iowa Avenue (AKA the Civic District). Yapp began discussing the 2013 Comprehensive Plan and that it states identifies two areas, one located generally east of Gilbert St and north of Burlington St, the other located north of Iowa Ave Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 2 of 24 and west of Dubuque St, as areas that were not included in the Downtown Master Plan or the Central District Plan. The IC2030 Comprehensive Plan states that while both areas have the potential to redevelop at higher densities both should comply with the policies and goals of the Central District Plan in order to ensure quality design and appropriate transitions to the areas that border them. Both of these areas are currently part of the Downtown Planning District (from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan). Yapp showed a map of the area and defined the two areas in question. For the purposes of this report, staff has separated the North Clinton I Dubuque District and the Civic District, and have provided staff recommendations for each district separately. First is the North Clinton I Dubuque District. The majority of the North Clinton I Dubuque District is zoned Planned Residential Multi -Family (PRM). It is characterized by multi -family apartments, former single family homes converted to apartments, religious and other institutions, and other public uses. With close proximity to the University of Iowa, demand is strong for multi -family residential as well as institutional and public uses. The purpose of the PRM Zone is to provide for the development of high density multi -family housing in close proximity to centrally- located employment, educational and commercial uses. The PRM zone is subject to multi -family design standards, and allows for both a density bonus and height increase up to 65 feet (5-6 stories) provided certain 'public benefits' are included in the project. These public benefits include a masonry finish on the exterior of the building, usable open space for the occupants of the building, rehabilitation of a historic building, provision of assisted housing, streetscape amenities, additional landscaping and/or windows that have a height 1.5 times greater than their width. Yapp pointed out on the south end of the Clinton St / Dubuque St District by Jefferson Street that is a portion of the Jefferson Street Historic District is represented on the map as Overlay Historic District (OHD). Freerks asked Yapp to discuss or explain how the overlay will come into play with this change to the area. Yapp stated that the historic overlay will not be affected by the comprehensive plan changes. Freerks asked how the historic overlay district would be affected by development. Yapp explained that any demolition of properties, or proposed exterior changes, such as an addition or change in the exterior of the property, or construction of an accessory building such as a garage, would need to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission before a building permit could be issued. Eastham asked if the OHD limits redevelopment height? Can a two-story building in an OHD be replaced by a five -story building? Yapp stated that it would depend on two different things. One the underlying zoning, and what that zoning would allow in terms of height, and two it would need to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. Yapp continued his presentation showing a map of the land uses. The North Clinton / Dubuque St District has many land uses, private institutions (religious), multi -family uses, mixed-use buildings consisting of both residential and commercial or offices, and there is also an office use and single- Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 3 of 24 family or duplex uses in this district as well. Yapp showed photos of the area to show the variety of the land uses. Yapp moved on to describe the Civic District, The Civic District, so named due to the municipal/public uses in the district, is a mixed-use area in that it contains a variety of uses. Besides municipal uses, it contains multi -family, commercial, and institutional uses. Historically the three municipal blocks (bounded by Gilbert St, Iowa Ave, Van Buren St and Burlington St) have been identified as municipal campus blocks. These blocks contain City Hal!, Fire and Police stations, the Recreation Center, Swan Parking Facility, and Chauncey Swan Park. The zoning of this area is also a mix, the municipal blocks are zoned public, for the most part with portions of them zoned CB5 for non-public uses. The east side of Van Buren St and the north side of Iowa Ave are zoned CB -2 and CB -5, which are central business support classifications. The land uses in the Civic district are public uses, and a mixture of office, commercial, and mixed-use land uses Yapp explained that they received public comment on the Ralston Creek Corridor, and he believes the Ralston Creek Corridor represents an opportunity for the area. He showed images of the area and stated that some of the comments were to clean up some of the invasive species in the corridor, make Ralston Creek more accessible, and provide trail and/or way -side parks along the creek corridor. Additionally much of the public comment was related to historic buildings, and he showed on the images the designated historic landmarks at 130 E. Jefferson Street and 30 N. Clinton Street. There are also several potential historic buildings in both the areas discussed this evening, 10 S. Gilbert Street, 410 & 422 Iowa Avenue, and 109 E. Market Street. Yapp began discussing the staff recommendation for the Central District Plan and stated that staff proposes adding the North Clinton I Dubuque St District to the Central District Plan map with land use categories consistent with the rest of the Central Planning District. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, outside of the three municipal blocks, be added to the Central District Plan and identified as mixed-use (These properties are already identified as 'mixed-use' in the larger Comprehensive Plan land use map). This proposal will fit in with existing polices and goals in the Central District Plan which include: • Goal #1: Promote the Central District as an attractive place to live by encouraging reinvestment in residential properties throughout the district and by supporting new housing opportunities. • Goal #1(d): Support the goals and objectives proposed in the Historic Preservation Plan. • Goal #2(d): In higher density multi -family zones, ensure that adequate infrastructure and open space is provided to create a livable environment for residents. • Goal #3(c): Implement targeted code enforcement for areas that receive a higher level of complaints regarding zoning code violations, snow and weed removal, and trash control that affect neighborhood quality of life Selected Existing Transportation Goals —Central District Plan Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 4 of 24 • Goal #1: Balance traffic circulation needs, preserve neighborhood character, and public safety issues. • Goal #1(b): When planning for street improvements, give consideration to all modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and driving. Balance these needs with desirability of on -street parking and street trees. • Goal #3: Develop a plan to formalize safe bicycle and pedestrian connections between the major destinations in the district, including downtown Iowa City, neighborhood commercial areas, the UI campus, parks and elementary and secondary schools. • Goal #3(d): Continue to explore options such as high -visibility crosswalks to improve pedestrian crossings where major pedestrian routes intersect with arteria! Streets • Goal #4: Encourage development of businesses, institutions, and public entities that provide goods, services, and amenities that support healthy neighborhoods. • Goal #4(a): Encourage a diverse range of businesses that provide essential services to the Downtown area -grocery, clothing, household items, etc. • Goal #4(b): Encourage investment and reinvestment in existing commercial areas that provide goods and services for Central District neighborhoods. • Goal #5(a): Install pedestrian lighting where needed to create safe travel corridors for pedestrians. • Goal #5(c): Provide for walkable/bikable routes to and through commercial areas. Selected Existing Transportation Goal —Central District Plan • Goal #3(e): Explore the viability of alternative routes for bikes and pedestrians along Ralston Creek, recognizing the difficulties posed by private ownership of the creek, access, and flooding. Selected Existing Open Space Goals —Central District Plan • Goal #3: Improve the amenities offered in existing parks or other open spaces • Goal #5(a): Develop plans for improving visual and physical access to Ralston Creek and for restoration of the stream along both public and privately owned sections of the creek. Yapp explained that some of the input they received they could not find a goal or policy in the existing district plan, so as part of putting these areas into the Central District Plan staff recommends three additional goals: Housing Goal #1(h): Review the Multi Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors without overly discouraging redevelopment. Transportation Goal #3 (k): Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque St and Clinton St to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. Transportation Goal #3(h): As Dubuque St, Clinton St and other area streets are redesigned/reconstructed incorporate complete streets principals into their design Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 5 of 24 Yapp reconfirmed that this is the recommendation for the Central District Plan. Freerks asked Yapp to discuss and explain how this plan is different and used different than the Civic use map. She pointed out it appears there are additional properties. Yapp explained that when they reviewed the existing boundaries of the central district use map, there were slight inconsistencies with what was in the comprehensive plan. He pointed out the area that is being recommended to add to the Central District Plan, and the rest is already in the Central District Plan. Yapp discussed the remainder of the Civic District, the three municipal blocks, those are part of the old downtown planning district, in the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. Yapp explained staff is recommending these three blocks be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings area and will be subject to some of policies and goals of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan: • New development should be located on sites that do not contain historic buildings. • Active uses, such as ground floor retail (and not blank walls) should front onto the street frontages and the City Plaza. • Upper floors should contain office, commercial, and residential uses. • Buildings should be built to the property line. • Corner locations should be reserved for taller buildings, creating a block structure with taller buildings on the comers and lower scale historic buildings between them. • The taller buildings on the corners should have a lower base consistent with [any] adjacent historic buildings to make them 'feel' contextual with the rest of downtown, while also limiting the perceived height of towers. • Parking should be located both on -street and behind storefronts in parking structures Eastham questioned the recommendation that new developments not be located on historic properties, and asked if there was a sequence to the staff's planning process, stating that specific consideration cannot be given to historic properties, if they do not know what the historic properties are. Yapp replied that it is for the properties that are already designated as historic or if designated in the future through the historic landmark designation process. Yapp continue on and gave the staff recommendation for the three municipal blocks in the Civic District are: 1. Staff recommends the three municipal blocks, bounded by Iowa Ave, Gilbert St, Burlington St, and Van Buren St remain in the Downtown Planning District and be added to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings and Downtown Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit B. 2. Staff recommends the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Land Use Map be amended to include the three municipal blocks shown as a mix of 'Civic' and 'Mixed Use' and be added to the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as an addendum, as shown on Exhibit C. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 6 of 24 3. Staff recommends the remainder of the Civic District, north of Iowa Ave and east of Van Buren St, be added to the Central District Plan and shown as 'Mixed Use' as shown on Exhibit A. Eastham asked if "Mixed Use" in this area would have the same meaning as the rest of the Comprehensive Plan, as in the Central District. Yapp explained that yes "Mixed Use" means buildings that have a variety of uses, including residential and/or commercial or office uses. Freerks questioned why in the Civic Land Use Map Ralston Creek was not used as more of a barrier and kind of a dividing area, and instead have the boundary in the middle of block. Swygard agreed that there is a question in the area between the Civic District and the east side of Van Buren Street. Freerks confirmed that the entire area is confusing, multiple districts, multiple overlays, and bringing the Rivertront Crossings area over to this area, and giving a designation to an area that has in the past been a "no man's land". Her feeling is that doing this movement within districts is kind of a "up zoning". Yapp explained that it is a comprehensive plan land use map redesign, but it could result in re- zoning actions or be a basis for rezoning actions in the future. He reiterated that staff recommended that the three municipal blocks be part of the Downtown District for the reasons they are higher intensity in use, they are served by major arterial streets, and they are served by a parking structure. Therefore the remainder of the area, north of Iowa Avenue and East of Van Buren St they recommend being part of the Central District due to the types of uses of the buildings, the intensity of the uses, are more in keeping with the Central District policies and goals. Freerks commented that in the past there has been public comment on keeping transitions from areas to areas, and she doesn't think this district has enough transition. Hektoen stated that the boundary of the Central District already includes the home to the east. Yapp confirmed that only the three municipal blocks would be going into the Rivertront Crossings/Downtown area. Eastham also questioned how the staff recommendations build the concept of transitions both in the concepts, height and building design, characteristics, etc. from one side of the transition are to the other. Yapp stated that consideration was given, with Ralston Creek there is a topographic transition east and west of the creek, and also in the zoning as east of Van Buren St. it is CB -2 and CB -5 zoning and then to the east transitions to multi -family zoning, then further east transitions to the College Green Historic District. Also the recommended land use map indicates mixed use designation east of Van Buren and north of Iowa Avenue, which then transitions to residential land use designation, so there is mixed use and multi -family between the downtown and residential areas. Eastham believes that the staff recommendation actually extends CB -10 zoning across Gilbert Street into those three blocks of civic uses. Yapp stated it could be CB -5 there as well, however Thomas pointed out there is no CB -5 zoning in the Downtown District. Freerks asked staff to explain what the area east of the Civic District is. Hektoen said that was the Central District, and the staff recommendation is to add the area of the Civic District, with the exception of the three municipal blocks from the Civic District into the Central District. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 7 of 24 Thomas asked if the Northside Market Place was in the Central District and Yapp confirmed that it was. Freerks opened public hearing. Dan Cilek (Oakland Avenue) works for Meta Communications Company and they recently moved offices from South Gilbert St to the Downtown District, and stated he does support the proposed recommendation due to the effect it is having on his business. He really hopes to see trails built along Ralston Creek and to have more recreational area around the creek. Cilek hears from his staff that they want to live in housing near the downtown area to be close to work and other businesses. Marc Moen, commented about the Civic District, having focused on the area for many years, and made investments in the area, and the area that was once reserved for City Campus would now be considered for development. On that consideration, his company retained design and landscape experts to look at the possibilities of the area, most specifically the corner of College Street and Gilbert Street. After a couple years of research on what that area could be, and sustain, it seemed logical it would be part of the Central Business District. Having this area included in the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan will be great for this building, and Moen supports this proposal. He stated it is critical to move forward to sustain Iowa City, but also critical to maintain the historic buildings and areas which is a crucial part of the fabric of downtown. This proposal allows the City to move forward and attract the best and the brightest of people and businesses in Iowa City, and allows businesses to recruit which is very important. Adding mixed use buildings to the area will only expand the area, the alternative is to take buildings down, which would lose the integrity of the fabric of the downtown area. Moen reiterated he supports the recommendation to Council to allow mixed use buildings in this area and feels it will be an advantage to both the College Green area and the downtown. Sarah Clark (Brown Street) distributed copies to each commissioner a letter signed by 21 folks who live in the north side and Goosetown neighborhoods. The letter states: As longtime residents of closest to downtown Iowa City, we are writing to share our concerns about the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments to be discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission's Public Hearing to be held of January 15, 2015. While we are in general agreement with City Staff recommendations, to add the North Clinton/Dubuque Street district to the Central District we are troubled by the proposed addition Civic District to the Downtown District of the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Master Plan. Our concerns are these. We believe it is critically important to prevent the abrupt and unsightly transition between the high-rise structures allowable in certain Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Districts and their low-rise and largely historic neighbors. One can imagine for example the Civic District one day being populated with shoulder to shoulder 15 story apartments or condos towering over and destroying the views from College Green Park and the near north side. We would thus advocate the requirements of more appropriate transition zones between districts as recommended in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Instead of adding to the Downtown District, the Civic District presents an ideal opportunity to create a distinctive mixed-use area on the near -east side just as north -side market place has its own distinctive character and that would further strengthen the Comprehensive Plan's emphasis on appropriate transitions between districts. Cities need diversity and Iowa City is deficient in walkable commercial districts. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 8 of 24 Finally, we strongly encourage the development of more diverse and affordable housing options within both the Downtown/Riverfront Crossing and Central Districts for populations other than college students. We are thinking retirees, working professionals, young families. And further, that such options incorporate a multitude of housing types, from single-family homes, as promoted by the admirable UniverCity Program, to mid -rises, duplexes, low-rise townhouses, apartments and even pocket neighborhoods. Expanding the Downtown District without additional discussion and possible zoning adjustments would erase these valuable and fleeting opportunities to enhance the quality and livability of Iowa City's unique downtown and surrounding districts. As Joni Mitchell (and I'm showing our age here) so famously sang "You don't know what you've got until it's gone". We urge the City to reconsider the addition of the Civic District into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings District and instead, within the Central District require more appropriate transitions zones, encourage more mixed use area zones, and incentify more affordable housing options for all. Rockne Cole (1607 East Court Street) is speaking as co-chair of the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow and as a concerned citizen related to this project. We oppose adding the three blocks contained in the Civic District to the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings District Master Plan. This Commission should defer this decision until the Commission can come up with a plan specifically tailored to the unique aspects of this area. Colel believes the key thing to emphasize here is they have some incredibly articulate logical members of this community on both sides. He is quite confident regardless of which argument the Commission hears tonight, they will not be able to determine whether this is a downtown area or a neighborhood area. And the reason is because it has aspects of both. On the one hand, you are essentially within one block from the College Green Park. On the other hand, you look to the west of that and you are two blocks down to the downtown and it's precisely because that no side is going to be able to tell you definitely whether it's purely downtown or purely a neighborhood. That is what makes it a transitional area. As far as he can tell by the comments made tonight by Mr. Yapp, what he is identifying as a transitional zone is essentially to the east of Ralston Creek to College Green Park. So basically a half a block protection. The reality is, it's true Mr. Moen has put in a lot of time effort, but the City should have had this conversation four years ago before it put out the request for proposal for that area. The reality is now there is a proposal that has polarized the community. Cole believes the greatest irony here is as we look forward, how do we save the downtown, and how do we save our neighborhoods. The proposal tonight is destabilizing the neighborhood, it's destabilizing the long- term residents that are there. I know each and every resident that resides along the west side of College Green Park, every single one of them is opposed to this project, this zoning designation. The Trinity Church has spoken as a church and while it's not confirmed, a substantial number of the members are opposed to this designation. And so because, and when you have a designation where there are two sides of the community, operating in good faith, both passionately believing in the purpose of what they believe in, that is precisely when this commission should step back, allow additional time, delay this process, and reopen so we can get something uniquely tailored for this area. Cole stated he is quite confident that if allowed, and the multitude got their ability to participate, the result would be something less controversial. Everyone agrees it needs to be developed, everyone agrees it needs to be mixed use, the question is, are we going to essentially have an intense use building within a block of a historic neighborhood. Cole is asking the Commission to defer, and one final comment some of the downtown developments have been Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 9 of 24 good, but the reality is they are downtown, and moving into the transitional zone will just create more conversations of the same in years to come. Alan Swanson (Blank & McCune Real Estate). His business is in the Civic District, or very close to it. He thinks moving the Civic District into the Riverfront Crossings area is a stroke of genius. It is something that looks to the future, and should not be waited on, not only are there young people who want to live downtown, many people of all ages from all over the country are looking to live in downtown Iowa City to be close to everything going on as possible. This would be a way to have higher density for people to live here beyond the students. Young professionals and retirees will live there and use all the things that are coming to Iowa City more and more and it's a time to move forward for Iowa City. Swanson stated he sees Iowa City as an international city, and while there may be a few tall buildings, they are not and will not be side by side, there will be some discretion where they are put. Jim Knapp stated there was an area in the Central Business District that appears to be absent and that is the corner of Clinton and Burlington, and the northeast side of that. There is a privately owned parking lot there now, but supposedly there are no legally owned privately run parking lots within the City of Iowa City, but this has been allowed by special agreement. This lot is large enough to house a city parking structure, and is competing against the already existing City parking lots. Knapp questioned why it is allowed to have a privately owned parking lot there. This would be an area perfect in the Central Business District perfect for a tall building, rather than in an area where it will be a shadow on a church and part of the rest of Iowa City. Knapp feels that high- rise buildings should not be on the edge of the district where there are parks and residential areas. Casey Cook (1 Oakpark Court) stated planners are like hockey players, the most successful ones anticipate where the puck is going to be. You are looking at the big picture, the Comp Plan reflects this perspective. It also considers the big picture, the community at large. Cook stated what he liked about this plan, he feels this plan continues the City's commitment to compact incontiguous development as a critical element in a community that works. This plan supports and enhances an investment in the Central Business District, it is the heart of the community, and we need to build on that success. Cook stated the City should continue to nurture a trail and pathway system the knits our community together and passively contains stormwater and emits flooding. An efficient community can be humane as well as gentle on the environment. We should continue to compete effectively with the communities around us, and capitalize on our resources as a critical aspect of good stewardship. We are all part of a large and complex community, a community of communities in fact, and he encourages the Commission to bring manifold considerations into their deliberations. Cook then stated his concerns about the plan, as well as additional questions for the Commission to think about. Is there some coordination between the planning policy and the concerns of the finance department? Specifically what is the impact on revenues from recent changes imposed by the state, that now assess partial commercial properties, mixed use, at residential rates. Basically half their value. What are the consequences of the rollback on multi- family assessments on City, County and School revenues? How committed do you believe the state is to backfill these lost revenues and for how long? And how does it affect your planning? If the City continues to trade restrictive zoning for tax benefit dollars, at what point are you willing to reduce support for the Senior Center? At what point do you cut support for the Summer of Arts, or Jazzfest? At what point are you prepared to cut support for human services? Can the City afford to jeopardize their support of the library? These are the kinds of considerations Cook believes Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 10 of 24 needs to come into the process, he feels the people in this room are asking important questions, wanting to know where historic preservation fits it, the priorities in the planning process, the quality of design and architecture. Cook stated as a six-year member of the Planning Commission, and a commercial real estate appraiser with a 30 year history in Iowa City, with a master's degree in urban planning from The University of Iowa, he shares the concerns. While design, architecture and historic preservation are important parts of the process, the Comp Plan needs to be a lot more. Amanda Van Horne (1722 Ridgeway Drive) is before the Commission as an elected representative of Trinity Episcopal Church. Van Horne stated that Trinity Episcopal Church is a Iowa City institution that has been on that corner since 1871. The church has been against the Chauncey development and can make the same arguments tonight because changing the Comprehensive Plan allows that development to proceed. She could argue that high-rise buildings impinge on the light of their neighbors, that buildings over 10 stories are not cost-effective to build, and that these costs are passed along to their tenants, making it impossible for affordable housing, that density alone does not make for environmental sustainability, and the use of a TIF for this sort of building hinders tax payers dollars without realizing a significant community benefit in return. But the question of the Chauncey is not before the Commission today, what is before the Commission today is changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the arguments about the Chauncey is that it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and with these changes that alter the default zoning, that would no longer be the case. The Comprehensive Plan shares a vision seen amongst a diversity of the community on how land is used to serve the good of all. What is that vision for Iowa City? How is the manner in which we use land and other resources affect the community? A city gains its character from the relationships between businesses, cultural institution, government and individual citizens and visitors. Churches are in the category of private cultural institutions. Among their unique contributions to a city's character is their ability to draw people together across boundaries of age, economic status, and personal interests. Secular public stations offer similar opportunities for people to come together. We've chosen neighborhoods, occupations, and neighborhoods, based on generation, economical, and other characteristics. Van Horne notes that the Central District and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan as it was presented today, does not support the continuation of these private sources. Van Horne represents Trinity Episcopal Church because they believe the changes that will come from this Comprehensive Plan will harm churches and infringe on spaces that allow for public discourse in the city. Trinity and other downtown churches operate seven days a week, hosting group meetings, social events, and art performances in addition to offering spiritual care for their members. Chauncey Swan Park serves as a spontaneous town square, hosting the farmer's market, food trucks, protests and other political speech. Incorporating this entire area into the Downtown Planning District makes it possible for tall buildings to be built in multiple locations. A tall building that towers over the nearby park and other buildings, eclipsing them from sunlight throughout the day, will be detrimental to the character of the public spaces, and will have a chilling effect, literally, on the park. A tall building, who's users monopolize the parking garage because the building itself does not supply significant parking, will place a particular burden on nearby churches and other community organizations like the recreation center and farmer's market creating a barrier to participation in these areas for those that cannot easily walk and ultimately effecting their growth and mission potential and restricting participation. The church views this as an improachment on their historic space. The contributions of Trinity and other Iowa City churches to the community is significant. Trinity has provided space to The University of Iowa jazz department, since their offices and classroom Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 11 of 24 spaces were destroyed by the 2008 flood. Trinity provides volunteer labor and publicity for the annual shelter house book sale, has been an overflow location for the program, and it provided leadership for the Agave Cafe. Downtown churches are united in efforts to provide free lunch, EIP, and annual school supply and outwear drives. All of this is work that flows from our community in the downtown area, and would not take place if the church was located in another space. Churches are an untapped resource of volunteers and social services, churches makes friends of strangers, even if that stranger doesn't attend that community of faith, an in a civic culture that favors for-profit entities the contributions of faith communities will remain unacknowledged until pressures placed on them, such as the changes proposed by this Comprehensive Plan, impair their ability to do their work. At that time, the extent to which they contribute to the City's quality of life, will become readily apparent in its absence. If this change to the Comprehensive Plan goes forward, if the zoning is changed to allow the Chauncey to be built, Van Horne believes Trinity will follow the lead of First Christian Church, St. Patrick's, and perhaps the Unitarian Church, and leave the downtown area. The community will be the poorer for it, many of Iowa City's faith communities are among their oldest, they've had an integral part in knitting together its fabric, and making it what it is today. What would a community be like without any of its faith organizations? What will be lost if these faith communities disappear from downtown? What holes would there be in our everyday life? Van Horne challenges the Commission to consider how these proposed changes will be realized, and indeed much of that vision has already been articulated by the City, but to think of who will be unintentionally harmed, and urges the Commission to vote against the changes to the Civic District Plan. Ann Christensen (827 Dearborn Street) read to the Commission a passage from a book by Bill Brycen, who is an Iowa native, grew up in Des Moines, but spent most of his adult life England. He writes about growing up in Des Moines, and highly recommends his books, they are non-fiction, historic books, with a lot of width to them. At one point when he was living in England, he's married to an English woman, they were moving back to America for few years, he decided to take a walking tour of England, and he critique the various towns and cities he walked through, and he was very critical in much of what was done in the name of urban development, in the name of progress. And in Manchester, his comment was, he talked about what he considered two very ugly buildings, and then he said "but let me also say that neither is as bad as the Maples Building, that rises like some kind of half-witted practical joke, a dozen or so stories into the air in the middle of a long street of unguinous Victorian structures. Now how did that happen, he asked". If this high- rise building is permitted on that corner, the Chauncey, Christensen is going to write to Brycen and explain to him exactly how this happens, and how we end up with a blithe in our community. That tall of a structure does not belong on that corner, and there are a lot of other places around town that it could go. Mark Nolte (lives on the west side of town) has been a resident of Iowa City since 1993 and moved here from a community that continues to shrink, because there is apathy. What is so great about this community, there are people are both sides of this issue, but as Nolte represents the community as his job is to attract people and businesses to come to this community, and that we are at a very unique point in history. The City needs to think about how they are going to sustain and grow the tax base, what people are looking for now is density, to live in areas that are fun and healthy and vibrant and they don't need a car. Nolte stated he supports historical preservation but also acknowledges we need more density, more office spaces (office vacancy rates are near zero). Nolte hears from companies all the time that would like to come to Iowa City but there is not Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 12 of 24 sufficient office property downtown for them. Additionally any housing that can be added that fits the design and ethos of the community he supports, stating there needs to be more done for affordable housing, and some of those elements have been addressed in the Chauncey development. Nolte stated his support of the staffs recommendation, believing it is something Iowa City needs. Although he is not a parishioner of the church, nor lives on Iowa Avenue so he is not personally affected and is sensitive to those who are, however long term the City needs to be thinking about how they can grow, and move forward sustainable. Nolte stated height should not be the issue, as long as there is good design and good architecture, it can be a nice addition to the community (gave the example of Grant Park in New York City, surrounded by very high buildings). Marc McCullum (13 South Johnson), just purchased this property about a year and a half ago, even after the development issues had arisen, but still wanted to be in this neighborhood. On the east side view of his building he has wonderful views of the park, and on the west side of the building he has wonderful views of a direct skyline view of downtown Iowa City. McCullum supports density and development, but is afraid of, is by having this move in the Central Planning District, there are design guidelines, in the Downtown District there are no design guidelines. McCullum finds that visitors to Iowa City like the areas such as Clinton Street, the lower -rise buildings. The Washington Plaza Building is built to CB -5 and it doesn't feel like there is a transition from that building to the residential areas. That building followed the Central Planning District guidelines, and that same developer is building a wonderful building up on Linn Street. McCullum feels that if the Commission adopts this plan, while there might be provisions to protect historic structures, there are no guarantees, as seen from other areas in the Riverfront Crossings District. If this proposal goes forward, he believes the area will lose the church, the youth homes, every property owner is re-evaluating their property situation. Tim Conroy (1410 Foster Road) questioned why this area wasn't originally considered when the Riverfront Crossings District was first discussed in the Comprehensive Plan. The area in question seems to be one of the most organic organizing meeting areas for Iowa City residents, such as farmer's market, Rummage in the Ramp, and the Rec Center. All of these are amazing public gatherings and to bring it into the Comprehensive Plan, is a good thing. The question is if the area should go beyond Ralston Creek, which would serve as a natural divide, as Commission Freerks brought up. Conroy doesn't feel a bunch of tall buildings will go up if the Civic Area is pulled into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings area because a lot of the land in question is owned by the City. He agrees with pushing the boundaries a little to include more businesses into the Downtown District. There are several businesses east of Ralston Creek that would like to be in the Downtown District. Conroy does not discount the fears and feelings of the residents of the College Green Park area, but that will not be included in this proposal. The project looming in everybody's mind, the Chauncey, is another discussion. Pam Michaud (111 South Johnson) stated she has lived in her house for 24 years and has seen four Victorian houses destroyed right behind her home to be replaced by a block long, ungraceful, four story building for undergraduates. 120 bedrooms were added to the neighborhood in a year. That was zoned CB -2, limit of 45 feet high. Michaud can see keeping the Gilbert Street area CB -5 because it is stepping down from CB -10. Michaud stated that terms like Central District and Comprehensive Plan are euphuisms for "taking over". A transition zone to a historic area is not two buildings. It's hardly even two blocks. It is ludicrous to say there is a transition zone when buildings of any height will be built right up to the historic neighborhood. Michaud stated that as Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 13 of 24 seen in major cities in America and abroad, historic areas make a difference, and Iowa Avenue will not be the same without the Unitarian Church and the two Victorian houses. Being part of a historic district is an honor, and stated there is a need for transitional zones. Michaud also stated that developers of large buildings, that will allow residents to have dogs, should be required to also provide a dog park for the residents. That would be structuring in green space. She also stated that she believes Iowa City will soon have an overabundance of hotels and more and more people are wanting to stay at B&B's so hotel prices need to drop to compete. In closing, Michael reiterated that massive block long buildings do not belong adjacent to historic Victorian homes. Cecile Kuenzli (705 S. Summit Street) is asking the Commission to not fold the Civic District into the Riverfront Crossings District because if it is done, there will be no transitional zone between the high-rises and the residential areas east of Van Buren Street. Mr. Yapp acknowledged that when asked, and stated there would only be a half a block of transition. Well, half a block does not constitute a transitional area. Additionally a lot has been said this evening from the developers and real estate community on how attracted young people will be in the future to this new development. Kuenzli stated that everyone needs to remember during the public hearing for the Chauncey the young people came out in force to oppose that project because what they liked about Iowa City was the old areas and the "funky" parts of Iowa City and made a point to state they don't take visitors to see high-rise structures, rather they take people to see places like The Mill, The Haunted Bookshop, The Hamburger Inn, The Soap Opera, New Pioneer, and such. Some of those businesses have already disappeared and she urges the Commission to save what is left and the transitional areas. Ethan Diehl (201 E Washington St) and grew up in Iowa City since his family moved here in 1975, moving away to attend college and then later live in Austin Texas for 16 years. He moved back to Iowa City and specifically to live in the 201 E Washington Street building, Marc Moen's building downtown. He chose to move back to Iowa City for the small town charm, as well as the international flavor of the Writer's Workshop. He remembers when an Iowa City that was opposed to the Ped Mall in 1977, and then again opposition to the Hotel Vetro, and opposed to a number of beautiful projects in the downtown area. If the Council is interested in young people coming back to Iowa City, which is a good thing considering how good the public schools are, they should be in favor of projects like this and this new development. Rudolf Kuenzli (705 S. Summit Street) had many questions when listening to Mr. Yapp give his presentation. There seems to be terms used, such as Central Business District, and trying to fold the three municipal blocks into the Central Business District. (Yapp confirmed that the three municipal blocks would be folded into the Downtown District.) Kuenzli stated that there is always consequences in zoning, because the Central Business District has been designated for density, high-rise buildings as has the Riverfront Crossings. Kuenzli agrees with the staff that the Riverfront Crossings will be the future of Iowa City, there are so many plans and projects in the works. Having lived in Iowa City for 45 years, coming during the middle of downtown urban renewal, and since then, until now, he has not seen so much planning and so many projects. Kuenzli is trying to suggest to put the emphasis of the Central Business District into the Riverfront Crossings and try to keep Gilbert Street, due to its proximately to the east side historic district, as the beginning of a transitional area. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 14 of 24 Matthew Fleminq presented an anecdote in support of the proposed changes. A year and a half ago he was offered a position at Mercy Hospital and when his wife and he considered moving to Iowa City, if the mixed use structures that exist in downtown Iowa City were not here, they likely would not have come to this great community. So as a somewhat young professional, he believes Iowa City needs more of structures developed in Iowa City and they will attract younger people. Mary Bennett (1107 Muscatine Ave) is very concerned about the College Street Park and as the oldest park in the town it is not being shown its due respect. She had listened to the many hours of debate on the Chauncey building project, it is appears that this proposal it to retro fit some of the plans in an effort to accommodate more growth in the city. Bennett stated her concern about how this will impact the Civic area, being an avid user of the rec center she enjoys coming out of that building and looking at the sky and enjoy the space around Ralston Creek. The Civic buildings were designed 50 years ago with the skyline in mind and keeping the views unobstructed to show respect to the neighborhoods. These two buildings are part of the historic Iowa City and could be nominated for the National Registry at some point. While these are city -owned properties right now, that can change in the future, and new structures could get built. Will the City build a high- rise building for their offices? If the City continues to grow, there will be a premium on the city - owned land. Bennett believes the downtown area has already grown out of control, and does not need to improach onto the neighborhoods to the east. It is ironic that 175 years ago Chauncey Swan himself came to this area and stood on the land where Old Capital was built, and wrote about how beautiful it was and how appropriate of a location to have a city in this location. He commissioned the drawing of the first map of Iowa City that designated very prominently areas for churches near the immediate downtown area. Areas for schools, in the immediate downtown area, where are those schools now? Where are those churches now? He talked about promenades and green spaces, even in 1839. Why isn't there green spaces surrounding Ralston Creek, why don't we imagine a beautiful farmer's market under a canopy right next to the creek, instead of underneath a parking ramp. Bennett feels the City needs a broader imagination in looking at how our community is going of grow. The tax base will grow alone with all the development and high- rises in the Riverfront Crossings area, and feels there needs to be stop to the erasing of the past throughout the City. If the City approves drawing the boundary line for the Downtown District half- way up to Johnson Street, how long after will it be that more multi -family structures will be built in the area. This proposal tonight does start a trajectory that will be very harmful. Additionally Bennett works at the State Historic Society of Iowa, the 400 block of Iowa Avenue was once all nice mansions, on the north side, and on the other side very nice four square farm houses. Bennett encourages the Commission and the City to slow down, get the correct boundaries set, and focus on the needs of the community. Nancy Bird, the executive director of the Iowa City Downtown District, and has had the pleasure of being introduced to Iowa City over the past couple of years. Their board has discussed many times what the boundaries of downtown Iowa City are. She has been listening carefully of when people talk about downtown, what they think downtown is, the various constituent areas, and to support the businesses of the downtown area. So for those who don't know, the boundary of the Downtown District is from Burlington Street up to Bloomington Street, including the north side neighborhood, and then from Gilbert Street to Clinton Street. In essence they have three neighborhoods in the downtown area, the Old Capitol Center, the downtown and the north side. What strikes Bird about the proposal tonight, which she supports, and her board supports, the community at large, these boundaries are on a map in a book, and people don't know where they Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 15 of 24 are. There are natural boundaries such as Ralston Creek, and other boundaries such as parking structures. One of the things her board is trying to do is listen to the property owners and citizens discuss historic buildings and there is a lot of passion around these buildings. Some are in need of repair and reinvestment and in order to do that the City has to be careful about new growth around these areas, recognizing one of the best things you can do to maintain a sustainable area is make sure you have density in the core, and believes in keeping the density downtown. Bird stated in her career of working with municipals, it is imperative that every five years they look at their Comprehensive Plans due to technology changes, market shifts, and climate shifts. One of the challenges of her job is not having enough spaces to put interested people, the vacancy rate is less than 2% and there a lot of people are invested in this community and being able to have some flexibility east of Gilbert Street will give the City the space that may be needed in the future for growth while saving historic areas as well. Therefore Bird gives here support to this proposal. Freerks asked Bird if her association has had much discussion on historic districts. Bird replied that yes, they have talked about historic properties. And with the guidelines established, she has been working with City staff on making them more stringent so there is predictability of what can be done to avoid controversy. Predictability is very important. Freerks stated there is very little protection in that area right now John Fogerty, one of the co-chairs of the Iowa Coalition Against the Shadow, spoke to the Commission about compromise, feeling Ms. Bird was the only speaker so far this evening that supported the proposal but saw the need for compromise on the properties east of Gilbert Street. Fogerty believes this whole proposals is because of Mr. Moen's project, if his project was in the already CB -10 zone, or Riverfront Crossings, and there wouldn't be a need for this conversation. Fogetry stressed to the Commission to think if there are other options for bringing all these young people back to Iowa City. There is plenty of space south of Burlington Street. He believes that yes there are options for these three blocks that would bring in revenue for the City and allow for the appropriate transition to the College Green District and allow for some mixed use development. He implores the Commission to think about the effects of this proposal years down the road and the impact it may have on the Victorians in the neighborhood. He feels they should look at other options, and is in support of emphasizing the Riverfront Crossings area and south of. Burlington. Joyce Summerwill stated she is a retiree who recently moved downtown, and did so because they wanted to. They had lived in a very nice neighborhood in Iowa City, having lived here for over 50 years, and what she has seen Iowa City become is many thanks to the folks that serve on commissions and who serve in the City and have made the City better to live in. The purpose for everyone tonight is because they all feel passionate about their views, whatever they are, but from her perspective that living downtown with a variety of people, with the wonderful churches, with the wonderful parks, with the services, with the variety of people, this is what attracts people to Iowa City. Change is going to happen no matter what anyone wants to do to stop it. The best thing to do is to manage the change that comes with good thinking, good planning, good design, good usage, and from her perspective in Iowa City currently, the best use of land. She believes vertical development, planned accordingly with.good design, is the only way to secure good neighborhoods that are already in Iowa City. It has sadden her over the years to see what apartment complexes that have gone up in the neighborhoods, the so called sprawl, probably necessary because students needed a place to live. But now we are even seeing the University Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 16 of 24 endorsing higher buildings, so she believes the question of whether we like or don't like vertical buildings, is not the question. We have to think as planners and as future people who may want to live here, what you want your city to be, and we want all of these components to be a part. She feels the plan the City has outlined is a good use for growth. Amanda Ward (201 E Washington St) is relatively new to Iowa City, only having lived here for three months. She had moved here from Los Angeles and at first was very disappointed but came here to be the director of VIP Services for Hotel Vetro so is in the unique position of talking to the travelers that come to Iowa City every day. One of the first things she noticed about the Ped Mall was the mix of old buildings and new buildings, where in California they don't have that, and found the old buildings to be beautiful but also likes the mix of the new architecture, including the new building she lives in. Ward discussed the Victorian homes, and stated there is a huge difference between a Victorian home and a home on the National Registry, so when she first drove through Iowa City and was looking at the Victorian homes, she noticed buildings with broken cornices, trash cans in front of them, that are falling apart and are run down, not the beautiful mansions everyone is talking about this evening. She continued to discuss the arbitrary boundaries and the time put into these conversations, and the appeal to slow down and don't make a rush decision. Ward feels the opposite, speed up, make a decision, and hopefully it's a decision of moving Iowa City forward, into young and old, newbies and traditional people who have lived here a long time. As she mentioned, she talks to people every day, they are attracted to the downtown area, they are wanting to live in the Ped Mall, they are wanting to be down where they are close to the action of the city for its vibrant nature, so having the opportunity for buildings that will provide that for people, that will become a draw for people to come to Iowa City, she can't see that as a negative thing. Ward stated she understands the emphasis on the old and protecting the old, but the new is as equally as important. Joseph Knock, agrees with the people who say a decision should not be made tonight, that there should be some consideration for what should be expanded and what should be kept. If however, this district is folded into the Downtown/Riverfront Crossings Plan, he would suggest that they try to save or preserve as many historical properties as possible. He also suggests that new buildings adhere to some of the architecture of that area, so rather than having an out of place, block long development, to try to have the development resemble what is already there. Jim Knapp thanked the Commission for showing the beautiful picture of the congregation because back in 1989 he rebuilt that steeple and was on scaffold 65 feet above ground. He reiterated that they town needs to keep its historic nature and building new high-rises that are 15 or 20 stories high are not necessary. Dick Summerwill stated he was going to speak in favor of this proposal but after hearing Casey Cook talk earlier and feels his comment need to be taken note of. Summerwill stated he has lived in Iowa City almost his whole life, was away for 10 years, but came back, and when he came back the downtown was a mess, it was the kind of downtown that the University would not bring their professors through when they were recruiting them. Young people were fleeing the area. Urban renewal came and went, and frankly made this discussion look like a piece of cake. Summerwill feels this is a wonderful conversation because it is discussing compromise and what can be done. The biggest idea tonight for a compromise is to make Ralston Creek the boundary, because that is a natural boundary. After going through urban renewal it took 30 years to get enough buildings Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 17 of 24 and streetscapes to encourage people to come downtown, they are now coming. Summerwill believes the downtown is the best today as it's ever been and that is because there are cohesive efforts between the University of Iowa and the City of Iowa City and it is growing and dynamic and there needs to be room for more growth. In closing he urged the Commission to not delay the project, but to move forward. Cook stated that he has renovated three old houses, ages 1910-1920, and there is a big distinction between an old house and a historic house and questions if historic has been well defined. Cook also sat on the Board of Directors for the United Action for Youth and that house at 422 Iowa Avenue has a nice paint job, but it is not in good condition, and if designated as a historic property, it will devalue that home around a half million dollars. Cook has also done some work on the Unitarian Church, and if that building stay intact, on that site, it will reduces its value by about two- thirds. When you think about what people are paying for land in the downtown area, it makes him very much in favor of this district. Cilek spoke to give a comparison to what is Meta experienced, they were on South Gilbert Street, in half the amount of space, and when they moved into the new building at 201 Washington, they have approximately twice the space, the utility bills are half as much, due to LED lighting, and other upgraded features. So when folks talk about historic that is important but they need to recognize a business looks at utilities, high-speed internet, and other amenities that come with a new building, is what will attract new businesses to Iowa City, and outweighs worrying about where the buffer zone is. Cilek feels the his company will be looking for additional space in the future, and will want to be close to their current downtown location. McCullum stated that Mr. Cook just re-emphasized the concern about how it seems that every church in this area is being looked at as a development project. The community will lose all those properties, those churches, so there won't be any old, just new. Freerks closed public hearing. Freerks stated that this is a topic that needs to be discussed and mulled over, and entertains a motion to have discussion. Eastham moved that the Commission defer this item until the first meeting in February. Swygard seconded the motion. Eastham questioned staff on how many sites of redevelopment on multi -story currently are identified in Downtown District Plan. Yapp stated that would take some time to count. Hektoen asked if Eastham was just asking how many are designated in the plan itself, and Eastham confirmed that was his question. Swygard also had a question for staff on the Riverfront Crossings/Downtown Plan, it says that ultimately the City should pursue the creation of form -based code to regulate all new development downtown, and asked staff to comment on if that is in the works. Yapp confirmed it is on the staff work program, and the initial steps of that was a discussion with the Downtown District earlier this week regarding establishing design standards, facades, signage and so forth, and that he sees this as a first step to establishing a form -based code for the Downtown District. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 18 of 24 Eastham stated that staff has asked the Council to establish proposals for inclusionary affordable housing, and asked if the staff has considered extending those proposals or measures into the Civic District. Yapp answered that the City Council direction that they were given was to develop and propose inclusionary zoning standards for just the Riverfront Crossings Area at this time. Eastham asked for confirmation that the staff proposal is to only include into the Downtown District Plan only three blocks of this Civic Area, and Yapp confirmed that was correct. Eastham also noted that there is only one potentially historical structure in that three block area, and Yapp confirmed that is correct as well. Freerks stated her concern that the Commission may not even be ready to vote on this issue even at the next meeting, as this is such a big subject with a lot of energy around it, and the ongoing discussions of historic structures, and lessons were learned in discussions of previous historic areas that need to be heeded at this time. Freerks believes that not all structures need to have gone through the historic preservation process, but the Commission and the City needs some type of map showing the areas that might be in question so people can move forward with the correct expectations. Freerks feels this proposal today seems hobbled together and if moved forward will just divide those interested more. She understands the need for taller structures and building vertically in some areas, but there is also the need to maintain parts of these areas, and protect areas, and could not do so if they moved forward with the proposal as it is. The boundary being set in a middle of a block does not make sense, and there is a need to go through and look at what the base zones are in these areas and are those zonings really what the community wants for these areas. Freerks believes there needs to be a better plan and wants to call for an informal meeting to discuss this issue prior to the next formal meeting for this topic. Informal meetings are also open to the public. Hektoen clarified that the proposal is not talking about establishing a boundary mid -block. That boundary is there currently. Freerks understands but still feels the issue needs to be looked at overall for more clarity. Eastham stated as he understands this proposal, staff has suggested that three square blocks which are almost entirely owned by the City of Iowa City, be incorporated into the Downtown District. So the Commission is tasked with deciding if that is a good idea or not. Whether there are existing proposals of development on that area is not of the Commission's concern. Swygard stated she would like to see these two Comprehensive Plan Amendments broken into two separate pieces. Eastham agreed that would be a good idea. Thomas agreed that they should be discussed separately as they are on two different timelines. Dyer shared her confusion still on the area in question. Yapp explained the areas on the map outlined in blue are proposed to be added to the Central Planning District, as they are both part of the old Downtown Planning District, and they were not included in the Downtown Master Plan, and were not included in the Central District Plan. Yapp stated that staff would work to schedule an informal meeting to discuss this issue and once the time is set it will be posted to the website. Planning and Zoning Commission January 15, 2015 - Formal Page 19 of 24 Swygard had a question regarding the motion, and if the motion is to delay to the next meeting or further. Freerks stated it could be discussed again at the next formal meeting, but hopes an informal meeting can be held as well. A vote was taken, motion carried 7-0 REZONING ITEM (REZ14-00023) Discussion of an application submitted by Southgate Companies for a rezoning from Interim Development Research Park (ID -RP) to Commercial Office (CO -1) zone for approximately 34.21 acres of property located north of Northgate Drive. (REZ14-00023) Miklo showed the location map of the property, this property is located in the North Corridor District. This property is currently zoned Interim Development — Research Development Park (ID - RP) and the proposal is to change the zoning to Commercial Office Zone (CO -1). The purpose of the CO -1 zone is to provide specific areas where office functions, compatible businesses, apartments and certain public and semipublic uses may be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The CO-Izone can serve as a buffer between residential and more intensive commercial or industrial areas. Miklo said the Comprehensive Plans show this area as Office Research Development Center. The proposed CO -1 zoning, as well as the Research Development Park (RD) and Office Research Park (ORP), are appropriate zoning districts to implement the land use plan. The property to the south is currently zoned CO -1 and developed as Northgate Office Park. Properties to the west, north and east are currently used for agriculture, including a farm residence that is located directly north. The land use plan depicts the areas to the west and east of the subject property as also being appropriate for Office Research Development Centers; the property to the north is identified as Rural Residential. Miklo said the CO -1 zone is generally viewed as being compatible with residential neighborhoods. It has a maximum building height of 25 feet (generally two stories) and does not allow more intense commercial uses that may detract from nearby residences. The Commercial Site Development Standards that apply to the CO -1 zone require street trees, parking lot coverage trees and landscaping around the perimeter of parking lots to further improve compatibility with nearby residential uses. Miklo said that there are some traffic implications with this development. Initially the only street access to this property will be via Northgate Drive, which intersects with Dodge Street (Highway 1). In the long-term Oakdale Boulevard is planned to cross the northern portion of this property to provide additional access to Highway 1. Additional access may also be available from Moss Ridge Road as shown on the concept plan. Staff measured existing traffic volumes, and forecasted future volumes, at several locations along Northgate Drive. It was concluded that at the Steindler Orthopedic Clinic Driveway the average daily traffic (ADT) on Northgate Drive would be approximately 5,547 upon full 'build -out' of the subject property — assuming similar land -uses currently present on Northgate Drive. This figure was derived using existing traffic counts and existing developed acreage which resulted in an additional 84 vehicles per day per acre. Traffic volumes were measured at the Steindler driveway as there is a secondary means of access at this point which allows egress between Northgate Drive and the Quality Inn Property. Therefore, r-� ra cr ARR Prepared by: John Yapp, Dev. Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52 19 6-52@@- RESOLUTION NO. -"' RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDI' f$ ADD THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY CLINTON STREET, JEF*ERS@d STREET, BLOOMINGTON STREET AND DUBUQUE STREET TO TRE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, Staff initiated a process in 2014 to determine review a* seek input on the area generallyounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington treet and Dubuque Street specificallyXthe area should be added to the Central District Plan; ancV WHEREAS, StK held an open house and created a webpage to eceive public input, and the Planning and Zoni%isclo mission held public discussion on the pro osed amendment; and WHEREAS, The nerally bounded by Clinton Street, Jeff rson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street to the University of Iowa Campus d has primarily multi -family uses, religious institutions, and oth ublic and private uses; and WHEREAS, Clinton Street and D uqVtin function a gateway corridors to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campappropria to review site development standards to ensure that properties have landscbuildin facades that contribute to these streets functioning as gateways; and WHEREAS, The subject area attractsnt mount of bicyclists and pedestrians as well and transit and vehicular modes of tra, d as Dubuque Street and other area streets are redesigned or reconstructed it is at in orporate complete streets principals in their design; and WHEREAS, The Historic Preservation Co fission has viewed the subject area and has determined that while there are individu buildings that ay qualify as historic landmark properties, the area as a whole does not q lify as a historic distr t, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning mmission has recommended approval of incorporating the subject area into the Central Di 'ct Plan as well as adding specific goals to the Central District Plan to address concerns r ted to complete streets, streetscape and gateway design, and pedestrian connectivity. \ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT SOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The area generall ounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street t at is not part of the Central District Plan be added to the Central District Plan. 2. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Review the Multi -Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors. Resolution No. Page 2 B. Transportation Goal: Invest in the streetscapes of Dubuque Street and Clinton Street to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Trans p ation Goal: As Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and other area streets are redesigns reconstructed, incorporate complete streets principals into their design; improve easest pedestrian connectivity between the Clinton St / Dubuque St corridor and the orthside neighborhood. 3. Amend the IC2030 omprehensive Plan Citral District Plan map consistent with adding the subject area the Central Plann' g District. Passed and approved this ATTEST: CITY CLERK of 20 Approved by Attorney's Office N 0 Cn 0 N s 3 N O_ GI1 `0'e f V Prepared by: John Yapp, Dev. Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA (3fJj 356252 RESOLUTION NO. 3 -'411- M- RESOLUTION RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMEN6MENV'-YO ADD PORTIONS OF BLOCKS NORTH OF IOWA AVE AND EAST OF GILBERT STREET; AND PORTIONS OF BLOCKS EAST OF VAN BURENREET AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE CENTRAL PLANNIN DISTRICT WHEREAS, Staff initiated a process in 2014 to determine review and see input on the area north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert Street; and portions of blocks east of V Buren Street and north of Burlington Street; and WHEREAS, Staff 1*' Id an open house and created a webpage to eceive public input, and the Planning and Zoning ommission held public discussion on the pr osed amendment; and WHEREAS, The subjedt area is occupied by a variety of miod-use buildings and commercial buildings, including reside ial, office and commercial uses; a WHEREAS, The subject are h=cally has been ide tified as a transition area between downtown Iowa City and the r al areas to the els t, and as such has been zoned with Central District Support (CB -5) an entral District Servi (CB -2) zoning classifications; and WHEREAS, Properties in the subject rea, while th may be zoned with a commercial zoning designation, are near to or on the same ck face a residential properties; and WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Co is zoning code amendments to address design tE design techniques to promote compatible desi WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Co missi mechanism to provide an exemption fro the req floor in CB -2 and CB -5 zones, to ensu better c block; and has recommended a goal of developing a ards, building heights, setbacks and other residential buildings and uses; and recommended a goal of developing a t for commercial land uses on the first ility with residential uses on the same WHEREAS, The Historic Pres erva on Commission has revi ed the subject area and has determined that while there are ndividual buildings that may ualify as historic landmark properties, the area as a whole d s not qualify as a historic district; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of incorporating the subject area into the Central District Plan as well as adding specific goals to the Central District Plan to address concerns related to design and commercial uses to promote compatibility with nearby residential uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The area generally north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert Street; and portions of blocks east of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street which are not in the Central Planning District be added to the Central Planning District. 2. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: Resolution No. Page 2 A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Develop Zoning Code standards in the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones when CB -2 and CB -5 properties are on the same block as residential properties to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, open space, and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block. Develop a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for Iti-family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. B. Con . er a form -based code for commercial properties in this portion of the Central Plannin District 3. Amend the IC2 ,30 Comprehensive Plan Central District Plan map consistent with adding the subject area the Central Plan ing District. Passed and approved this ATTEST: CITY CLERK of MAYOR 20 Approved by City Attorney's Office en """ N Prepared by: John Yapp, Dev. Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5252 RESOLUTION NO. 15-146 RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO ADD THE AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY CLINTON STREET, JEFFERSON STREET, BLOOMINGTON STREET AND DUBUQUE STREET TO THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan calls for further study to establish a redevelopment plan of an area generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street; and WHEREAS, Staff initiated a process in 2014 to review and seek public input on the comprehensive planning vision for the area; and WHEREAS, Staff held an open house and created a webpage to receive public input, and the Planning and Zoning Commission held public discussion on the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the area is close to the University of Iowa Campus and has primarily multi -family uses, religious institutions, and other public and private uses; and WHEREAS, Clinton Street and Dubuque Street function as gateway corridors to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa campus and it is appropriate to review site development standards to ensure that properties have landscaping and building facades that contribute to these streets functioning as gateways; and WHEREAS, the subject area attracts a significant amount of bicyclists and pedestrians as well and transit and vehicular modes of transportation, and as Dubuque Street and other area streets are redesigned or reconstructed it is appropriate to incorporate complete streets principals in their design; and WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the subject area and has determined that while there are individual buildings that may qualify as historic landmark properties, the area as a whole does not qualify as a historic district; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of incorporating the subject area into the Central District Plan as well as adding specific goals to the Central District Plan to address concerns related to complete streets, streetscape and gateway design, and pedestrian connectivity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The area generally bounded by Clinton Street, Jefferson Street, Bloomington Street and Dubuque Street that is not part of the Central District Plan be added to the Central District Plan. 2. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Review the Multi -Family Design standards to ensure they meet the goal of attractive streetscapes in gateway corridors. Resolution No. 15-146 Page 2 B. Transportation Goal: Encourage investment in the streetscapes of Dubuque Street and Clinton Street to highlight their function as gateways to downtown Iowa City and the University of Iowa east campus. C. Transportation Goal: As Dubuque Street, Clinton Street and other area streets are redesigned / reconstructed, incorporate complete streets principals into their design; improve east -west pedestrian connectivity between the Clinton St / Dubuque St corridor and the Northside neighborhood. 3. Amend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan maps to reflect that the above-described areas are located within the Central District Plan. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 20 15 MAYOR Approved by ATTEST:W., CITY ERK City Attorney's Office Resolution leo. 15-146 Page 3 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Botchway the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: DAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne g Throgmorton Prepared by: John Yapp, Dev. Services Coordinator, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5252 RESOLUTION NO. 15-147 RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO ADD PORTIONS OF BLOCKS NORTH OF IOWA AVE AND EAST OF GILBERT STREET; AND PORTIONS OF BLOCKS EAST OF VAN BUREN STREET AND NORTH OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan calls for further study to establish a redevelopment plan of an area north of Iowa Avenue and east of Gilbert Street, and an area east of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street; and WHEREAS, Staff initiated a process in 2014 to review and seek public input on the comprehensive planning vision for those areas; and WHEREAS, Staff held an open house and created a webpage to receive public input, and the Planning and Zoning Commission held public discussion on the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the subject areas are occupied by a variety of mixed-use buildings and commercial buildings, including residential, office and commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the subject areas historically have been identified as a transition area between downtown Iowa City and the residential areas to the east, and as such has been zoned with Central District Support (CB -5) and Central District Service (CB -2) zoning classifications; and WHEREAS, certain properties in the subject area may be zoned with a commercial zoning designation but are near to or on the same block face as residential properties; and WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a goal of developing a zoning code amendments to address design standards, building heights, setbacks and other design techniques to promote compatible design with residential buildings and uses; and WHEREAS, The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a goal of developing a mechanism to provide an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in CB -2 and CB -5 zones, to ensure better compatibility with residential uses on the same block; and WHEREAS, The Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the subject area and has determined that while there are individual buildings that may qualify as historic landmark properties, the area as a whole does not qualify as a historic district; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of incorporating the subject area into the Central District Plan as well as adding specific goals to the Central District Plan to address concerns related to design and commercial uses to promote compatibility with nearby residential uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: Resolution No. 15-147 Page 2 1. The area north of Iowa Ave and east of Gilbert Street and those portions of blocks east of Van Buren Street and north of Burlington Street which are not in the Central District Plan be added thereto. 2. The Central District Plan be amended to add the following goals: A. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Develop Zoning Code standards in the CB -2 and CB -5 Zones to require setbacks, building height step-downs, landscaping, open space, and other techniques to promote compatibility with residential properties on the same block as residential properties. Develop an exemption from the requirement for commercial land uses on the first floor in the CB -2 and CB -5 zones, and provide for multi -family design standards to apply to CB -2 and CB -5 multi -family properties. B. Housing and Quality of Life Goal: Consider establishing a form -based code for commercial properties in this portion of the Central Planning District. 3. Amend the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan maps to reflect that the above-described areas are located within the Central District Plan. Passed and approved this 5th day of ATTEST: i(J CITY C RK Ma 20 15 Approved by '� ity Attorney's Office �� Resolution No. 15-147 Page 3 It was moved by Dobyns and seconded by Botchway the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne g Thrograorton e Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319rA56-5030 , Cn RESOLUTION NO. .... CD RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILM-# LOCATED AT 403 DOUGL.ASS COURT. CA) WHEREAS, the UniverCity Neighborhood Partne hip Program is a joint effort baleen the University of Iowa and the City to encourage hom ownership and reinvestment in designated neighborhoods surrounding ',the University of Iowa; nd WHEREAS, the City purchases rental units I the University of Iowa, rehabilit es them, and WHEREAS, the City purchased Court, Iowa City; and WHEREAS, the City has received an ofi sum of $102,000 (the amount the City p, approximately $4,200, which are all costs and sell it, including abstracting and recor mowing and snow removal, utilities, real/ repair and rehabilitate the home; and WHEREAS, this sale would provide University of Iowa; and [ed in designated neighborhoods surrounding n sells them to income -eligible buyers; and a single family home located at 403 Douglass o purchase 403 Douglass Court for the principal ai acquire the home), plus the "carrying costs" of cu%tax the City to acquire the home, maintain it tingterest on the loan to purchase the home, esta, and any costs in excess of $50,000 to ble housing in\q designated area surrounding the WHEREAS, on April 21, 2015, th City Council adopted a Res tion proposing to convey its interest in 403 Douglass Court, /authorizing public notice of the roposed conveyance, and setting the date and time for the ublic hearing; and WHEREAS, following the pu is hearing on the proposed conveyance, he City Council finds that the conveyance is in the ublic interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that: Upon the direction of the City Attorney, the Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to execute a warranty deed conveying the City's interest in 403 Douglass Court, legally described as Lot 41 in Wise Addition, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to deliver said warranty deed and to carry out any actions necessary to consummate the conveyance required by law. a Resolution No. Page 2 It was moved by adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: and seconded by Passed and approved this qday of Approved by City Attorney's Office ABSENT: YOR ATTE CITY CLERK the Resolution be Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton , 2015. N 0 er+ own 3 co W :ara Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Assistant City Attorney, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 RESOLUTION NO. 15-148 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LOCATED AT 403 DOUGLASS COURT. WHEREAS, the UniverCity Neighborhood Partnership Program is a joint effort between the University of Iowa and the City to encourage home ownership and reinvestment in designated neighborhoods surrounding the University of Iowa; and WHEREAS, the City purchases rental units located in designated neighborhoods surrounding the University of Iowa, rehabilitates them, and then sells them to income -eligible buyers; and WHEREAS, the City purchased and rehabilitated a single family home located at 403 Douglass Court, Iowa City; and WHEREAS, the City has received an offer to purchase 403 Douglass Court for the principal sum of $102,000 (the amount the City paid to acquire the home), plus the "carrying costs" of approximately $4,200, which are all costs incurred by the City to acquire the home, maintain it and sell it, including abstracting and recording fees, interest on the loan to purchase the home, mowing and snow removal, utilities, real estate taxes, and any costs in excess of $50,000 to repair and rehabilitate the home; and WHEREAS, this sale would provide affordable housing in a designated area surrounding the University of Iowa; and WHEREAS, on April 21, 2015, the City Council adopted a Resolution proposing to convey its interest in 403 Douglass Court, authorizing public notice of the proposed conveyance, and setting the date and time for the public hearing; and WHEREAS, following the public hearing on the proposed conveyance, the City Council finds that the conveyance is in the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, that: 1. Upon the direction of the City Attorney, the Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to execute a warranty deed conveying the City's interest in 403 Douglass Court, legally described as Lot 41 in Wise Addition, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. The City Attorney is hereby authorized to deliver said warranty deed and to carry out any actions necessary to consummate the conveyance required by law. Resolution No. 15-148 Page 2 It was moved by nobyns and seconded by Botchway the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton Passed and approved this 5th day of May '2015. ATTEST:A'g�� CITY -CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office Prepared by: Kumi Morris, Public Works Dept., 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, (319)356-5044 RESOLUTION NO. 15-149 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CON- TRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY PARKING GARAGE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 2015 PROJECT, ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE TO BIDDERS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS. WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the plans, specifications, form of contract and estimate of cost for the above-named project was published as required by law, and the hearing thereon held; and WHEREAS, funds for this project are available in the Parking Facility Restoration Repair account # T3004 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA THAT: 1. The plans, specifications, form of contract and estimate of cost for the above-named project are hereby approved. 2. The amount of bid security to accompany each bid for the construction of the above- named project shall be in the amount of 10% (ten percent) of bid payable to Treasurer, City of Iowa City, Iowa. 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish notice, not less than 4 and not more than 45 days before the date for filing the bids, for the receipt of bids for the construction of the above-named project in a newspaper published at least once weekly and having a general circulation in the city. 4. Sealed bids for the above-named project are to be received by the City of Iowa City, Iowa, at the Office of the City Clerk, at the City Hall, before 2:30 p.m. on the 28th day of May, 2015. At that time, the bids will be opened by the City Engineer or his designee, and thereupon referred to the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, for action upon said bids at its next regular meeting, to be held at the Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa, at 7:00 p.m. on the 5th day of June, 2015, or at a special meeting called for that purpose. Passed and approved this 5th day of May , 20 15 MAYOR Approved by ATTEST: %C� . Q�� !�� ✓��w CITY ERK City Attorney's Office pweng\masters\res appp&s.doc 4/15 Resolution No. 15-149 Page 2 It was moved by Payne and seconded by Botchway the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek g Mims x Payne g Throgmorton 52-483 CITY BUDGET AMENDMENT AND CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION To the Auditor of JOHNSON County, Iowa: The City Council of IOWA CITY in said County/Counties met on 5/5/15 ,at the place and hour set in the notice, a copy of which accompanies this certificate and is certified as to publication. Upon taking up the proposed amendment, it was considered and taxpayers were heard for and against the amendment. The Council, after hearing all taxpayers wishing to be heard and considering the statements made by them, gave final consideration to the proposed amendment(s) to the budget and modifications proposed at the hearing, if any. thereupon, the following resolution was introduced. RESOLUTION No. 15-150 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CURRENT BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE, 2015 (AS AMENDED LAST ON 9/2/14 ) Be it Resolved by the Council of the City of IOWA CITY Section 1. Following notice published 4/24/15 and the public hearing held, 5/5/15 the current budget (as previously amended) is amended as set out herein and in the detail by fund type and activity that supports this resolution which was considered at that hearing: Passed this 5th (D•» Signature City Clerk/Finance Officer day of May, 2015 (M..tW-r) Signa Mayor /1-11- 52=483 1$% Total Budget as certified or last amended Current Amendment Total Budget after Current Amendment Revenues & Other Financing Sources Taxes Levied on Property 1 . , :;:•: 51,608,730 0 : ':':':': 51,608,730 Less: Uncollected Property Taxes -Levy Year 2 0 0 0 Net Current Property Taxes 3 51,608,730 0 51,608,730 Delinquent Property Taxes 4 0 0 0 IF Revenues 5 652,624 0 652,624 Other City Taxes 6 2,594,500 0 2,594,500 Licenses & Permits 7 1,580,852 0 1,580,852 Use of Mone and Property8 2,354,073 48,590 2,402,663 Intergovemmental 9 56,762,868 -11,606,736 45,156,132 Charges for Services 10 42,402,911 19,565 42,422,476 Special Assessments 11 0 0 0 Miscellaneous 12 5,305,704 -1,586,488 3,719,216 Other Financing Sources 13 43,401,916 16,080,614 59,482,530 Total Revenues and Other Sources 14 206,664,178 2,955,545 209,619,723 Expenditures & Other Financing Uses Public Safety 15 22,562,862 450,381 23,013,243 Public works 16 7,595,416 5,549 7,600,965 Health and Social Services 17 303,841 20,000 323,841 Culture and Recreation 18 13,235,262 296,217 13,531,479 Community and Economic Development 19 13,633,481 278,659 13,912,140 General Government 20 8,127,302 2,300 8,129,602 Debt Service 21 17,315,399 0 17,315,399 Capital Projects 22 67,338,478 -25,822,082 41,516,396 Total Government Activities Expenditures 23 150,112,041 -24,768,976 125,343,065 Business Type /Enterprises 24 66,737,176 5,303,198 72,040,374 Total Gov Activities & Business Expenditures 25 216,849,217 -19,465,778 197,383,439 Transfers Out 26 36,588,884 9,349,451 45,938,335 Total Expenditures/Transfers Out 27 253,438,101 -10,116,327 243,321,774 Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over (Under) Fxpendituresfrransfers Out Fiscal Year 28 .:.:.: . -46,773,923 , • , :.: 13,071,872 -33,702,051 Beginning Fund Balance July 1 29 166,594,0791 0 166,594,079 Ending Fund Balance June 30 301 119,820,1561 13,071,872 132,892,028 Passed this 5th (D•» Signature City Clerk/Finance Officer day of May, 2015 (M..tW-r) Signa Mayor /1-11- 52=483 1$% Resolution No. 15-150 ]Page 2 It was moved by Payne and seconded by Botchway the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Botchway Dickens Dobyns Hayek Mims Payne Throgmorton Budget Amendment #2 Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Budget Description Other Professional Services Amount Totals Use of Money and Property 480 Police storage rental Land & Building Rental Parking loan interest to Landfill Interest on Loans 48,590 48,590 Intergovernmental Other Operating Equipment 100,000 Fire storage rental UniverCity donation code correction University of Iowa (100,000) City Vehicle Replacement Chgbk State 2014 flood grant Other State Grants 21,192 30,182 Flood buyout program adjustment Other State Grants (550,000) Police/Fire medical expenses 2015 CIP adjustments Other State Grants (6,303,915) 2015 CIP adjustments Federal Grants (4,891,528) 17,000 FEMA 2014 disaster grant FEMA Reimbursements 191,925 State 2014 flood grant State Disaster Assistance 25,590 (11,606,736) Charges for Services Police special revenue Special Police Services 19,565 19,565 Miscellaneous UniverCity donation code correction Contrib & Donations 100,000 2015 CIP adjustments Contrib & Donations 154,031 2015 CIP adjustments Reimb of Expenses (1,000,000) 2015 CIP adjustments From Equipment (790,000) Category correction Sale of Equipment (50,519) (1,586,488) Other Financing Sources 2015 CIP adjustments Bond Sales (95,723) 2015 CIP adjustments From Airport Operations 117,955 2015 CIP adjustments From Landfill Operations 35,000 2015 CIP adjustments From Parking Operations (603,775) 2015 CIP adjustments From Refuse Operations 100,000 2015 CIP adjustments From Road Use Tax 235,000 2015 CIP adjustments From Stormwater 50,000 2015 CIP adjustments From Wastewater Operations (700,000) 2015 CIP adjustments From Water Operations (1,346,000) 2015 CIP adjustments General Fund CIP Funding 100,000 2015 CIP adjustments Interfund Loan Proceeds 6,000,000 2015 CIP adjustments Local Option Taxes 3,594,958 2015 Emergency Reserve contribution Misc Transfers In 1,338,516 Category correction Sale of Equipment 50,519 Energy Efficiency projects to General fund Misc Transfers In 48,924 Landfill loan to Parking fund Interfund Loan Proceeds 2,495,350 Parking debt reserves to defease bonds Debt Service x 3,100,325 Parking fund loan payment to Landfill Interfund Loan Repayment 624,172 Sale of N. Commerce lots Sale of Land 799,393 Transit bus reserve transfers From Transit Ops 136,000 16,080,614 Total Revenues & Other Sources 2,955,545 Public Safety St. Ambrose professional services Other Professional Services 10,000 Electric utility adjustment Electricity 480 Police storage rental Land & Building Rental 7,280 Police overtime Overtime Wages 20,000 Police operating equipment Other Operating Equipment 100,000 Fire storage rental Land & Building Rental 7,480 Fire vehicle replacement to Equipment City Vehicle Replacement Chgbk 149,610 Fire overtime Overtime Wages 30,182 NDS department account restructure Various (274,651) Police/Fire medical expenses Worker's Comp -Medical Expense 400,000 450,381 Public Works Street paint Paint Supplies 17,000 Flood services Flood supplies Snow removal salt purchases Energy Efficiency projects to General fund Health and Social Services Temporary homless shelter Culture and Recreation Chadik property acquisition Chadik property acquisition Chadik property acquisition Cemetery lot purchases Communitv & Economic Development Other Operating Services 10,479 Sand 22,206 Salt 127,000 Contracted Improvements (171,136) 5,549 Aid to Agencies 20,000 20,000 Consultant Services 6,883 Other Professional Services 7,305 Land Acquisition 280,000 Purchases For Resale 2,029 296,217 NDS department account restructure Various 274,651 Sustainability activity created Consultant Services 32,806 Energy Efficiency projects to General fund Contracted Improvements 171,136 Economic Development grant correction Economic Development Asst (58,000) TIF rebate correction TIF Tax Rebate (141,934) 278,659 General Government City Clerk scanning services scanning/Microfilm Services 9,000 Contingency to temp homeless shelter Contingency (20,000) GovDelivery e -subscription Subscriptions 13,300 2,300 Capital Projects 2015 CIP adjustments Building Improvement 378,923 2015 CIP adjustments Contracted Improvements (26,013,280) 2015 CIP adjustments Consultant Services 50,000 Fiber Optic Project to Internal Service Funds Contracted Improvements (237,725) (25,822,082) Business-Type/Enterprises New parking meters Other Operating Equipment 23,250 Landfill loan interest expense Interest Expense 48,590 Defease 2009 parking revenue bonds Revenue Bonds Principal 6,605,000 Defease 2009 parking revenue bonds Revenue Bonds Interest 536,301 Landfill land acquisition Land Acquisition 370,000 2014 Flood expenses Other Operating Services 84,430 Storm water/drainage contract improvements Contracted Improvements 113,900 2014 Flood expenses Other Operating Equipment 171,470 Cable TV building repairs Heating Equipment R&M Services 6,272 Earth Channel annual fee Misc Services & Charges 4,490 2015 CIP adjustments Consultant Services (133,684) 2015 CIP adjustments Other Operating Equipment (352,619) 2015 CIP adjustments Interest Expense 166,598 2015 CIP adjustments Contracted Improvements (2,340,800) 5,303,198 Transfers Out 2015 CIP adjustments Capital Project Funding 1,772,762 2015 CIP adjustments Interfund Loan (166,598) 2015 Emergency Reserve contribution Misc Transfers Out 1,338,516 Airport loan payoff to Landfill fund Interfund Loan 480,000 Energy Efficiency projects to General fund Misc Transfers Out 48,924 Landfill loan to Parking fund Interfund Loan 2,495,350 Parking debt reserves to defease bonds Debt Service Funding 3,100,325 Parking fund loan payment to Landfill Interfund Loan 144,172 Transit bus reserve transfers Improvement Reserve Funding 136,000 9,349,451 Total Expenditures & Transfers Out (10,116,327) r ^� CITY OF IOWA CITY 11 ®�MEMORANDUM Date: March 17, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Chris O'Brien, Director of Transportation Services — o Re: Transit Funding Application Introduction: At the May 5, 2015 City Council meeting, consideration will be given to a resolution authorizing the filing of an application with Iowa DOT for FY2016 state transit assistance and FTA funding. History/background: This is an annual application filed with Iowa DOT listing capital and operating expenses that we wish to see funded by IDOT and FTA. The projects contained in the application have been programmed by Iowa City Transit for Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307, 5310 and/or 5339 funds in FY2016. The projects will be included in the FY2016 Iowa DOT Consolidated Transit Funding Application that MPOJC is completing and in the FY2016-2019 MPOJC Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Iowa City Transit may not seek funding for all of the projects; however, each project needs to be listed in order to be eligible for funding. Discussion of Solution: Following is a summary of the funds being applied for: State Transit Assistance Program: approximately $501,799 — These are formula funds awarded to the MPO and then distributed between Iowa City Transit, Coralville Transit and the University of Iowa — Cambus. Federal operating assistance for transit: $1,482,500 — These are funds awarded from FTA to provide operational assistance to the transit agency. From federal funds for transit in non -urbanized areas and/or for transit serving primarily elderly persons and person with disabilities: $118,550 — These funds are awarded to Iowa City and committed to para -transit services that are contracted through a 28E Agreement with Johnson County SEATS State-wide federal capital assistance for transit: $17,845,950 — These funds include all of the capital projects that Iowa City Transit wishes to see funded. This sum includes replacement and relocation of the transit facility and the replacement of several buses. A local match of 15% - 20% is commonly required for the award of these funds. Financial Impact: The most substantial financial impact will result from the local match required of the capital projects, especially considering the magnitude of the transit facility replacement and relocation project. This project is estimated at $20 million with an estimated local match of $4 million. The Transportation Services Department has a reserve account, currently just over $3 million, to pay for the local match on the remaining capital projects. Prepared by: Brad Neumann, Asst. Transp. Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5235 RESOLUTION NO. 15-151 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR FY2016 IOWA DOT STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE AND FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION FUNDING. WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City, Iowa has undertaken to provide its residents with a public transportation system; and WHEREAS, the Iowa Department of Transportation offers financial assistance to local governmental units for their public transportation systems. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: We, hereby, authorize the City Manager, on behalf of the City of Iowa City, to apply for financial assistance as noted below and to enter into related contract(s) with the Iowa Department of Transportation. From the State Transit Assistance Program: 3.596668% (approximately $501,799) of Formula Funds From federal operating assistance for transit: $1,482,500; From federal funds for transit in non -urbanized areas and/or for transit serving primarily elderly persons and person with disabilities: $118,550; From state-wide federal capital assistance for transit: $17,845,950; We understand acceptance of federal transit assistance involves an agreement to comply with certain labor protection provisions. We certify that the City of Iowa City has sufficient non-federal funds to provide required local match for capital projects and at time of delivery will have the funds to operate and maintain vehicles and equipment purchased under this project. We request the State Transit Assistance formula funding be advanced monthly as allowed by law, to improve transit system cash flow. Passed and approved this 5th day of May, 2015. Resolution No. 15-151 Page 2 MAYOR ATTEST: `2%us�x� SCS • �.r�s/ CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office It was moved by Dickens and seconded by Payne the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway II x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton r �`,pr CITY OF IOWA CITY 12 M E M 0 RA N D UM Date: April 27, 2015 To: Thomas M. Markus, City Manager From: Marcia Bollinger, Neighborhood Outreach Re: FY16 Aid to Agencies Funding Allocation Introduction: The City annually budgets financial aid to human service agencies serving Iowa City residents. For FY16 the City budgeted $378,700 for this purpose. The attached resolution allocates these funds to the identified local human service agencies. History/Background: The City Council directed the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) to review and formulate a funding recommendation for the applications requesting Iowa City funds received under the United Way Joint Funding process. Similar to previous years, Johnson County human service agencies request funding for United Way, Johnson County and the cities of Iowa City and Coralville on this one application. At their January 15, 2015 meeting, the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) developed a funding recommendation to forward to City Council. HCDC's funding recommendation is attached to the resolution. Discussion of Solutions: This is the fifth year that these funding recommendations have been made by HCDC. Previously, funding recommendations were made by a subcommittee of the City Council. The City Council has the option of revising HCDC's recommendations. Financial Impact: The City budgeted $378,700 in the FY16 budget for financial aid to human service agencies serving Iowa City residents. These funds consist of funds from the General Fund ($250,000), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program ($100,000), and utility user fees ($28,700). Another $20,000 was budgeted for the Crisis Center 1105 project that is not included in the $250,000 total for Aid to Agencies. Recommendation: Staff recommends the allocation of funds consistent with the HCDC recommendation, which is attached to the resolution. I ��fir, CITY OF IOWA CITY z � MEMORANDUM Date: April 17, 2015 To: Mayor and City Council From: Tracy Hightshoe, Housing and Community Development Commission Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission At their April 16, 2015 meeting the Housing and Community Development Commission approved the March 12 minutes with the following recommendation to the City Council: HCDC recommends approving the FY16 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) budget recommendations to City Council as presented in the spreadsheet below with the condition that Habitat for Humanity shall not purchase land within Census Tract 18. HCDC recommends approving Habitat's request for $100,000 for down payment assistance for 10 dwelling units on the 2200 -block of Taylor Drive being sold by Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity to first-time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the median household income. The $100,000 budgeted for two FY16 UniverCity homes, would be diverted to this project. Additional action (check one) _x_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action F%vu HCDC Percent of MVV HCDC Final HCDC Housing Requested Allocation Request Score Recommendation THF - CHDOOperating $ 16,000 $ 13,089 82% 72 $ 16,000 Habitat for Humanity $ 80,000 $ 54,439 68% 76 $ 61,956 CHARM Homes $ 61,650 $ 56,965 92% 75 $ 61,650 Mayor's Youth Employment Program $ 60,000 $ 48,000 80% 71 $ 60,000 Systems Unlimited Inc $ 250,000 $183,101 73°% 70 $ 184,000 THF - Rental Acquisition & Rehab * $ 200,000 $ 98,889 49% 69 $ 49,998 THF - Sabin Townhomes * $ 300,000 $ 276,667 92°% 67 $ 300,000 Subtotal ** $ 967,650 $731,150 $ 733,604 Public Facilities Domestic Violence Intervention Prog $ 116,256 $106,130 91% 66 $ 116,256 Neighborhood Centers of JC $ 94,140 $ 88,690 94% 63 $ 94,140 Subtotal $ 210,396 $194,819 $ 210,396 TOTAL: $1,178,046 $925,969 $ 944,000 HCDC recommends approving Habitat's request for $100,000 for down payment assistance for 10 dwelling units on the 2200 -block of Taylor Drive being sold by Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity to first-time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the median household income. The $100,000 budgeted for two FY16 UniverCity homes, would be diverted to this project. Additional action (check one) _x_ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action MINUTES APPROVED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MARCH 12, 2016 - 6:30 PM MEETING ROOM A, IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Andrew Chappell, Michelle Bacon Curry, Jim Jacobson, Bob Lamkins, Christine Ralston, Dorothy Persson, Rachel Zimmermann Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: Angel Taylor STAFF PRESENT: Kristopher Ackerson, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Patton, Michelle Lloyd, Kari Wilken, Al Persson, Roger Lusala, Casey Westhoff, Bruce Teague, Diane Dingbaum HCDC recommends approving the FY16 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) budget recommendations to City Council as presented in the spreadsheet below with the condition that Habitat for Humanity shall not purchase land within Census Tract 18. HCDC Percent of HCDC Final HCDC Housing Requested Allocation Request Score Recommendation THF - CHDO Operating $ 16,000 $ 13,089 82% 72 $ 16,000 Habitat for Humanity $ 80,000 $ 54,439 68% 76 $ 61,956 CHARM Homes $ 61,650 $ 56,965 92% 75 $ 61,650 Mayor's Youth Employment Program $ 60,000 $ 48,000 80% 71 $ 60,000 Systems Unlimited Inc $ 250,000 $183,101 73% 70 $ 184,000 THF - Rental Acquisition & Rehab * $ 200,000 $ 98,889 49% 69 $ 49,998 THF - Sabin Townhomes * $ 300,000 $ 276,667 92% 67 $ 300,000 Subtotal ** $ 967,650 $731,150 $ 733,604 Public Facilities Domestic Violence Intervention Prog $ 116,256 $106,130 91% 66 $ 116,256 Neighborhood Centers of JC $ 94,140 $ 88,690 94% 63 $ 94,140 Subtotal $ 210,396 $194,819 $ 210,396 TOTAL: $1,178,046 $925,969 1 $ 944,000 Housing and Community Development Commission March 12, 2015 Page 2 of 6 HCDC recommends approving Habitat's request for $100,000 for down payment assistance for 10 dwelling units on the 2200 -block of Taylor Drive being sold by Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity to first-time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the median household income. The $100,000 budgeted for two FY16 UniverCity homes, would be diverted to this project. Zimmermann Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 19. 2015 MINUTES: Chappell moved to approve the minutes of the February 19, 2015 meeting. Persson seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 8-0. None. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING APPLICATIONS FOR FYI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) FUNDING: Zimmermann Smith began the conversation stating there were fewer applicants this year than in previous years and suggested that if there were a majority of the Commission members that voted for full funding for an application, that amount be disbursed and see what the amount remaining is available for funding partial projects for the rest of the applications. Hightshoe noted that there is $944,000 available to date, $200,000 of that is returned funds from last year from a Housing Fellowship project that didn't proceed. Hightshoe noted that $680,000 must be allocated to HOME eligible activities. Of the HOME eligible activities, all are CDBG eligible except for the CHDO operating, which has to be HOME funding. The only CHDO that qualified for HOME funding is the Housing Fellowship, so $50,000 has to go to the Housing Fellowship as the only CHDO. CHDO operating does not qualify as part of the $50,000 CHDO set aside, so at least $50,000 minimum has to go to the rental acquisitions and Sabin Townhome projects. Zimmermann Smith stated the applications that the majority voted for full funding were: CHDO Operating ($16,000); Charm Homes ($61,650); Mayor's Youth Employment Program ($60,000); The Housing Fellowship — Sabin Townhomes ($300,000); DVIP ($116,256); and Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County ($94,140). Byler asked if any projects come in under budget, does the money get returned to the City for reallocation the next year. Hightshoe confirmed it would unless there were sufficient funds to do Housing and Community Development Commission March 12, 2015 Page 3 of 6 a mid -year funding round. If there were $75,000 or $100,000 available the City could advertise again for applications. Zimmermann Smith then asked the Commission to discuss the remaining applications. Habitat for Humanity was discussed first. Three members of the Commission voted for full funding. Chappell noted that five members voted for at least $60,000 in funding. Bacon Curry questioned the concerns listed in the staff report and asked how other members of the Commission voted for funding even with those concerns. Chappell noted that time was on Habitat's side; there had not been issues for a couple of years and it has been able to operate a lot of properties without funding the past couple of years and have continued to work with City staff well. Hightshoe confirmed that staff has not had any recent concerns in the past two years. Zimmermann Smith suggested allocating $60,000 but Ralston suggested allocating $40,000 because it would be one home, $60,000 would not be enough for two. Mark Patton (Habitat for Humanity) explained that first there was a concern raised by the City for Habitat to find lots outside of the south side of Iowa City so they have found two lots on Prairie du Chien that are possibilities and cost about $45,000 each. So $60,000 would not be enough to buy both, but would help. He also felt Habitat could raise the remaining funds to get be able to purchase both lots. Zimmermann Smith suggested allocating the $45,000 to Habitat with the caveat that the lot cannot be on the south side of Iowa City. Persson noted that she thought to allocate full funding for Habitat because she believes the Commission needs to support affordable housing and Habitat for Humanity is affordable housing. Chappell noted again that five members of the Commission voted for at least $60,000 in funding and noted the highest overall average score from everyone was this project. Patton noted that due to the change in the HOME rules, Habitat can no longer "stock pile" lots so they can only purchase what they can build in a year, and two homes is not a challenge for one year, they are able to do four or five a year. Jacobson asked if they purchased a lot for $45,000 could they use the rest of the funding for construction costs. Hightshoe noted they could use the remaining for construction if they were not able to achieve the other acquisition within the year. Patton stated that if they used the extra funding for construction rather than acquisition it would throw off the ratios on the home for costs, but it could work. Zimmermann Smith opened the discussion on the next application, Systems Unlimited. All members allocated at least $100,000. Chappell noted that he did not agree with The Housing Fellowship purchasing the UniverCity properties. Hightshoe noted that the Commission can allocate funding with a stipulation that they cannot use the funding on that particular property. Chappell stated that if the allocations are $100,000 for The Housing Fellowship and $125,000 for Systems that is treating both applications similarly as both would be receiving half of what they requested. There is not enough to fully fund both of them, but both projects could get things done with partial funding. Bacon Curry noted that five members voted to allocate more to Systems. She also stated her concern with The Housing Fellowship rental acquisition appeared to create an application just to Housing and Community Development Commission March 12, 2015 Page 4 of 6 re -coup the $200,000 they were unable to use last year. Bacon Curry noted that the rehab portion of the application, the $25,000 per unit, was reasonable and would aid in keeping the rental housing already owned in good condition. Lamkins asked what the rehab portion would be. Hightshoe noted it would be $24,999 each for a total of $48,998. Lamkins agreed to fund the rehab portion but not the UniverCity acquisition portion. Zimmermann Smith stated the allocation for Housing Fellowship rehab would be $48,998 and the Sabin Townhomes would be $300,000. Therefore Systems would receive $184,900 and the balance would be allocated to Habitat for Humanity for an allocation of $61,956. Chappell stated he still feels there is too large of a gap in funding between Systems and The Housing Fellowship. The Commission discussed the scoring system used for the applications and the need for possible review in the future. Bacon Curry moved to approve the FYI Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) budget recommendations to City Council) as presented in the spreadsheet with the condition that Habitat for Humanity shall not purchase land within Census Tract 18. Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 8-0. Ackerson presented the staff report. On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity notified city staff that it had signed a 60 -day purchase agreement for five rental duplexes (i.e. ten dwelling units) on the 2200 -block of Taylor Drive. The properties are located approximately two blocks north of Wetherby Park. Habitat for Humanity plans to convert 2 - bedroom rental units with unfinished basements into 4 -bedroom homes. Once the rehabilitations are complete (starting in October 2015), Habitat proposes selling the homes to families who are first time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the area median income. At this time, Habitat is negotiating with three lenders for the purchase funds and has submitted an application for funding from the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County to rehabilitate the homes. To ensure the affordability of the units, Habitat is asking for city funds totaling $100,000 ($10,000 per unit) to be used for down payment assistance. Since this project was not budgeted by the City for fiscal year 2016, the City could transfer the $100,000 currently budgeted for the UniverCity Program to this Habitat for Humanity project. Whereas the UniverCity program funds would convert two units from rental to owner -occupied, this proposed project would convert ten units. This project would enhance the City's efforts to stabilize the neighborhood. If approved, city funds would be only used for down payment assistance to the homeowner to purchase the completed property. Housing and Community Development Commission March 12, 2015 Page 5 of 6 The Commission discussed how the units would be converted from rentals to single family owner -occupied homes. Some Commission members were confused about the number of lots and dwelling units. Ackerson and Patton clarified the units would be duplextzero lot line homes, so two single family homes on one lot each. And by finishing the basements in each home, it would add two bedrooms to each home so each duplex will be a four bedroom duplex. Patton stated the homes would sell for approximately $115,000 each when completed. Persson questioned if there were water concerns/issues for the basements. Patton stated the few units he has visited have sump pumps and no water issues. - - - Hightshoe noted that neighbors had come to the City in support of this project. Patton confirmed that some concern was stated regarding maintaining of the properties, but the applicants for these properties will be within 80% of the median income, working families, willing to take care of the properties. Lamkins asked about the down payment of $10,000 — stating that if the homes were to sell for $115,000 it would be nice for the down payment to be $11,500 or 10% which is what most lenders will require for the loans. Hightshoe stated that the City is only providing down payment assistance. Habitat has to purchase the properties, rehab them, find buyers, and only if all that is successful will the City be involved. If that does not happen, the City is not out any money. Bacon Curry noted that although this is a great project, it invests money into a part of Iowa City that is already known for low income housing and taking money away from the UniverCity project and putting low income housing in other parts of the City. Hightshoe explained that the UniverCity Program doesn't always mean low income — it is intended to stabilize neighborhoods. Some UniverCity homes are sold to residents that make more than the median household income. Chappell noted that this project would bring neighborhood stabilization to the Wetherby Park area and the homes will be a huge bang for the buck. Chappell moved that the City Council approve Habitat's request for $100,000 for down payment assistance for 10 dwelling units on the 2200 -block of Taylor Drive being sold by Iowa Valley Habitat for Humanity to first-time homebuyers earning less than 80 percent of the median household income. The $100,000 budgeted for two FYI UniverCity homes, would be diverted to this project. Bacon Curry seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 8-0. ADJOURNMENT: Jacobson moved to adjourn. Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 8-0. c 0 E E O U c d E CL 0 0 T E 0 L 0 NCO O N w a) — coO UN =2 a. z N O v z wo 2w a0 O(J �� 0 WZ Z z N W � H � Q O U z a O z_ N O X X x X X X X O x M x x x x x x x x x LO r. x x x x x o o x N X X X X X X c j x X x x x x x 0) x x W o x w O w o ti x x x x x x X I x x x X M w x co I, -LO r- m co 0 1- LO o N 0 N 0 N 0 N Cl N 0 N r 0 N Cl N 0 N r r r r r r r r W J J W U LL z W J w Q z m D V z ZV U d J O c z z Q �� z U J w Q 0 m� V z O w 0 J MIL 0 �H m m 0 a Z � -j col Prepared by: Marcia Bollinger, Neighborhood Services, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5230 RESOLUTION NO. 15-152 RESOLUTION ALLOCATING HUMAN SERVICES AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2016 WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City budgeted for aid to local human services agencies; and WHEREAS, the Housing and Community Development Commission recommended allocations of aid to agencies funding amongst human services agencies at its January 15, 2015 meeting; and WHEREAS, the amount of aid proposed to be allocated, $378,700, is budgeted as Aid to Human Services Agencies in the FY16 Budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, THAT: 1. The funding recommendations from the Housing and Community Development Commission are hereby adopted. 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute agreements for aid to agencies with the organizations identified in Exhibit A (attached). Passed and approved this 5th day of May '2015. ml— ♦.RM1i Approved bye, City Attorney's Office h Resolution No. 15-152 ]Page 2 It was moved by Mims and seconded by Payne the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Botchway x Dickens x Dobyns x Hayek x Mims x Payne x Throgmorton c O c w E O v aO to m m W a O 'a U6 2 0 O O O Ln N in d w G1 m 2*- U O o O O co14 In v C 0) L U N U N U +L+ 3 N N U_ > N _u > ` .r. V Ln V) U Ln Ln 01 CL C 'Lp V 0 O m O t Li 7 0 3 O } } U 0) >->- H N tko c cm C c O Ora i C `J L-0 w LJ -0 a) v v u o -o (vv v u� 3 u L Mn L C m L L L L L C U p U F- U 00 U m U U m U C N _N N Y N Y _N 3 3 3 == N V 03 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N �+ U N N •Ol N O1 N Ol T T N L�i1 } >• m41 N C N S N u N N N N OJ u N a N N 4! E 0 m ++ N m Q c N v 0 -o C Q O m OJ m L m O Q Q L m'0 0 0 0 p LL LL W Z G L 2 0 W L Z 2 W LL OC u- U ti 2 Z LL Z U LL c !l+ d` O 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 00 O 000 0C)0 O O O 00000 O RA o o o e(o Z' 0 v C Z e�cooRC o 0 n^ ao Lri M Ln . - N Ln 14 - Ln r-1 Ln Ln e q Ln e-1 Ln -* a M I FI L. 1~/L O O O O O M O O 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ Q O o O Il 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d p 0 LI1 p 0 0 0 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 Lrj O O O p p 0 o 0 o Ln 55 CY Ln M o N N Ln V) LA O w -cr n Ln O Ll1 Ln Ln I- Ln Ln ' L -4 M ri N111 Ln Ln ,V .-1 LD N N M ri ei � N N n eA -4 [* N LD V> V? V? V? V? V) V? V? V? V? V)• V1 V? V? In Vf V? V1 V1 V1 V) V► L}L 7 0 0 O O O O cooOO O 0 0 0 0 rl0 Q o pp0000 o 0 O O O p o O O O pOQ O p Q O O O00 OpO 0 Op0Li O N Ln Ln Ln O M N +? t' O N O +� Ln C4 � Ln n +� L Z VY Z Ln' O O Ln a � V) V? V? l* V? M V1 �' rl V? N V? ri N V} .--1 V► Ln V> �' r1 i/1• � V► t V? . m E m u a� 00 Q 0- q0 0 O L i Nd L m E L uCL O L O M L L L al Y u m 3 O to V Q c c m N 3 +_' C N 0 d c t]. U 3 O u N u m V L N a.+41 U U (LO N d U c U Ol Z C m O) C U (7 LL ul r 01 + bo O Q o L N m 0 c m �_ u U H W O m d L N OC p H O= U H t' O 0 u u 'C m O p "_ >- ' u o L w O 0 w` m C d c m u Y 0 U O `1 m Y 0 ai u t) O d "_ ami ' o f C O lA Gl W 0i 0 o L F. a-. m - m O Ly v O y OC LL � m Q= c 3 W-, U O O L o Ln a s o �- u L L c> a) L 4- v 0 3 Q N d c E ''' 3 O> Z' L p O L y w "' O m 0 O Q E 3 O E O N 1 4O c 3 c 3 L c u_ O) Y m u_ Ll E- p0 m N C •_+ V C Y N s O N 1. u t F- u Q L E E V `^ O 3 0 c 'i v O a -0 > v a O co a v — 3 LL 0 W QO O Gl L C 40 U 0 0 0 O D 0) O Q O 0 0 3= 0> L c m 41 Q Q m U U U U 0 W Ll Ll LL l9 2 2 0; Z D_ m Ln H 2 0 O O O Ln N in d w G1 m 2*- U O o O O co14 In v May 5, 2015 The Finance Director of the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa, met in the City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa, at 10:00 A.M., on the above date, to open sealed bids received, access electronic bids and to refer the sale of the Bonds to the best and most favorable bidder for cash, subject to approval by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. on the above date. The following persons were present: Dennis Bockenstedt, Marian Karr, Nick Schaul and Jon Burmeister -1- This being the time and place for the opening of bids for the sale of $7,785,000 (Subject to Adjustment per Terms of Offering) General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, the meeting was opened for the receipt of bids for the Bonds. The following actions were taken: Sealed bids were filed and listed in the minutes while unopened, as follows: Name & Address of Bidders: None 2. The Finance Director then declared the time for filing of sealed bids to be closed and that the sealed bids be opened. The sealed bids were opened and announced. -2- 3 4 Electronic bids received were accessed and announced as follows: Name & Address of Bidders: Name FTN Financial Capital Markets Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc. Piper Jaffray Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc. D.A. Davidson & Co. BMO Capital Markets UMB Bank N.A. Raymond James & Associates, Inc. Address Memphis, TN Memphis, TN Kansas City, MO Milwaukee, WI Denver, CO Chicago, IL Kansas City, MO St. Petersburg, FL The best bid was determined to be as follows: Name & Address of Bidder: FTN Financial Capital Markets of Memphis, TN True Interest Rate (as -bid): 1.588081% Net Interest Cost (as -bid): $717,551.74 In consultation with the Municipal Advisor, the City considered the adjustment of the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds and each scheduled maturity thereof in accordance with the Terms of Offering and the following actions were taken: Final Par Amount as adjusted: $7,785,000.00 Purchase Price as adjusted: $7,966,772.95 All bids were then referred to the Council for action. -3- Council Member Mims introduced the following Resolution entitled "RESOLUTION DIRECTING SALE OF $7,785,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015," and moved its adoption. Council Member Botchway seconded the motion to adopt. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton NAYS: None Whereupon, the Mayor declared the following Resolution duly adopted: Resolution No 15-153 RESOLUTION DIRECTING SALE OF $7,785,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015 WHEREAS, bids have been received for the Bonds described as follows and the best bid received (with permitted adjustments, if any) is determined to be the following: $7,785,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015 Bidder: FTN Financial Capital Markets of Memphis, Tennesee The terms of award: Final Par Amount as adjusted: $7,785,000 Purchase Price as adjusted: $ 7,966,772.95 True Interest Rate: 1.588081 % Net Interest Cost: $717,551.74 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA: Section 1. That the bid for the Bonds as above set out is hereby determined to be the best and most favorable bid received and, the Bonds are hereby awarded as described above. Section 2. That the statement of information for Bond bidders and the form of contract for the sale of the Bonds are hereby approved and the Mayor and Clerk are authorized to execute the same on behalf of the City. I&IM Section 3. That the notice of the sale of the Bonds heretofore given and all acts of the Clerk done in furtherance of the sale of the Bonds are hereby ratified and approved. PASSED AND APPROVED this 5th day of May, 2015. n Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Council Member "RESOLUTION DIRECTING S� SERIES 2015," and moved its ad( the motion to adopt. The roll was AYES: NAYS: Whereupon, the Mayor decla RESOLUTION DIRE GENERAL OBLIGA introduced the OF $ GENER n. Council Member ed and the vote was, 05-05-15 13 lowing Resolution entitled OBLIGATION BONDS, seconded the following Ijksolution duly adopted: G SALE PF $ BONDS' SERIES 2015 WHEREAS, bids have been reived fo he Bonds described as follows and the best bid received (with permitted adjustments, i any) i determined to be the following: $ GEN OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015 Bidder: The terms of award: Final Par Amount as adju/ted: $ Purchase Price as adius(ed: $ True Interest Rate: Net Interest Co NOW, THE ORE, BE IT I OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA: Section 1. Ihat the bid for the Bc and most favorable bid received and, the Sectio 2. That the statement of i for the sale o the Bonds are hereby appr the same o behalf of the City. VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY as above set out is hereby determined to be the best ids are hereby awarded as described above. ation for Bond bidders and the form of contract I and the Mayor and Clerk are authorized to execute 5- Publish 4/27 NOTICE OF BOND SALE Time and Place of Sealed Bids: Bids for the sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, of the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa, will be received at the office of the Finance Director, City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa 52440 (the "Issuer") before 10:00 o'clock A.M., on the 5th day of May, 2015. The bids will then be publicly opened and referred for action to the meeting of the City Council in conformity with the TERMS OF OFFERING. The Bonds: The bonds to be offered are the following: GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015, in the amount of $7,785,000*, to be dated June 2, 2015 (the "Bonds") *Subject to principal adjustment pursuant to official terms of offering Manner of Bidding: Open bids will not be received. Bids will be received in any of the following methods: • Sealed Bidding: Sealed bids may be submitted and will be received at the office of the Finance Director at City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa 52440. • Electronic Internet Bidding: Electronic internet bids will be received at the office of the Finance Director at City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa 52440. The bids must be submitted through the PARITY® competitive bidding system. • Electronic Facsimile Bidding: Electronic facsimile bids will be received at the office of the Finance Director at City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa 52440 (facsimile number: 319-341-4008). Electronic facsimile bids will be sealed and treated as sealed bids. Consideration of Bids: After the time for receipt of bids has passed, the close of sealed bids will be announced. Sealed bids will then be publicly opened and announced. Finally, electronic internet bids will be accessed and announced. Sale and Award: The sale and award of the Bonds will be held at the Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa at a meeting of the City Council on the above date at 7:00 o'clock P.M. Official Statement: The Issuer has issued an Official Statement of information pertaining to the Bonds to be offered, including a statement of the Terms of Offering and an Official Bid Form, which is incorporated by reference as a part of this notice. The Official Statement may be obtained by request addressed to the Finance Director, City Hall, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, Iowa 52440 (Telephone: 319-356-5053) or the Issuer's Municipal Advisor, Public Financial Management, Inc., 2600 Grand Avenue, Suite 214, Des Moines, Iowa, 50312 (Telephone: 515-243-2600). Terms of Offering: All bids shall be in conformity with and the sale shall be in accord with the Terms of Offering as set forth in the Official Statement. Legal Opinion: The bonds will be sold subject to the opinion of Ahlers & Cooney, P.C., Attorneys of Des Moines, Iowa, as to the legality and their opinion will be furnished together with the printed bonds without cost to the purchaser and all bids will be so conditioned. Except to the extent necessary to issue their opinion as to the legality of the bonds, the attorneys will not examine or review or express any opinion with respect to the accuracy or completeness of documents, materials or statements made or furnished in connection with the sale, issuance or marketing of the bonds. Rights Reserved: The right is reserved to reject any or all bids, and to waive any irregularities as deemed to be in the best interests of the public. By order of the City Council of the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa. Marian K. Karr City Clerk, City of Iowa City, State of Iowa /41 Council Member Payne introduced the following resolution entitled "RESOLUTION APPOINTING US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, TO SERVE AS PAYING AGENT, BOND REGISTRAR, AND TRANSFER AGENT, APPROVING THE PAYING AGENT AND BOND REGISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT", and moved that the resolution be adopted. Council Member Botchway seconded the motion to adopt. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek Mims, Payne, Throgmorton NAYS: None Whereupon, the Mayor declared the resolution duly adopted as follows: Resolution No 15-154 RESOLUTION APPOINTING US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, TO SERVE AS PAYING AGENT, BOND REGISTRAR, AND TRANSFER AGENT, APPROVING THE PAYING AGENT AND BOND REGISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 75 of the Code of Iowa, $7,785,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, dated June 2, 2015, have been sold at public sale and action should now be taken to provide for the maintenance of records, registration of certificates and payment of principal and interest in connection with the issuance of the bonds; and WHEREAS, this Council has deemed that the services offered by US Bank National Association of St. Paul, Minnesota, are necessary for compliance with rules, regulations, and requirements governing the registration, transfer and payment of registered bonds; and WHEREAS, a Paying Agent, Bond Registrar and Transfer Agent Agreement (hereafter "Agreement") has been prepared to be entered into between the Council and US Bank National Association. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA: Section 1. That US Bank National Association of St. Paul, Minnesota, is hereby appointed to serve as Paying Agent, Bond Registrar and Transfer Agent in connection with the issuance of $7,785,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, dated June 2, 2015. -2- Section 2. That the Agreement with US Bank of St. Paul, Minnesota, is hereby approved and that the Mayor and Clerk are authorized to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Council. PASSED AND APPROVED this 5th day of May, 2015. ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor -3- AGREEMENT RELATING TO PAYING AGENCY, REGISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGENCY THIS PAYING AGENT/BOND REGISTRAR AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), is entered into as of May 5, 2015 by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa (the "Issuer"), and U.S. Bank National Association ('Bank"), as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. RECITALS WHEREAS the Issuer has duly authorized and provided for the issuance of its Bonds, entitled 2015A General Obligation Bonds (the "Bonds") in an aggregate principal amount of $7,785,000 to be issued as fully registered bonds without coupons; WHEREAS the Issuer will ensure all things necessary to make the Bonds the valid obligations of the Issuer, in accordance with their terms, will be done upon the issuance and delivery thereof; WHEREAS the Issuer and the Bank wish to provide the terms under which Bank will act as Paying Agent to pay the principal, redemption premium (if any) and interest on the Bonds, in accordance with the terms thereof, and under which the Bank will act as Registrar for the Bonds; WHEREAS the Bank has agreed to serve in such capacities for and on behalf of the Issuer and has full power and authority to perform and serve as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar for the Bonds; WHEREAS the Issuer has duly authorized the execution and delivery of this Agreement; and all things necessary to make this Agreement a valid agreement have been done. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows: ARTICLE ONE DEFINITIONS Section 1.01. Definitions. For all purposes of this Agreement except as otherwise expressly provided or unless the context otherwise requires: Definition of Terms. The terms "item", "receipt", "transfer", "turnaround", "process", "business day", and other terms used throughout the Agreement shall be deemed to have the meanings provided in Rules 17Ad-1 and 17Ad-2 of the Regulations promulgated pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Section 76.10(4) of the Code of Iowa, as amended and in effect from time to time. "Bank" means U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association organized and existing under the laws of the United States of America. "Bond Register" means the book or books of registration kept by the Bank in which are maintained the names and addresses and principal amounts registered to each Registered Owner. "Fiscal Year" means the fiscal year of the Issuer ending on June 30 of each year. "Issuer" means City of Iowa City. "Paying Agent" means the Bank when it is performing the function of paying agent for the Bonds. "Person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, association, joint stock company, trust, unincorporated organization or government or any agency or political subdivision of a government or any entity whatsoever. "Registered Owner" means a Person in whose name a Bond is registered in the Bond Register. "Registrar" means the Bank when it is performing the function of registrar for the Bonds. "Stated Maturity" when used with respect to any Bond means the date specified in the Bond as the date on which the principal of such Bond is due and payable. ARTICLE TWO APPOINTMENT OF BANK AS PAYING AGENT AND BOND REGISTRAR Section 2.01. Appointment and Acceptance. The Issuer hereby appoints the Bank to act as Paying Agent with respect to the Bonds, to pay to the Registered Owners in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement the principal of, redemption premium (if any), and interest on all or any of the Bonds. The Issuer hereby appoints the Bank as Registrar with respect to the Bonds. As Registrar, the Bank shall keep and maintain for and on behalf of the Issuer, books and records as to the ownership of the Bonds and with respect to the transfer and exchange thereof as herein provided. The Bank hereby accepts its appointment, and agrees to act as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. Section 2.02. Compensation. As compensation for the Bank's services as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar, the Issuer hereby agrees to pay the Bank the fees and amounts set forth in. The Bank's proposal for paying agent/registrar services dated March 12, 2015. In addition, the Issuer agrees to reimburse the Bank, upon its request, for all reasonable and necessary out- of-pocket expenses, disbursements, and advances, including without limitation the reasonable fees, expenses, and disbursements made or incurred by the Bank in connection with entering into and performing under this Agreement.. ARTICLE THREE PAYING AGENT Section 3.01. Duties of Paving Agent. As Paying Agent, the Bank, provided sufficient collected funds have been provided to it for such purpose by or on behalf of the Issuer, shall pay on behalf of the Issuer the principal of, redemption premium, if any, and interest on each Bond in accordance with the provisions of the Bond. Section 3.02. Payment Dates. The Issuer hereby instructs the Bank to pay the principal of, redemption premium (if any) and interest on the Bonds , to the extent such funds have herein been provided by the Issuer, as follows: (a) At least three business days prior to each payment date Issuer will deposit with the Agent in immediately available funds such amount as is required to make such payment. (b) One business day before each payment date Agent will pay interest and, upon presentation and surrender of the matured or called Obligations, will pay principal to each registered owner of the Obligations as of the record date by mailing a check to each such owner. In any case where the date of maturity of interest on or principal of the Obligations or the date fixed for redemption of any Obligations shall be a Sunday or a legal holiday or a day on which the banking institutions are authorized by law to close, then payment of interest or principal may be made on the succeeding business day with the same force and effect as if made on the date of maturity or the date fixed for redemption. Provided, however, that payment of principal shall be made not later than the second day after receipt of the matured Obligation. (c) When the Agent shall receive notice from Issuer of its option to redeem Obligations prior to maturity, the Agent shall select the Obligations to be redeemed and give notice of the redemption thereof, all in accordance with the terms of the Obligations and the Resolution. The Bank shall not be required to pay interest on any funds of the Issuer for any period during which such funds are held by the Bank awaiting the presentation of the Bonds for payment. ARTICLE FOUR REGISTRAR Section 4.01. Initial Delivery of Bonds. The Bonds will be initially registered and delivered to the purchaser designated by the Issuer as one Bond for each maturity. If such purchaser delivers a written request to the Bank not later than five business days prior to the date of initial delivery, the Bank will, on the date of initial delivery, deliver Bonds of authorized denominations, registered in accordance with the instructions in such written request. Section 4.02. Duties of Registrar. The Bank shall provide for the proper registration of transfer, exchange and replacement of the Bonds. Every Bond surrendered for transfer or exchange shall be duly endorsed or be accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, the signature on which as been guaranteed by an eligible guarantor institution, in form acceptable to the Bank, duly executed by the Registered Owner thereof or his attorney duly authorized in writing. The Registrar may request any supporting documentation it deems necessary or appropriate to affect a re -registration. Bank shall comply at all times with such rules, regulations, and requirements as may govern the registration, transfer and payment of registered Bonds including without limitation Chapters 76, 384, 5 54.8 101 et seq. Code of Iowa and standards issued from time to time by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board of the United States and any other securities industry standard and the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. For purposes of determining the registered owners of the Bonds, the record date shall be deemed to be the fifteenth day of the month preceding the date on which payment of principal, premium, if any, or interest is payable to the registered owners of the Bonds ("payment date") whether such payment is due to optional redemption, operation of a sinking fund, or for any other reason. Bank agrees that it will turnaround within three business days of receipt all items received in proper form for transfer, process or other action pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Bank will promptly cancel and deliver to Issuer all Bonds or certificates representing the Bonds surrendered to it upon payment of the principal, premium, if any, and interest owing on such Bonds. In the event any payment check representing payment of interest or principal on the Bonds is returned to the Bank or is not presented for payment, or if any Bonds is not presented for payment of principal or premium, if any, at the maturity or redemption date, if funds sufficient to pay such interest on Bonds shall have been made available to the Bank for the benefit of the owner thereof, all liability of the Issuer to the owner thereof for such interest or payment of such Bonds shall forthwith cease, terminate and be completely discharged, and thereupon it shall be the duty of the Bank to hold such funds, without liability for interest thereon, for the benefit of the owner of such Bonds who shall thereafter be restricted exclusively to such funds for any claim of whatever nature on his part under this Agreement or on, or with respect to, such interest or Bonds. The Bank's obligation to hold such funds shall continue for a period equal to two years and six months following the date on which such interest or principal became due, whether at maturity, or at the date fixed for redemption thereof, or otherwise, at which time the Bank, shall surrender any remaining funds so held to the Issuer, whereupon any claim under this Agreement by the Owners of such interest or Bonds of whatever nature shall be made upon the Issuer. Section 4.03. Unauthenticated Bonds. The Issuer shall provide to the Bank on a continuing basis, an adequate inventory of unauthenticated Bonds to facilitate transfers. The Bank agrees that it will maintain such unauthenticated Bonds in safekeeping. Section 4.04. Form of Bond Register. The Bank as Registrar will maintain its records as Bond Registrar in accordance with standards issued from time to time by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board of the United States and any other securities industry standard and the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and Chapter 76 of the Code of Iowa. Section 4.05. Reports. The records of Bank shall be in such form as to be in compliance with standards issued from time to time by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board of the United States and any other securities industry standard and the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and Chapter 76 of the Code of Iowa. Bank's records in connection with the Bonds shall remain confidential records entitled to protection and confidentiality pursuant to Section 22.7(17), Code of Iowa. Agent agrees that its use of the records will be limited to the purposes of this Agreement and that Agent will make no private use or permit any private access thereto. The Bank will not release or disclose the content of the Bond Register to any person other than to the Issuer at its written request, except upon receipt of a subpoena or court order or as may otherwise be required by law. Upon receipt of a subpoena or court order the Bank will notify the Issuer. Section 4.06. Cancelled Bonds. All Bonds surrendered for payment, redemption, transfer, exchange, or replacement, if surrendered to the Bank, shall be promptly cancelled by it and, if surrendered to the Issuer, shall be delivered to the Bank and, if not already cancelled, shall be promptly cancelled by the Bank. The Issuer may at any time deliver to the Bank for cancellation any Bonds previously authenticated and delivered which the Issuer may have acquired in any manner whatsoever, and all Bonds so delivered shall be promptly cancelled by the Bank. All cancelled Bonds held by the Bank for its retention period then in effect and shall thereafter be returned to the Issuer . Section 4.07. Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. In case any Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Bank shall deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of any such mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any such Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Bank in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing by the owner with the Bank of evidence satisfactory to the Bank that such Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Bank of an appropriate bond of indemnity in form, substance and amount as may be required by law and as is satisfactory to the Bank. All Bonds so surrendered to the Bank shall be canceled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Issuer. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it shall not be necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment, provided that the owner shall first provide the Bank with a bond of indemnity as set forth above. ARTICLE FIVE THE BANK Section 5.01.Duties of Bank. The Bank undertakes to perform the duties set forth herein. No implied duties or obligations shall be read into this Agreement against the Bank. The Bank hereby agrees to use the funds deposited with it for payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds to pay the same as it shall become due and further agrees to establish and maintain such accounts and funds as may be required for the Bank to function as Paying Agent. Section 5.02.Reliance on Documents, Etc. (a) The Bank may conclusively rely, as to the truth of the statements and correctness of the opinions expressed therein, on certificates or opinions expressed therein, on certificates or opinions furnished to the Bank by the Issuer. (b) Bank may rely conclusively and act, without further investigation, upon any list, instruction, certification, authorization, certificate or other instrument or paper suitably guaranteed and believed by it in good faith and due diligence in performing its functions to be genuine and to have been signed, countersigned or executed by any duly authorized person or persons or upon the instruction of any authorized officer of Issuer or upon the advice of Issuer's counsel; and may register any certificate representing the Bonds or may refuse to register any such certificate if in good faith Bank deems such refusal necessary in order to avoid any liability on the part of either Issuer or Bank, and Issuer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Bank from and against any and all losses, costs, claims and liability for so relying or acting or refusing to act. (c) No provision of this Agreement shall require the Bank to expend or risk or use its own funds for performance of any of its duties hereunder (d) The Bank may consult with counsel for the Issuer, and the written advice or opinion of counsel for the Issuer shall be frill authorization and protection with respect to any action taken, suffered or omitted by it hereunder in good faith and reliance thereon. (e) The Bank shall not be responsible for delays or failures in performance resulting from acts beyond its control, including without limitation acts of God, strikes, lockouts, riots, acts of war or terror, epidemics, governmental regulations, fire, communication line falures, computer viruses, power failures, eathquakes or other disasters. (f) The Bank is authorized, to comply with final orders issued or process entered by any court of competent jurisdiction with respect to any money held by the Bank hereunder. If any portion of money held by the Bank hereunder is at any time attached, garnished or levied upon under any court order, or in case the payment, assignment, transfer, conveyance or delivery of any such property shall be stayed or enjoined by any court order, or in case any order, judgment or decree shall be made or entered by any court affecting such property or any part thereof, then and in any such event, the Bank is authorized, to rely upon and comply with any such order, writ, judgment or decree which it is advised by legal counsel selected by the Issuer; and if the Bank complies with any such order, writ, judgment or decree, it shall not be liable to any of the parties hereto or to any other person or entity by reason of such compliance even though such order, writ, judgment or decree may be subsequently reversed, modified, annulled, set aside or vacated. Section 5.03. Recitals of Issuer. The recitals contained in the Bonds shall be taken as the statements of the Issuer, and the Bank assumes no responsibility for their correctness. Section 5.04. May Own Bonds. The Bank, in its individual or any other capacity, may become the owner or pledgee of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not the Paying Agent and Bond Registrar for the Bonds. Section 5.05. Money Held by Bank. Money held by the Bank hereunder need not be segregated from other funds. The Bank shall have no duties with respect to investment of funds deposited with it and shall be under no obligation to pay interest on any money received by it hereunder. Any money deposited with or otherwise held by the Bank for the payment of the principal, redemption premium (if any) or interest on any Bond and remaining unclaimed, by the Registered Owner (or by the Issuer (which claim by the Issuer shall be made in writing) after maturity and prior to escheatment) will be escheated pursuant to Iowa law.. If funds are returned to the Issuer, the Issuer and the Bank agree that the Registered Owner of such Bond shall thereafter look only to the Issuer for payment thereof, and that all liability of the Bank with respect to such moneys shall thereupon cease. Section 5.06. Other Transactions. The Bank may engage in or be interested in any financial or other transaction with the Issuer. Section 5.07. Interpleader. The Issuer and the Bank agree that the Bank may seek adjudication of any adverse claim, demand, or controversy over its person as well as funds on deposit, in a court situated in Johnson County Iowa. The Issuer and the Bank further agree that the Bank has the right to file an action in interpleader in any court situated in Johnson County Iowa to determine the rights of any person claiming any interest herein. Section 5.08 Insurance. The Bank shall carry insurance in the types and amounts for the duration of this agreement as listed in the Issuer's request for paying agent/registrar services dated February 20, 2015. ARTICLE SIX MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Section 6.01. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by an agreement in writing signed by both of the parties hereto. Section 6.02. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other party. Section 6.03. Notices. Any request, demand, authorization, direction, notice, consent, waiver or other document provided or permitted hereby to be given or furnished to the Issuer or the Bank shall be mailed, faxed, sent pdf or delivered to the Issuer or the Bank, respectively, at the address shown below, or such other address as may have been given by one party to the other by fifteen (15) days written notice: If to the Issuer: City of Iowa City Finance Department c/o Finance Director 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 Facsimile: 319-341-4008 If to the Bank: U.S. Bank National Association 60 Livingston Avenue St. Paul MN 55107 Facsimile: 651-466-7431 Section 6.04. Effect of Headings. The Article and Section headings herein are for convenience of reference only and shall not affect the construction hereof. Section 6.05. Successors and Assigns. All covenants and agreements herein by the Issuer and the Bank shall bind their successors and assigns, whether so expressed or not. Section 6.06. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be determined to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. Section 6.07. Benefits of Agreement. Nothing herein, express or implied, shall give to any Person, other than the parties hereto and their successors hereunder, any benefit or any legal or equitable right, remedy or claim hereunder. Section 6.08. Entire A egr�ement. This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto relative to the Bank acting as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. Section 6.09. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same Agreement. Section 6.10. Term and Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by giving the other party at least 90 days advance written notice. At termination of the Agreement, Agent shall deliver to Issuer any and all records, documents or other writings made or accumulated in the performance of its duties under this Agreement and shall refund the unearned balance, if any, of fees paid in advance by Issuer. If the Bank shall resign, or become incapable of acting, the Issuer shall promptly appoint a successor Paying Agent and Bond Registrar Section 6.11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and shall be governed by the laws of the State of Iowa. Section 6.12. Documents to be Filed with Bank. At the time of the Bank's appointment as Paying Agent and Bond Registrar, the Issuer shall file with the Bank the following documents: (a) a specimen Bond; (b) a copy of the opinion of bond counsel provided to the Issuer in connection with the issuance of the Bonds; and (c) such other relevant information that the Bank may request. Section 6.13. Patriot Act Compliance. To help the government fight the funding of terrorism and money laundering activities, Federal law requires all financial institutions to obtain, verify and record information that identifies each person who opens an account. For a non -individual person such as a business entity, a charity, a Trust or other legal entity we will ask for documentation to verify its formation and existence as a legal entity. We may also ask to see financial statements, licenses, identification and authorization documents from individuals claiming authority to represent the entity or other relevant documentation. Section 6.14. Examination of Records. Issuer or its duly authorized agents may examine all records relating to the Obligations at the principal office of the Agent at reasonable times as agreed upon with the Agent and such records shall be subject to audit from time to time at the request of Issuer or Agent. The Agent, on request, will furnish Issuer with a list of the names, addresses, and other information concerning the owners of the Obligations or any of them. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Issuer and the Bank have caused this agreement to be executed in their respective names by their duly authorized representatives, in two counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. City of Iowa City, Iowa, Issuer By: lQ Its: I�t� By: Its: a-iglrl. CiCol�i� U.S. Bank National Association, as Authentication Agent, Transfer Agent, Registrar and Paying Agent t By _� a va, " � R� Authorize Representativ 01097925-1\10714-119 Council Member "RESOLUTION APPOINTING PAYING AGENT, BOND REG PAYING AGENT AND BOND AUTHORIZING THE EXECU7 be adopted. Council Member was called and the vote was, AYES: NAYS: 5-05-15 U introduced the following resolution entitled LANK OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, TO SERVE AS AR, AND TRANSFER AGENT, APPROVING THE ISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGMT AGREEMENT AND OF THE AGREEMENT", and m ved that the resolution seconded the mo ion to adopt. The roll Whereupon, the Mayor declared the RESOLUTION APPOINTING II MINNESOTA, TO SERVE AS P REGISTRAR, AND TRANSFER PAYING AGENT AND BOND I adopted as follows: 3 NK OF ST. PAUL, (ING AGENT, BOND GENT, APPROVING THE GISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGENT AGREEMENT AND AU EXECUTION OF THE AGREEM WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015,,dated June action should now be taken to provide,�or the maim and payment of principal and interest'in connection ORIZING THE apter 75 of the Code of Iowa, $ , 2015, have been sold at public sale and nance of records, registration of certificates �ith the issuance of the bonds; and WHEREAS, this Council,.has deemed that the Ner Minnesota, are necessary for compliance with rules, re u registration, transfer and payment of registered bonds; WHEREAS, a Paying Agent, Bond Registrar and "Agreement") has been prepared to be entered into betwe NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY T] IOWA: f -s offered by US Bank of St. Paul, ons, and requirements governing the ansfer Agent Agreement (hereafter the Council and US Bank. OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF Section 1. That US Bank of St. Paul, Minnesota, is here�y appointed to serve as Paying Agent, Bond Registrar and Transfer Agent in connection with the issuance of $ General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, dated June 2, 2015. -2- It- /56 CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE This Continuing Disclosure Certificate (the "Disclosure Certificate") is executed and delivered by the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa (the "Issuer"), in connection with the issuance of $7,785,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015 (the "Bonds") dated June 2, 2015. The Bonds are being issued pursuant to a Resolution of the Issuer approved on May 5, 2015 (the "Resolution"). The Issuer covenants and agrees as follows: SECTION 1. Purpose of the Disclosure Certificate. This Disclosure Certificate is being executed and delivered by the Issuer for the benefit of the Holders and Beneficial Owners of the Bonds and in order to assist the Participating Underwriters in complying with S.E.C. Rule 15c2 - 12(b)(5). SECTION 2. Definitions. In addition to the definitions set forth in the Resolution, which apply to any capitalized term used in this Disclosure Certificate unless otherwise defined in this Section, the following capitalized terms shall have the following meanings: "Annual Financial Information" shall mean financial information or operating data of the type included in the final Official Statement, provided at least annually by the Issuer pursuant to, and as described in, Sections 3 and 4 of this Disclosure Certificate. "Beneficial Owner" shall mean any person which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, any Bonds (including persons holding Bonds through nominees, depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of any Bonds for federal income tax purposes. "Business Day" shall mean a day other than a Saturday or a Sunday or a day on which banks in Iowa are authorized or required by law to close. "Dissemination Agent" shall mean the Issuer or any Dissemination Agent designated in writing by the Issuer and which has filed with the Issuer a written acceptance of such designation. "Holders" shall mean the registered holders of the Bonds, as recorded in the registration books of the Registrar. "Listed Events" shall mean any of the events listed in Section 5(a) of this Disclosure Certificate. "Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board" or "MSRB" shall mean the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 1900 Duke Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314. "National Repository" shall mean the MSRB's Electronic Municipal Market Access website, a/k/a "EMMA" (emma.msrb.org). "Participating Underwriter" shall mean any of the original underwriters of the Bonds required to comply with the Rule in connection with offering of the Bonds. "Rule" shall mean Rule 15c2 -12(b)(5) adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as the same may be amended from time to time. "State" shall mean the State of Iowa. SECTION 3. Provision of Annual Financial Information. (a) The Issuer shall, or shall cause the Dissemination Agent to, not later than two hundred ten (2 10) days after the end of the Issuer's fiscal year (presently June 30th), commencing with information for the 2014/2015 fiscal year, provide to the National Repository an Annual Financial Information filing consistent with the requirements of Section 4 of this Disclosure Certificate. The Annual Financial Information filing must be submitted in such format as is required by the MSRB (currently in "searchable PDF" format). The Annual Financial Information filing may be submitted as a single document or as separate documents comprising a package. The Annual Financial Information filing may cross-reference other information as provided in Section 4 of this Disclosure Certificate; provided that the audited financial statements of the Issuer may be submitted separately from the balance of the Annual Financial Information filing and later than the date required above for the filing of the Annual Financial Information if they are not available by that date. If the Issuer's fiscal year changes, it shall give notice of such change in the same manner as for a Listed Event under Section 5(c). (b) If the Issuer is unable to provide to the National Repository the Annual Financial Information by the date required in subsection (a), the Issuer shall send a notice to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, if any, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A. (c) The Dissemination Agent shall: (i) each year file Annual Financial Information with the National Repository; and (ii) (if the Dissemination Agent is other than the Issuer), file a report with the Issuer certifying that the Annual Financial Information has been filed pursuant to this Disclosure Certificate, stating the date it was filed. SECTION 4. Content of Annual Financial Information. The Issuer's Annual Financial Information filing shall contain or incorporate by reference the following: 2 (a) The last available audited financial statements of the Issuer for the prior fiscal year, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board as modified in accordance with the governmental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board or as otherwise provided under State law, as in effect from time to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, noting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof. If the Issuer's audited financial statements for the preceding years are not available by the time Annual Financial Information is required to be filed pursuant to Section 3(a), the Annual Financial Information filing shall contain unaudited financial statements of the type included in the final Official Statement, and the audited financial statements shall be filed in the same manner as the Annual Financial Information when they become available. (b) A table, schedule or other information prepared as of the end of the preceding fiscal year, of the type contained in the final Official Statement under the captions "City Property Values" and "City Indebtedness". Any or all of the items listed above may be included by specific reference to other documents, including official statements of debt issues of the Issuer or related public entities, which have been filed with the National Repository. The Issuer shall clearly identify each such other document so included by reference. SECTION 5. Reporting of Significant Events. (a) Pursuant to the provisions of this Section, the Issuer shall give, or cause to be given, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events with respect to the Bonds in a timely manner not later than 10 Business Days after the day of the occurrence of the event: (1) Principal and interest payment delinquencies; (2) Non-payment related defaults, if material; (3) Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties; (4) Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements relating to the Bonds reflecting financial difficulties; (5) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform; (6) Adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notices of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701-TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax-exempt status of the Series Bonds, or material events affecting the tax-exempt status of the Bonds; (7) Modifications to rights of Holders of the Bonds, if material; (8) Bond calls (excluding sinking fund mandatory redemptions), if material, and tender offers; (9) Defeasances of the Bonds; (10) Release, substitution, or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds, if material; (11) Rating changes on the Bonds; (12) Bankruptcy, insolvency, receivership or similar event of the Issuer; (13) The consummation of a merger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the Issuer or the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the Issuer, other than in the ordinary course of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake such an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to any such actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and (14) Appointment of a successor or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. (b) Whenever the Issuer obtains the knowledge of the occurrence of a Listed Event, the Issuer shall determine if the occurrence is subject to notice only if material, and if so shall as soon as possible determine if such event would be material under applicable federal securities laws. (c) If the Issuer determines that knowledge of the occurrence of a Listed Event is not subject to materiality, or determines such occurrence is subject to materiality and would be material under applicable federal securities laws, the Issuer shall promptly, but not later than 10 Business Days after the occurrence of the event, file a notice of such occurrence with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board through the filing with the National Repository. SECTION 6. Termination of Reporting Obligation. The Issuer's obligations under this Disclosure Certificate shall terminate upon the legal defeasance, prior redemption or payment in 4 full of all of the Bonds or upon the Issuer's receipt of an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judicial action or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the Issuer to comply with the terms hereof will not cause Participating Underwriters to be in violation of the Rule or other applicable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. If such termination occurs prior to the final maturity of the Bonds, the Issuer shall give notice of such termination in the same manner as for a Listed Event under Section 5(c). SECTION 7. Dissemination Agent. The Issuer may, from time to time, appoint or engage a Dissemination Agent to assist it in carrying out its obligations under this Disclosure Certificate, and may discharge any such Agent, with or without appointing a successor Dissemination Agent. The Dissemination Agent shall not be responsible in any manner for the content of any notice or report prepared by the Issuer pursuant to this Disclosure Certificate. The initial Dissemination Agent shall be the Issuer. SECTION 8. Amendment; Waiver. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer may amend this Disclosure Certificate, and any provision of this Disclosure Certificate may be waived, provided that the following conditions are satisfied: (a) If the amendment or waiver relates to the provisions of Section 3(a), 4, or 5(a), it may only be made in connection with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in legal requirements, change in law, or change in the identity, nature or status of an obligated person with respect to the Bonds, or the type of business conducted; (b) The undertaking, as amended or taking into account such waiver, would, in the opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel, have complied with the requirements of the Rule at the time of the original issuance of the Bonds, after taking into account any amendments or interpretations of the Rule, as well as any change in circumstances; and (c) The amendment or waiver either (i) is approved by the Holders of the Bonds in the same manner as provided in the Resolution for amendments to the Resolution with the consent of Holders, or (ii) does not, in the opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel, materially impair the interests of the Holders or Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. In the event of any amendment or waiver of a provision of this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer shall describe such amendment in the next Annual Financial Information filing, and shall include, as applicable, a narrative explanation of the reason for the amendment or waiver and its impact on the type (or in the case of a change of accounting principles, on the presentation) of financial information or operating data being presented by the Issuer. In addition, if the amendment relates to the accounting principles to be followed in preparing financial statements, (i) notice of such change shall be given in the same manner as for a Listed Event under Section 5 5(c), and (ii) the Annual Financial Information filing for the year in which the change is made will present a comparison or other discussion in narrative form (and also, if feasible, in quantitative form) describing or illustrating the material differences between the financial statements as prepared on the basis of the new accounting principles and those prepared on the basis of the former accounting principles. SECTION 9. Additional Information. Nothing in this Disclosure Certificate shall be deemed to prevent the Issuer from disseminating any other information, using the means of dissemination set forth in this Disclosure Certificate or any other means of communication, or including any other information in any Annual Financial Information filing or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event, in addition to that which is required by this Disclosure Certificate. If the Issuer chooses to include any information in any Annual Financial Information filing or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event in addition to that which is specifically required by this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer shall have no obligation under this Certificate to update such information or include it in any future Annual Financial Information filing or notice of occurrence of a Listed Event. SECTION 10. Default. In the event of a failure of the Issuer to comply with any provision of this Disclosure Certificate, any Holder or Beneficial Owner of the Bonds may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to comply with its obligations under this Disclosure Certificate. Direct, indirect, consequential and punitive damages shall not be recoverable by any person for any default hereunder and are hereby waived to the extent permitted by law. A default under this Disclosure Certificate shall not be deemed an event of default under the Resolution, and the sole remedy under this Disclosure Certificate in the event of any failure of the Issuer to comply with this Disclosure Certificate shall be an action to compel performance. SECTION 11. Duties Immunities and Liabilities of Dissemination Agent. The Dissemination Agent shall have only such duties as are specifically set forth in this Disclosure Certificate, and the Issuer agrees to indemnify and save the Dissemination Agent, its officers, directors, employees and agents, harmless against any loss, expense and liabilities which it may incur arising out of or in the exercise or performance of its powers and duties hereunder, including the costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees) of defending against any claim of liability, but excluding liabilities due to the Dissemination Agent's negligence or willful misconduct. The obligations of the Issuer under this Section shall survive resignation or removal of the Dissemination Agent and payment of the Bonds. SECTION 12. Beneficiaries. This Disclosure Certificate shall inure solely to the benefit of the Issuer, the Dissemination Agent, the Participating Underwriters and Holders and Beneficial Owners from time to time of the Bonds, and shall create no rights in any other person or entity. Date: 5th day of May , 2015. CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA By: Mayor ATTEST: By: �a� )�- i� City Clerk EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO NATIONAL REPOSITORY OF FAILURE TO FILE ANNUAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION Name of Issuer: City of Iowa City, Iowa. Name of Bond Issue: $7,785,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015 Dated Date of Issue: June 2, 2015 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Issuer has not provided Annual Financial Information with respect to the above-named Bonds as required by Section 3 of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate delivered by the Issuer in connection with the Bonds. The Issuer anticipates that the Annual Financial Information will be filed by Dated: day of , CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA By: Its: 01100836-1\10714-119 CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE This Continuing Disclosyre Certificate (the "Disclosure Certificate") is executed and delivered by the City of Io ity, State of Iowa (the "Issu r"), in connection with the issuance of $ General ligation Bonds, Series 2015 (th "Bonds") dated June 2, 2015. The Bonds are being issued pur uant to a Resolution of the Issue approved on May 5, 2015 (the "Resolution"). The Issuer c enants and agrees as follows: SECTION 1. Pur ose f the Disclosure Certificate This Disclosure Certificate is being executed and delivered by the suer for the benefit of the olders and Beneficial Owners of the Bonds and in order to assist the anticipating Underwrit s in complying with S.E.C. Rule 15c2 - 12(b)(5). SECTION 2. Definitions. In addition to the efinitions set forth in the Resolution, which apply to any capitalized term usedt this Disclosur Certificate unless otherwise defined in this Section, the following capitalized t�pns shall hav the following meanings: "Annual Financial Informati " sVent,rovided an financial information or operating data of the type included in the final Official Sta at least annually by the Issuer pursuant to, and as described in, Sections 3 and 4 tclosure Certificate. "Beneficial Owner" shall meann which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to ispose of ownership of, any Bonds (including persons holding Bonds through nominees, dep sitories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of any Bonds for federal Inco a t& purposes. "Business Day" shall meanh day +r than a Saturday or a Sunday or a day on which banks in Iowa are authorized or r uired blaw to close. "Dissemination Agent" hall mean the Issuer or any Dissemination Agent designated in writing by the Issuer andwhi has filed witli'�,the Issuer a written acceptance of such r designation. "Holders" shall mVan the registered holders of the Bonds, as recorded in the registration books of the Registrar. / "Listed Events' shall mean any of the events listed in Section 5(a) of this Disclosure Certificate. "Municipal/ ecurities Rulemaking Board" or "MSRB" shall mean the Municipal Securities Rulem mg Board, 1900 Duke Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314. "National Repository" shall mean the MSRB's Electronic Municipal Market Access website, a/k/a "EMMA" (emma.msrb.org). "Participating Underwriter" shall mean any of the original underwriters of the Bonds required to comply with the Rule in connection with offering of the Bonds. "Rule" shall mean Rule 15c2-12 adoptedby the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exc ge Act of 193 , as the same may be amended from time to time. "State" shall mean the State f Iowa. SECTION 3. Provision of ual Financial Info ation. (a) The Issuer shall, or shal cause the Dissftination Agent to, not later than two hundred ten (210) days er the end of�the Issuer's fiscal year (presently June 30th), commencing with 'nf National Repository an requirements of Section 4 Information filing must be s (currently in "searchable P may be submitted as a sin package. The Annual Fin information as provided in the audited financial statem, the balance of the Annual Fi required above for the filing available by that date. If the such change in the sane In ormation for the 2014/2015 fiscal year, provide to the ual Financial Information filing consistent with the f this Disclosure Certificate. The Annual Financial ubmitted in such format as is required by the MSRB F" format). The Annual Financial Information filing document or as separate documents comprising a cial Information filing may cross-reference other ction 4 of this Disclosure Certificate; provided that e is of the Issuer may be submitted separately from ancial Information filing and later than the date f the Annual Financial Information if they are not suer's fiscal year changes, it shall give notice of ann as for a Listed Event under Section 5(c). (b) If the Issuer is unable to providk to the National Repository the Annual Financial Information by the date require in subsection (a), the Issuer shall send a notice to the Municipal Securities Ruleming Board, if any, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A. (c) The Dissemination Agent shall: (i) each year file Annual Financ 1 Information with the National Repository; and (ii) (if the Dissemination Agent is o er than the Issuer), file a report with the Issuer certifying that the Annual financial Information has been filed pursuant to this Disclosure Certificate, stating the date it was filed. SECTION 4. Content of Annual Financial Information. The Issuer's Annual Financial Information filing shall contain or incorporate by reference the following: N (a) The last available audited financial statements of the Issuer for the prior fiscal year, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles promulgated by the Financ'Accounting Standards Board as modified in accordance with the gov ental accounting standards promulgated by the Governmental Accoun ng Standards Board or as otherwise provided under State law, as in effect from t e to time, or, if and to the extent such financial statements have not be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, n ting the discrepancies therefrom and the effect thereof. If the Issuer's audited fin cial statements for the- preceding years are not available by the time Ann al Financial Information is required to be filed pursuant to Section 3(a), t e Annual Financial Information filing shall contain unaudited financial statem is of the type included in the final Official Statement, and the audited financial st tements shall be filed in the same manner as the Annual Financial Informati n when they become available. (b) A table, schedule or other in ormation ;prepared as of the end of the preceding fiscal year, of the type contai ed in the final Official Statement under the captions "City Property Values" and " ity Indebtedness". Any or all of the items listed above may be including official statements of debt issues been filed with the National Repository. T document so included by reference. led by specific reference to other documents, Issuer or related public entities, which have ter shall clearly identify each such other SECTION 5. Rgporting of Significant vents. (a) Pursuant to the provisi ns of this ection, the Issuer shall give, or cause to be given, notice of the o currence of y of the following events with respect to the Bonds in a timely er not later an 10 Business Days after the day of the occurrence of the ent: (1) Principay and interest payment elinquencies; (2) Non-pAyment related defaults, if (3) Un§6heduled draws on debt service (4) )Jnscheduled draws on credit ei /reflecting financial difficulties; (5) Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, 3 reflecting financial relating to the Bonds their failure to perform; (6) Adverse tax opinions, the issuance by the Internal Revenue Service of proposed or final determinations of taxability, Notices of Proposed Issue (IRS Form 5701-TEB) or other material notices or determinations with respect to the tax-exenFt—sfatus of the Series Bonds, or material events affecting the tax-exentpt status of the Bonds; (7) Modifications to right of Holders of the Bond , if material; (8) Bond calls (excluding inking fund mandato redemptions), if material, and tender offers; (9) Defeasances of the Bonds; (10) Release, substitution, or sale of prope y securing repayment of the Bonds, if material; / (11) Rating changes on the (12) Bankruptcy, insolvency, eceivership or similar event of the Issuer; (13) The consummation of a erger, consolidation, or acquisition involving the Issuer or the sale of all or. ubstantially all of the assets of the Issuer, other than in the ordinary cours of business, the entry into a definitive agreement to undertake su h an action or the termination of a definitive agreement relating to, any uch actions, other than pursuant to its terms, if material; and (14) Appointment of=a successo or additional trustee or the change of name of a trustee, if material. (b) Whenever the Issuef obtains the kn wledge of the occurrence of a Listed Event, the Issuer shall determine if the occ ence is subject to notice only if material, and if so shall as :fsoon as possible de rmine if such event would be material under applicab�b federal securities la s. (c) If the Issuer determines that knowledg of the occurrence of a Listed Event is not subject to Materiality, or determines su occurrence is subject to materiality and would be #1aterial under applicable fede 1 securities laws, the Issuer shall promptly; but not later than 10 Business ays after the occurrence of the event, file a no ice of such occurrence with the icipal Securities Rulemaking Board througlthe filing with the National Reposi ry. SECTION 6 , Termination of Reporting Obligation. ,The Issuer's obligations under this Disclosure Certificate shall terminate upon the legal defeasance, prior redemption or payment in 4 full of all of the Bonds or upon the Issuer's receipt of an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel to the effect that, because of legislative action or final judi 'al action or administrative actions or proceedings, the failure of the Issuer to comply with the t rms hereof will not cause Participating Underwriters to be in v' ation of the Rule or other a licable requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, amended. If such terminatio occurs prior to the final maturity of the Bonds, the Issuer all give notice of such termi tion in the same manner as for a Listed Event under Section 5(c). SECTION 7. Disseminatio A ent. The Issuer may om time to time, appoint or engage a Dissemination Agent to ass t it in carrying out it obligations under this Disclosure Certificate, and may discharge any su Agent, with or w' out appointing a successor Dissemination Agent. The Disseminate n Agent shall n be responsible in any manner for the content of any notice or report prepared y the Issuer p suant to this Disclosure Certificate. The initial Dissemination Agent shall be the I suer. SECTION 8. Amendment; Waiver. Notwi standing any other provision of this Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer may amen this isclosure Certificate, and any provision of this Disclosure Certificate maybe waived, p vi d that the following conditions are satisfied: (a) If the amendment or waiver rel es to the provisions of Section 3(a), 4, or 5(a), it may only be made in connecti with a change in circumstances that arises from a change in legal requirements ch ge in law, or change in the identity, nature or status of an obligated perso with respect to the Bonds, or the type of business conducted; (b) The undertaking, aices; ded ort ng into account such waiver, would, in the opinion of nationalgnized bo counsel, have complied with the requirements of theat the time the original issuance of the Bonds, after taking into accountmendments interpretations of the Rule, as well as any change in circumstand (c) The amendment Ar waiver either (i) is ap roved by the Holders of the Bonds in the same mannas provided in the Resol tion for amendments to the Resolution with the consist of Holders, or (ii) does no in the opinion of nationally recognized band counsel, materially impair a interests of the Holders or Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. In the event of any amendment or waiver of a provision of thi isclosure Certificate, the Issuer shall describe such amendment in the next Annual Financial InAormation filing, and shall include, as applicable,' narrative explanation of the reason for the amendment or waiver and its impact on the type (or tin the case of a change of accounting principles, on the presentation) of financial information r operating data being presented by the Issue' In addition, if the amendment relates t the accounting principles to be followed in prering financial statements, (i) notice of such ch ge shall be given in the same manner as for a Liked Event under Section 6� 5(c), and (ii) the Annual Financial Information filing for the year in which the change is made will present a comparison or other discussion in narrative form (andals , if feasible, in quantitative form) describing or illustrating the material differences be een the financial statements as prepared on the basis of the new accounting principle;/Ind those prepared on the basis of the former accounting principles. SECTION 9. Additional Informs c deemed to prevent the Issuer from disse n dissemination set forth in this Disclosure i including any other information in any occurrence of a Listed Event, in addition to If the Issuer chooses to include any informs notice of occurrence of a Listed Event in ad Disclosure Certificate, the Issuer shall have information or include it in any future Anni occurrence of a Listed Event. SECTION 10. Default. In the event provision of this Disclosure Certificate, any such actions as may be necessary and appro performance by court order, to cause the Iss Disclosure Certificate. Direct, indirect, co recoverable by any person for any defaul e permitted by law. A default under this isc default under the Resolution, and the s e re of any failure of the Issuer to comply ith tl compel performance. SECTION 11. Nothing in this Wsclosure Certificate shall be ig any other in rmation, using the means of Ficate or any o er means of communication, or Financial Information filing or notice of t which is quired by this Disclosure Certificate. i in any ual Financial Information filing or on to th t which is specifically required by this oblig on under this Certificate to update such Fin ial Information filing or notice of failure of the Issuer to comply with any er or Beneficial Owner of the Bonds may take including seeking mandate or specific comply with its obligations under this ntial and punitive damages shall not be der and are hereby waived to the extent Certificate shall not be deemed an event of under this Disclosure Certificate in the event Certificate shall be an action to ilities of Dissemination Agent. The Dissemination Agent shall have oh' ly such duties as a specifically set forth in this Disclosure Certificate, and the Issuer agree* to indemnify and s ve the Dissemination Agent, its officers, directors, employees and agents; harmless against an loss, expense and liabilities which it may incur arising out of or in the exercise or performance its powers and duties hereunder, including the costs and expenses (including attorneys' es) of defending against any claim of liability, but excluding liabilities due to the Disseminati n Agent's negligence or willful misconduct. The obligations of the Issuer under this Sec 'on shall survive resignation or removal of the Dissemination Agent and payment of the Bonds. SECTION 12. Beneficiaries. This Disclosure Cert" of the Issuer, the DisseMination Agent, the Participating Un( Beneficial Owners from time to time of the Bonds, and shall or entity. 0 shall inure solely to the benefit riters and Holders and ite no rights in any other person ;i Date: day of , 2015. ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO NATIONAL REPOSITORY OF FAILURE TO FILE INFORMATION Name of Issuer: City of Iowa City, Iowa. Name of Bond Issue: $ General Dated Date of Issue: June 2, 2015 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Is Information with respect to the above-named Bor Disclosure Certificate delivered by the Issuer in c anticipates that the Annual Financial Information Dated: day of By: Its: 01 100836-1\10714-119 eries 2015 AL FINANCIAL r has fiot provided Annual Financial as r uired by Section 3 of the Continuing ie ion with the Bonds. The Issuer [Vbe filed by Y OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA #/5(!, Council Member Payne moved that the form of Tax Exemption Certificate be placed on file and approved. Council Member Mims seconded the motion. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton NAYS: None Council Member Payne moved that the form of Continuing Disclosure Certificate be placed on file and approved. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion. The roll was called and the vote was, AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton NAYS: None Council Member Payne introduced the following Resolution entitled "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $7,785,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015, AND LEVYING A TAX TO PAY SAID BONDS" and moved that it be adopted. Council Member Botchway seconded the motion to adopt, and the roll being called thereon, the vote was as follows: AYES: Botchway, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton NAYS: None Whereupon, the Mayor declared said Resolution duly adopted as follows: Resolution No 15-155 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $7,785,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015, AND LEVYING A TAX TO PAY SAID BONDS WHEREAS, the Issuer is duly incorporated, organized and exists under and by virtue of the laws and Constitution of the State of Iowa; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is in need of funds to pay costs of. a) the opening, widening, extending, grading, and draining of the right-of-way of streets, sidewalks, highways, avenues, alleys, public grounds, and market places, pedestrian underpasses and overpasses; the construction, reconstruction, and repairing of any street improvements; the acquisition, installation, and repair of traffic control devices and street lighting; and the acquisition of real estate needed for any of the foregoing purposes; b) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, extension, improvement, and equipping of works and facilities useful for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage and industrial waste in a sanitary manner, and for the collection and disposal of surface waters and streams; c) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and repair of bridges, culverts, retaining walls, viaducts, underpasses, grade crossing separations, and approaches thereto; d) the rehabilitation and improvement of parks already owned, including the removal, replacement and planting of trees in the parks, and facilities, equipment, and improvements commonly found in city parks; and e) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, and equipping of waterworks, water mains, and extensions, and real and personal property, useful for providing potable water to residents of a city; essential corporate purposes, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $6,500,000 be issued for said purpose; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384.25 of said Code, this Council has held a public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of said Bonds, and the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is also in need of funds to pay costs of the aiding in the planning, undertaking, and carrying out of urban renewal projects under the authority of chapter 403, and all of the purposes set out in section 403.12, including the Riverfront Crossings project, the CBD Streetscape Project and the Riverside Drive pedestrian tunnel, an essential corporate purpose, -5- and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $750,000 be authorized for said purpose; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Sections 384.24 (3)(q) and 384.25 of said Code, this Council has held a public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of said Bonds, and no petitions for referendum having been received, the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is also in need of funds to pay costs of the construction of public recreation facilities in a joint undertaking with the Iowa City Community School District, a general corporate purpose, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $700,000 be authorized for said purpose; and WHEREAS, the City has a population of more than 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, the Council of the City has held public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for general corporate purposes in the amounts as above set forth, and, no petition for referendum having been received, the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds thereof; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is also in need of funds to pay costs of the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and equipping of city buildings, and the acquisition of real estate therefore, including city hall improvements and fiber optic connectivity for city communications and computer systems, a general corporate purpose, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $700,000 be authorized for said purpose; and WHEREAS, the City has a population of more than 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, the Council of the City has held public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for general corporate purposes in the amounts as above set forth, and, no petition for referendum having been received, the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds thereof; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is also in need of funds to pay costs of the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and equipping of recreation grounds, trails, recreation buildings, juvenile playgrounds, recreation centers and parks, a general corporate purpose, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of $150,000 be authorized for said purpose; and WHEREAS, the City has a population of more than 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and Noll WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, the Council of the City has held public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for general corporate purposes in the amounts as above set forth, and, no petition for referendum having been received, the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds thereof, and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 384.28 of the Code of Iowa, it is hereby found and determined that the various general obligation bonds authorized as hereinabove described shall be combined for the purpose of issuance in a single issue of $7,785,000 Corporate Purpose General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 75 of the Code of Iowa, the above mentioned bonds were heretofore sold at public sale and action should now be taken to issue said bonds conforming to the terms and conditions of the best bid received at the advertised public sale: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA: Section 1. Definitions. The following terms shall have the following meanings in this Resolution unless the text expressly or by necessary implication requires otherwise: "Authorized Denominations" shall mean $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof. "Beneficial Owner" shall mean the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner of a Bond by a Participant on the records of such Participant or such person's subrogee. "Bond Fund" shall mean the fund created in Section 3 of this Resolution. "Bonds" shall mean $7,785,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, authorized to be issued by this Resolution. "Cede & Co." shall mean Cede & Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee of DTC with respect to the Bonds. "Continuing Disclosure Certificate" shall mean that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Issuer and dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof. "Depository Bonds" shall mean the Bonds as issued in the form of one global certificate for each maturity, registered in the Registration Books maintained by the Registrar in the name of DTC or its nominee. -7- "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, a limited purpose trust company, or any successor book -entry securities depository appointed for the Bonds. "Issuer" and "City" shall mean the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa. "Participants" shall mean those broker-dealers, banks and other financial institutions for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository. "Paying Agent" shall mean US Bank National Association, or such successor as may be approved by Issuer as provided herein and who shall carry out the duties prescribed herein as Issuer's agent to provide for the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due. "Project Fund" shall mean the fund required to be established by this Resolution for the deposit of the proceeds of the Bonds. "Rebate Fund" shall mean the fund so defined in and established pursuant to the Tax Exemption Certificate. "Registrar" shall mean US Bank National Association of St. Paul, Minnesota, or such successor as may be approved by Issuer as provided herein and who shall carry out the duties prescribed herein with respect to maintaining a register of the owners of the Bonds. Unless otherwise specified, the Registrar shall also act as Transfer Agent for the Bonds. "Representation Letter" shall mean the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations executed and delivered by the Issuer to DTC on file with DTC. "Resolution" shall mean this resolution authorizing the Bonds. "Tax Exemption Certificate" shall mean the Tax Exemption Certificate executed by the Treasurer and delivered at the time of issuance and delivery of the Bonds. "Treasurer" shall mean the Finance Director or such other officer as shall succeed to the same duties and responsibilities with respect to the recording and payment of the Bonds issued hereunder. Section 2. Levy and Certification of Annual Tax, Other Funds to be Used. (a) Levy of Annual Tax. That for the purpose of providing funds to pay the principal and interest of the Bonds hereinafter authorized to be issued, there is hereby levied for each future year the following direct annual tax on all of the taxable property in Iowa City, Iowa, to -wit: AMOUNT FISCAL YEAR (JULY 1 TO JUNE 30) YEAR OF COLLECTION $1,041,002 (pre -levy) 2015/2016 $ 853,712* 2016/2017 $ 854,513 2017/2018 $ 855,012 2018/2019 $ 865,213 2019/2020 $ 868,000 2020/2021 $ 872,300 2021/2022 $ 881,200 2022/2023 $ 884,600 2023/2024 $ 897,600 2024/2025 *$188,827 from excess of the first year pre -levy of this issue (NOTE: For example the levy to be made and certified against the taxable valuations of January 1, 2016 will be collected during the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2017.) (b) Resolution to be Filed With County Auditor. A certified copy of this Resolution should be filed with the County Auditor of Johnson County, State of Iowa, and said Auditor is hereby instructed in and for each of the years as provided, to levy and assess the tax hereby authorized in Section 2 of this Resolution, in like manner as other taxes are levied and assessed, and such taxes so levied in and for each of the years aforesaid be collected in like manner as other taxes of the City are collected, and when collected be used for the purpose of paying principal and interest on said Bonds issued in anticipation of said tax, and for no other purpose whatsoever. (c) Additional City Funds Available. Principal and interest coming due at any time when the proceeds of said tax on hand shall be insufficient to pay the same shall be promptly paid when due from current funds of the City available for that purpose and reimbursement shall be made from such special fund in the amounts thus advanced. Section 3. Bond Fund. Said tax shall be collected each year at the same time and in the same manner as, and in addition to, all other taxes in and for the City, and when collected they shall be converted into a special fund within the Debt Service Fund to be known as the "GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND FUND 2015 NO. 1" (the "Bond Fund"), which is hereby pledged for and shall be used only for the payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds hereinafter authorized to be issued; and also there shall be apportioned to said fund its proportion of taxes received by the City from property that is centrally assessed by the State of Iowa. Section 4. Application of Bond Proceeds. Proceeds of the Bonds other than accrued interest except as may be provided below shall be credited to the Project Fund and expended therefrom for the purposes of issuance. Any amounts on hand in the Project Fund shall be available for the payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds at any time that other funds shall be insufficient to the purpose, in which event such funds shall be repaid to the Project Fund FISCAL YEAR (JULY 1 TO JUNE 30) AMOUNT YEAR OF COLLECTION $1,041,002 (pre -levy) $ 853,712* $ 854,51 $ 855,012 $ 865,213 $ 868,000 $ 872,300 $ 881,200 $ 884,600 $ 897,600 *$188,847 from excess of the year pre -levy of this i 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 2020/202 2021/20 2022/2 3 (NOTE: For example the levy to be made and certifi9d against the taxable valuations of January 1, 2016 will be collected Vuring the fiscal y6ar commencing July 1, 2017.) (b) Resolution to be FiWd N Resolution should be filed with the of and said Auditor is hereby instructed assess the tax hereby authorized in Se taxes are levied and assessed, and such aforesaid be collected in like manner a; collected be used for the purpose of P�: anticipation of said tax, and for no Qfhe (c) Additi time when the proceeds of promptly paid when due & reimbursement shall be ma Couyftv Auditor. A certified copy of this A ditor of Johnson County, State of Iowa, or each of the years as provided, to levy and 2 of this Resolution, in like manner as other ;s so levied in and for each of the years er taxes of the City are collected, and when principal and interest on said Bonds issued in rpose whatsoever. Rinds Available. Principal and interest coming due at any 44ax on hands ll be insufficient to pay the same shall be current funds o he City available for that purpose and from such special d in the amounts thus advanced. Section 3. Bond Fund. Sod tax shall be collected a same manner as, and in additio� to, all other taxes in and AV shall be converted into a special fund within the Debt Sery "GENERAL OBLIGATION/BOND FUND 2015 NO. 1" (t pledged for and shall be us6d only for the payment of the pi hereinafter authorized to die issued; and also there shall be a of taxes received by thetity from property that is centrally h year at the same time and in the the City, and when collected they Fund to be known as the e 'Bond Fund"), which is hereby cipal of and interest on the Bonds rtioned to said fund its proportion .ss ssed by the State of Iowa. Section 4. Application of Bond Proceeds. Proceeds of the onds other than accrued interest except as �,ay be provided below shall be credited to the kiect Fund and expended therefrom for the Purposes of issuance. Any amounts on hand in the roject Fund shall be available for the payment of the principal of or interest on the Bonds at any time that other funds shall be insufficient to the purpose, in which event such funds shall be repaid to the Project Fund at the earliest opportunity. Any balance on hand in the Project Fund and not immediately required for its purposes may be invested not inconsistent with limitations provided by law or this Resolution. Accrued interest, if any, shall be deposited in the Bond Fund. Section 5. Investments of Bond Fund Proceeds. All moneys held in the Bond Fund, provided for by Section 3 of this Resolution shall be invested in investments permitted by Chapter 12B, Code of Iowa, 2013, as amended, or deposited in financial institutions which are members of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the deposits in which are insured thereby and all such deposits exceeding the maximum amount insured from time to time by FDIC or its equivalent successor in any one financial institution shall be continuously secured in compliance with Chapter 12C of the Code of Iowa, 2013, as amended, or otherwise by a valid pledge of direct obligations of the United States Government having an equivalent market value. All such interim investments shall mature before the date on which the moneys are required for payment of principal of or interest on the Bonds as herein provided. Section 6. Bond Details, Execution and Redemption. (a) Bond Details. General Obligation Bonds of the City in the amount of $7,785,000, shall be issued pursuant to the provisions of Sections 384.25, 384.26, and 384.28 of the Code of Iowa for the aforesaid purpose. The Bonds shall be designated "GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, SERIES 2015", be dated June 2, 2015, and bear interest from the date thereof, until payment thereof, at the office of the Paying Agent, said interest payable on December 1, 2015, and semiannually thereafter on the 1st day of June and December in each year until maturity at the rates hereinafter provided. The Bonds shall be executed by the manual or facsimile signature of the Mayor and attested by the manual or facsimile signature of the Clerk, and impressed or printed with the seal of the City and shall be fully registered as to both principal and interest as provided in this Resolution; principal, interest and premium, if any, shall be payable at the office of the Paying Agent by mailing of a check to the registered owner of the Bond. The Bonds shall be in the denomination of $5,000 or multiples thereof. The Bonds shall mature and bear interest as follows: Principal Interest Amount Rate Maturity June 1 st $695,000 2.000% 2016 $710,000 2.000% 2017 $725,000 2.000% 2018 $740,000 2.000% 2019 $765,000 2.250% 2020 $785,000 2.000% 2021 $805,000 2.000% 2022 $830,000 2.000% 2023 $850,000 2.000% 2024 $880,000 2.000% 2025 -10- (b) Redemption. Bonds maturing after June 1, 2023, may be called for redemption by the Issuer and paid before maturity on said date or any date thereafter, from any funds regardless of source, in whole or from time to time in part, in any order of maturity and within an annual maturity by lot. The terms of redemption shall be par, plus accrued interest to date of call. Thirty days' written notice of redemption shall be given to the registered owner of the Bond. Failure to give such notice by mail to any registered owner of the Bonds or any defect therein shall not affect the validity of any proceedings for the redemption of the Bonds. All bonds or portions thereof called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided funds for their redemption are on deposit at the place of payment. If selection by lot within a maturity is required, the Registrar shall designate the bonds to be redeemed by random selection of the names of the registered owners of the entire annual maturity until the total amount of bonds to be called has been reached. Section 7. Issuance of Bonds in Book -Entry Form; Replacement Bonds. (a) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Resolution regarding registration, ownership, transfer, payment and exchange of the Bonds, unless the Issuer determines to permit the exchange of Depository Bonds for Bonds in the Authorized Denominations, the Bonds shall be issued as Depository Bonds in denominations of the entire principal amount of each maturity of Bonds (or, if a portion of said principal amount is prepaid, said principal amount less the prepaid amount); and such Depository Bonds shall be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. Payment of semi-annual interest for any Depository Bond shall be made by wire transfer or New York Clearing House or equivalent next day funds to the account of Cede & Co. on the interest payment date for the Bonds at the address indicated in or pursuant to the Representation Letter. (b) With respect to Depository Bonds, neither the Issuer nor the Paying Agent shall have any responsibility or obligation to any Participant or to any Beneficial Owner. Without limiting the immediately preceding sentence, neither the Issuer nor the Paying Agent shall have any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC or its nominee or of any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant, any Beneficial Owner or any other person, other than DTC or its nominee, of any notice with respect to the Bonds, (iii) the payment to any Participant, any Beneficial Owner or any other person, other than DTC or its nominee, of any amount with respect to the principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds, or (iv) the failure of DTC to provide any information or notification on behalf of any Participant or Beneficial Owner. The Issuer and the Paying Agent may treat DTC or its nominee as, and deem DTC or its nominee to be, the absolute owner of each Bond for the purpose of payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on such Bond, for the purpose of all other matters with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes whatsoever (except for the giving of certain Bond holder consents, in accordance with -11- the practices and procedures of DTC as may be applicable thereto). The Paying Agent shall pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or upon the order of the Bondholders as shown on the Registration Books, and all such payments shall be valid and effective to fully satisfy and discharge the Issuer's obligations with respect to the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds to the extent so paid. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Resolution to the contrary (including without limitation those provisions relating to the surrender of Bonds, registration thereof, and issuance in Authorized Denominations), as long as the Bonds are Depository Bonds, full effect shall be given to the Representation Letter and the procedures and practices of DTC thereunder, and the Paying Agent shall comply therewith. (c) Upon (i) a determination by the Issuer that DTC is no longer able to carry out its functions or is otherwise determined unsatisfactory, or (ii) a determination by DTC that the Bonds are no longer eligible for its depository services or (iii) a determination by the Paying Agent that DTC has resigned or discontinued its services for the Bonds, if such substitution is authorized by law, the Issuer shall (A) designate a satisfactory substitute depository as set forth below or, if a satisfactory substitute is not found, (B) provide for the exchange of Depository Bonds for replacement Bonds in Authorized Denominations. (d) To the extent authorized by law, if the Issuer determines to provide for the exchange of Depository Bonds for Bonds in Authorized Denominations, the Issuer shall so notify the Paying Agent and shall provide the Registrar with a supply of executed unauthenticated Bonds to be so exchanged. The Registrar shall thereupon notify the owners of the Bonds and provide for such exchange, and to the extent that the Beneficial Owners are designated as the transferee by the owners, the Bonds will be delivered in appropriate form, content and Authorized Denominations to the Beneficial Owners, as their interests appear. (e) Any substitute depository shall be designated in writing by the Issuer to the Paying Agent. Any such substitute depository shall be a qualified and registered "clearing agency" as provided in Section 17A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The substitute depository shall provide for (i) immobilization of the Depository Bonds, (ii) registration and transfer of interests in Depository Bonds by book entries made on records of the depository or its nominee and (iii) payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds in accordance with and as such interests may appear with respect to such book entries. Section 8. Registration of Bonds; Appointment of Registrar; Transfer; Ownership; Delivery; and Cancellation. (a) Registration. The ownership of Bonds may be transferred only by the making of an entry upon the books kept for the registration and transfer of ownership of the Bonds, and in no other way. US Bank National Association is hereby appointed as Bond Registrar under the terms of this Resolution and under the provisions of a separate agreement with the Issuer filed herewith which is made a part hereof by this reference. Registrar shall maintain the books of the Issuer for the registration of ownership of the Bonds for the payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds as provided in this Resolution. All Bonds shall be negotiable as provided in Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code and Section 384.31 of the Code of Iowa, subject to the provisions for registration and transfer contained in the Bonds and in this Resolution. -12- (b) Transfer. The ownership of any Bond may be transferred only upon the Registration Books kept for the registration and transfer of Bonds and only upon surrender thereof at the office of the Registrar together with an assignment duly executed by the holder or his duly authorized attorney in fact in such form as shall be satisfactory to the Registrar, along with the address and social security number or federal employer identification number of such transferee (or, if registration is to be made in the name of multiple individuals, of all such transferees). In the event that the address of the registered owner of a Bond (other than a registered owner which is the nominee of the broker or dealer in question) is that of a broker or dealer, there must be disclosed on the Registration Books the information pertaining to the registered owner required above. Upon the transfer of any such Bond, a new fully registered Bond, of any denomination or denominations permitted by this Resolution in aggregate principal amount equal to the unmatured and unredeemed principal amount of such transferred fully registered Bond, and bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date or dates shall be delivered by the Registrar. (c) Registration of Transferred Bonds. In all cases of the transfer of the Bonds, the Registrar shall register, at the earliest practicable time, on the Registration Books, the Bonds, in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. (d) Ownership. As to any Bond, the person in whose name the ownership of the same shall be registered on the Registration Books of the Registrar shall be deemed and regarded as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and payment of or on account of the principal of any such Bonds and thepremium, if any, and interest thereon shall be made only to or upon the order of the registered owner thereof or his legal representative. All such payments shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond, including the interest thereon, to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (e) Cancellation. All Bonds which have been redeemed shall not be reissued but shall be cancelled by the Registrar. All Bonds which are cancelled by the Registrar shall be destroyed and a certificate of the destruction thereof shall be furnished promptly to the Issuer; provided that if the Issuer shall so direct, the Registrar shall forward the cancelled Bonds to the Issuer. (f) Non -Presentment of Bonds. In the event any payment check representing payment of principal of or interest on the Bonds is returned to the Paying Agent or if any bond is not presented for payment of principal at the maturity or redemption date, if funds sufficient to pay such principal of or interest on Bonds shall have been made available to the Paying Agent for the benefit of the owner thereof, all liability of the Issuer to the owner thereof for such interest or payment of such Bonds shall forthwith cease, terminate and be completely discharged, and thereupon it shall be the duty of the Paying Agent to hold such funds, without liability for interest thereon, for the benefit of the owner of such Bonds who shall thereafter be restricted exclusively to such funds for any claim of whatever nature on his part under this Resolution or on, or with respect to, such interest or Bonds. The Paying Agent's obligation to hold such funds shall continue for a period equal to two years and six months following the date on which such interest or principal became due, whether at maturity, or at the date fixed for redemption thereof, or otherwise, at which time the Paying Agent, shall surrender any remaining funds so held to the -13- Issuer, whereupon any claim under this Resolution by the Owners of such interest or Bonds of whatever nature shall be made upon the Issuer. (g) Registration and Transfer Fees. The Registrar may furnish to each owner, at the Issuer's expense, one bond for each annual maturity. The Registrar shall furnish additional bonds in lesser denominations (but not less than the minimum denomination) to an owner who so requests. Section 9. Reissuance of Mutilated, Destroyed, Stolen or Lost Bonds. In case any outstanding Bond shall become mutilated or be destroyed, stolen or lost, the Issuer shall at the request of Registrar authenticate and deliver a new Bond of like tenor and amount as the Bond so mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost, in exchange and substitution for such mutilated Bond to Registrar, upon surrender of such mutilated Bond, or in lieu of and substitution for the Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar evidence satisfactory to the Registrar and Issuer that such Bond has been destroyed, stolen or lost and proof of ownership thereof, and upon furnishing the Registrar and Issuer with satisfactory indemnity and complying with such other reasonable regulations as the Issuer or its agent may prescribe and paying such expenses as the Issuer may incur in connection therewith. Section 10. Record Date. Payments of principal and interest, otherwise than upon full redemption, made in respect of any Bond, shall be made to the registered holder thereof or to their designated agent as the same appear on the books of the Registrar on the 15th day of the month preceding the payment date. All such payments shall fully discharge the obligations of the Issuer in respect of such Bonds to the extent of the payments so made. Payment of principal shall only be made upon surrender of the Bond to the Paying Agent. Section 11. Execution, Authentication and Delivery of the Bonds. Upon the adoption of this Resolution, the Mayor and Clerk shall execute and deliver the Bonds to the Registrar, who shall authenticate the Bonds and deliver the same to or upon order of the Purchaser. No Bond shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose or shall be entitled to any right or benefit hereunder unless the Registrar shall duly endorse and execute on such Bond a Certificate of Authentication substantially in the form of the Certificate herein set forth. Such Certificate upon any Bond executed on behalf of the Issuer shall be conclusive evidence that the Bond so authenticated has been duly issued under this Resolution and that the holder thereof is entitled to the benefits of this Resolution. No Bonds shall be authenticated and delivered by the Registrar unless and until there shall have been provided the following: 1. A certified copy of the Resolution of Issuer authorizing the issuance of the Bonds; 2. A written order of Issuer signed by the Finance Director of the Issuer directing the authentication and delivery of the Bonds to or upon the order of the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price as set forth therein; -14- The approving opinion of Ahlers & Cooney, P.C., Bond Counsel, concerning the validity and legality of all the Bonds proposed to be issued. Section 12. Right to Name Substitute Pa dung Agent or Re ig stray. Issuer reserves the right to name a substitute, successor Registrar or Paying Agent upon giving prompt written notice to each registered bondholder. -15- Section 13. Form of Bond. Bonds shall be printed in substantial compliance with standards proposed by the American Standards Institute substantially in the form as follows: (1) (6) (8) -71 (2) —1 E (3) j I I5) (9) 9a (10) (Continued on the back of this Bond) (11)(12 13 (14 FIGURE 1 (Front) -16- (10) (16) (Continued) FIGURE 2 (Back) -17- The text of the Bonds to be located thereon at the item numbers shown shall be as follows: Item 1, figure 1= "STATE OF IOWA" "COUNTY OF JOHNSON" Item 2, figure 1= Item 3, figure 1= Item 4, figure 1= Item 5, figure 1= Item 6, figure 1= Item 7, figure 1= Item 8, figure 1= "CITY OF IOWA CITY" "GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND" "SERIES 2015" "CORPORATE PURPOSE" Rate: Maturity: Bond Date: June 2, 2015 CUSIP No.: "Registered" Certificate No. Principal Amount: $ Item 9, figure 1= The City of Iowa City, State of Iowa, a municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the Constitution and laws of the State of Iowa (the "Issuer"), for value received, promises to pay from the source and as hereinafter provided, on the maturity date indicated above, to Item 9A, figure 1 = (Registration panel to be completed by Registrar or Printer with name of Registered Owner). Item 10, figure 1 = or registered assigns, the principal sum of (enter principal amount in long form) THOUSAND DOLLARS in lawful money of the United States of America, on the maturity date shown above, only upon presentation and surrender hereof at the office of US Bank National Association, Paying Agent of this issue, or its successor, with interest on the sum from the date hereof until paid at the rate per annum specified above, payable on December 1, 2015, and semiannually thereafter on the 1 st day of June and December in each year. Interest and principal shall be paid to the registered holder of the Bond as shown on the records of ownership maintained by the Registrar as of the 15th day of the month preceding such interest payment date. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. This Bond is issued pursuant to the provisions of Sections 384.25, 384.26, and 384.28 of the Code of Iowa, for the purpose of paying costs of.- a) f a) the opening, widening, extending, grading, and draining of the right-of-way of streets, sidewalks, highways, avenues, alleys, public grounds, and market places, pedestrian underpasses and overpasses; the construction, reconstruction, and -18- repairing of any street improvements; the acquisition, installation, and repair of traffic control devices and street lighting; and the acquisition of real estate needed for any of the foregoing purposes; b) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, extension, improvement, and equipping of works and facilities useful for the collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage and industrial waste in a sanitary manner, and for the collection and disposal of surface waters and streams; c) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and repair of bridges, culverts, retaining walls, viaducts, underpasses, grade crossing separations, and approaches thereto; d) the rehabilitation and improvement of parks already owned, including the removal, replacement and planting of trees in the parks, and facilities, equipment, and improvements commonly found in city parks; e) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, and equipping of waterworks, water mains, and extensions, and real and personal property, useful for providing potable water to residents of a city; f) the aiding in the planning, undertaking, and carrying out of urban renewal projects under the authority of chapter 403, and all of the purposes set out in section 403.12, including the Riverfront Crossings project, the CBD Streetscape Project and the Riverside Drive pedestrian tunnel; g) the construction of public recreation facilities in a joint undertaking with the Iowa City Community School District; h) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and equipping of city buildings, and the acquisition of real estate therefore, including city hall improvements and fiber optic connectivity for city communications and computer systems; and i) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement, improvement, and equipping of recreation grounds, trails, recreation buildings, juvenile playgrounds, recreation centers and parks, in conformity to a Resolution of the Council of said City duly passed and approved. Unless this certificate is presented by an authorized representative of The Depository Trust Company, a limited purpose trust company ("DTC"), to the Issuer or its agent for registration of transfer, exchange or payment, and any certificate issued is registered in the name of Cede & Co. or such other name as requested by an authorized representative of DTC (and any payment is made to Cede & Co. or to such other Issuer as is requested by an authorized representative of DTC), ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE OR OTHER USE HEREOF FOR VALUE -19- OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL inasmuch as the registered owner hereof, Cede & Co., has an interest herein. Bonds maturing after June 1, 2023, may be called for redemption by the Issuer and paid before maturity on said date or any date thereafter, from any funds regardless of source, in whole or from time to time in part, in any order of maturity and within an annual maturity by lot. The terms of redemption shall be par, plus accrued interest to date of call. Thirty days' written notice of redemption shall be given to the registered owner of the Bond. Failure to give such notice by mail to any registered owner of the Bonds or any defect therein shall not affect the validity of any proceedings for the redemption of the Bonds. All bonds or portions thereof called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided funds for their redemption are on deposit at the place of payment. If selection by lot within a maturity is required, the Registrar shall designate the bonds to be redeemed by random selection of the names of the registered owners of the entire annual maturity until the total amount of bonds to be called has been reached. Ownership of this Bond may be transferred only by transfer upon the books kept for such purpose by US Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota, the Registrar. Such transfer on the books shall occur only upon presentation and surrender of this Bond at the office of the Registrar as designated below, together with an assignment duly executed by the owner hereof or his duly authorized attorney in the form as shall be satisfactory to the Registrar. Issuer reserves the right to substitute the Registrar and Paying Agent but shall, however, promptly give notice to registered bondholders of such change. All bonds shall be negotiable as provided in Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code and Section 384.31 of the Code of Iowa, subject to the provisions for registration and transfer contained in the Bond Resolution. This Bond is a "qualified tax-exempt obligation" designated by the City for purposes of Section 265(b)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. And it is hereby represented and certified that all acts, conditions and things requisite, according to the laws and Constitution of the State of Iowa, to exist, to be had, to be done, or to be performed precedent to the lawful issue of this Bond, have been existent, had, done and performed as required by law; that provision has been made for the levy of a sufficient continuing annual tax on all the taxable property within the territory of the Issuer for the payment of the principal and interest of this Bond as the same will respectively become due; that the faith, credit, revenues and resources and all the real and personal property of the Issuer are irrevocably pledged for the prompt payment hereof, both principal and interest; and the total indebtedness of the Issuer including this Bond, does not exceed the constitutional or statutory limitations. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Issuer by its Council, has caused this Bond to be signed by the facsimile signature of its Mayor and attested by the facsimile signature of its City Clerk, with the seal of the City printed hereon, and to be authenticated by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar, US Bank National Association, St. Paul, Minnesota. -20- Item 11, figure 1 = Date of authentication: Item 12, figure 1 = This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution, as registered by US Bank National Association. US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Registrar St. Paul, Minnesota By: )—'�—te' Authorized Signature Item 13, figure 1 = Registrar and Transfer Agent: US Bank National Association Paying Agent: US Bank National Association SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS Item 14, figure 1 = (Seal) Item 15, figure 1 = (Signature Block) CITY OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA By: (facsimile signature) Mayor ATTEST: By: (facsimile signature) City Clerk Item 16, figure 1 = (Assignment Block) (Information Required for Registration) -21- ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto (Social Security or Tax Identification No. ) the within Bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney in fact to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: (Person(s) executing this Assignment sign(s) here) SIGNATURE) GUARANTEED) IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY The signature(s) to this Power must correspond with the name(s) as written upon the face of the certificate(s) or bond(s) in every particular without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever. Signature guarantee must be provided in accordance with the prevailing standards and procedures of the Registrar and Transfer Agent. Such standards and procedures may require signature to be guaranteed by certain eligible guarantor institutions that participate in a recognized signature guarantee program. INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION OF TRANSFER Name of Transferee(s) Address of Transferee(s) Social Security or Tax Identification Number of Transferee(s) Transferee is a(n): Individual* Partnership Corporation Trust *If the Bond is to be registered in the names of multiple individual owners, the names of all such owners and one address and social security number must be provided. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN - as joint tenants with rights of survivorship and not as tenants in common -22- IA UNIF TRANS MIN ACT - .......... Custodian .......... (Cust) (Minor) Under Iowa Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ................... (State) ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS MAY ALSO BE USED THOUGH NOT IN THE ABOVE LIST Section 14. Contract Between Issuer and Purchaser. This Resolution constitutes a contract between said City and the purchaser of the Bonds. Section 15. Non -Arbitrage Covenants. The Issuer reasonably expects and covenants that no use will be made of the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bonds issued hereunder which will cause any of the Bonds to be classified as arbitrage bonds within the meaning of Sections 148(a) and (b) of the Internal Revenue Code of the United States, as amended, and that throughout the term of the Bonds it will comply with the requirements of statutes and regulations issued thereunder. To the best knowledge and belief of the Issuer, there are no facts or circumstances that would materially change the foregoing statements or the conclusion that it is not expected that the proceeds of the Bonds will be used in a manner that would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Issuer hereby agrees to comply with the provisions of the Tax Exemption Certificate and the provisions of the Tax Exemption Certificate are hereby incorporated by reference as part of this Resolution. The Finance Director is hereby directed to make and insert all calculations and determinations necessary to complete the Tax Exemption Certificate in all respects and to execute and deliver the Tax Exemption Certificate at issuance of the Bonds to certify as to the reasonable expectations and covenants of the Issuer at that date. Section 16. Severability Clause. If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this Resolution be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining provisions hereof, and this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Section 17. Continuing Disclosure. The Issuer hereby covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate, and the provisions of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate are hereby incorporated by reference as part of this Resolution and made a part hereof. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Resolution, failure of the Issuer to comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate shall not be considered an event of default under this Resolution; however, any holder of the Bonds or Beneficial Owner may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking specific performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to comply with its obligations under the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. For purposes of this section, 'Beneficial Owner" means any person which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, any Bond (including persons holding Bonds through nominees, -23- depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of any Bonds for federal income tax purposes. Section 18. Additional Covenants. Representations and Warranties of the Issuer. The Issuer certifies and covenants with the purchasers and holders of the Bonds from time to time outstanding that the Issuer through its officers, (a) will make such further specific covenants, representations and assurances as may be necessary or advisable; (b) comply with all representations, covenants and assurances contained in the Tax Exemption Certificate, which Tax Exemption Certificate shall constitute a part of the contract between the Issuer and the owners of the Bonds;(c) consult with bond counsel (as defined in the Tax Exemption Certificate); (d) pay to the United States, as necessary, such sums of money representing required rebates of excess arbitrage profits relating to the Bonds;(e) file such forms, statements and supporting documents as may be required and in a timely manner; and (f) if deemed necessary or advisable by its officers, to employ and pay fiscal agents, financial advisors, attorneys and other persons to assist the Issuer in such compliance. Section 19. Amendment of Resolution to Maintain Tax Exemption. This Resolution may be amended without the consent of any owner of the Bonds if, in the opinion of bond counsel, such amendment is necessary to maintain tax exemption with respect to the Bonds under applicable Federal law or regulations. Section 20. Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations. For the sole purpose of qualifying the Bonds as "Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations" pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of the United States, the Issuer designates the Bonds as qualified tax-exempt obligations and represents that the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt governmental obligations which will be issued during the current calendar year will not exceed Ten (10) Million Dollars. Section 21. Repeal of Conflicting Resolutions or Ordinances. That all ordinances and resolutions and parts of ordinances and resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. PASSED AND APPROVED this 5th day of May, 2015. ATTEST: City erk Mayor -24- Council Member moved that Certificate be placed on file and approved. Council Member _ the motion. The roll was called and t* vote was, AYES: NAYS: Council Member Certificate be placed on file and appr ved. unc the motion. The roll was called and th vot was, AYES: NAYS: Council Member "RESOLUTION AUTH RIZING AND PF $ GENE OBLIGATION B PAY SAID BONDS" d moved that it be seconded the motion o adopt, and the roll t AYES: NAYS: of Tax Exemption seconded moved that the form of Continuing Disclosure I Member seconded introduced the following Resolution entitled ING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF , SERIES 2015, AND LEVYING A TAX TO 1. Council Member rlled thereon, the vote was as follows: Whereupon, the Mayor declared said Resolution duly adopted as follows: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $ GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2015, AND LEVYING A TAX TO PAY SAID BONDS WHEREAS, the Issuer is duly ' corporated, organized an exists under and by virtue of the laws and Constitution of the Stat of Iowa; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is in nked of funds to pay costs a) the opening, widening, exten i streets, sidewalks, highways, ave pedestrian underpasses and overp� repairing of any street improveme traffic control devices and street li for any of the foregoing purposes; b) the acquisition, construction, rei equipping of works and facilities u; of sewage and industrial waste in a disposal of surface waters and strez c) the acquisition, construction, repair of bridges, culverts, retain separations, and approaches tho grading, and aining of the right-of-way of alleys, pub 'c grounds, and market places, ;s; the cons ction, reconstruction, and ; the acqu' ition, installation, and repair of ting; and he acquisition of real estate needed 1 h t ction, extension, improvement, and or the collection, treatment, and disposal nary manner, and for the collection and tion, enlargement, improvement, and viaducts, underpasses, grade crossing d) the rehabilitation and im ovement o arks already owned, including the removal, replacement and anting of tree in the parks, and facilities, equipment, and improvements comm my found in cit parks; and e) the acquisition, con ruction, reconstruc 'on, improvement, repair, and equipping of waterwo s, water mains, and xtensions, and real and personal property, useful for p oviding potable water o residents of a city; essential corporate purpos s, and it is deemed necess y and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of n t to exceed $6,500,000 be i sued for said purpose; and WHEREAS, pu suant to notice published as req fired by Section 384.25 of said Code, this Council has held public meeting and hearing upon he proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of said B nds, and the Council is therefore n w authorized to proceed with the issuance of General Obligation Bonds; and WHEREASI the Issuer is also in need of funds to pay*sts of the aiding in the planning, undertaking, and c ying out of urban renewal projects under'the authority of chapter 403, and all of the purposes set out in section 403.12, including the Riverfront Crossings project, the CBD Streetscape Project and the Riverside Drive pedestrian tunnel, an essential corporate purpose, -5- and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $750,000 be authorized for said purpose; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Sections 384.24 (3)(q) and 384.25 of said Code, this Council has held a public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of said Bonds, and no petitio s for referendum having been received, the Council is therefore nowfhorized to proceed with he issuance of General Obligation Bonds; and r WHEREAS, the Issuer is also i� recreation facilities in a joint undertakii general corporate purpose, and it is dee Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $ WHEREAS, the City has a need of funds to pay osts of the construction of public with the Iowa City Community School District, a ed necessary and dvisable that General Obligation V0,000be author' ed for said purpose; and of moreXhan 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice pu fished the Council of the City has held public me ing a proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for g ner forth, and, no petition for referendum havin b e: authorized to proceed with the issuance of e er by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, d hearing upon the proposal to institute corporate purposes in the amounts as above set received, the Council is therefore now l Obligation Bonds thereof; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is also in ne of funds to pay costs of the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, enlargement� /in rovement, and equipping of city buildings, and the acquisition of real estate therefore, incluQing ity hall improvements and fiber optic connectivity for city communications and computerikste , a general corporate purpose, and it is deemed necessary and advisable that General Qbligati n Bonds to the amount of not to exceed $700,000 be authorized for said purpose; and % WHEREAS, the City has "population o more than 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant t6 notice publishe as required by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, the Council of the City has held' public meeting a d hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for general corporate purposes in the amounts as above set forth, and, no petition for re 'rendum having been eceived, the Council is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of General bligation Bonds thereof; and WHEREAS, the construction, rec trails, recreation suer is also in need of i 1, enlargement, impro, juvenile playgrounds, to pay costs of the acquisition, it, and equipping of recreation grounds, ation centers and parks, a general corporate purpose, an� it is deemed necessary and advi�able that General Obligation Bonds to the amount of $150,000 be authorized for said purpose; WHEREAS, the City has a population of more M 5,000 but not more than 75,000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to notice published as required by Section 384.26 (5) of said Code, the Council of the City has held public meeting and hearing upon the proposal to institute proceedings for the issuance of Bonds for general corporate purposes in the amounts as above set forth, and, no petition for referendum having beeiVreceived, theouncil is therefore now authorized to proceed with the issuance of�neral Obligation Bods thereof; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section determined that the various general oblil be combined for the purpose of issuance General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, WHEREAS, pursuant to the provl mentioned bonds were heretofore sold at bonds conforming to the terms and condi sale: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT I OF IOWA CITY, STATE OF IOWA: 84.28 of the Code ofI wa, it is hereby found and [tion bonds authorize as hereinabove described shall n a single issue of $ Corporate Purpose s hereinafter set fo ; and sions of Chapter 5 of the Code of Iowa, the above public sale and tion should now be taken to issue said ;ions of the bes id received at the advertised public Section 1. Definitions. The follow Resolution unless the text expressly or by ❑ "Authorized thereof. LVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY shall have the following meanings in this implication requires otherwise: " shall mean $5,000 or any integral multiple ❑ "Beneficial Owner' shal mean the person in whose name such Bond is recorded as the beneficial owner f a B nd by a Participant on the records of such Participant or such person's sub ogee. ❑ "Bond Fun/his ll meant fund created in Section 3 of this Resolution. ❑ "Bonds" shean $ General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015, authorized to be issued byResolution. ❑ "Cede &Po." shall mean Cede Co., the nominee of DTC, and any successor nominee of TC with respect to the onds. ❑ "Cont' uing Disclosure Certificat " shall mean that certain Continuing Disclosure Certific e executed by the Issuer and ted the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as or' inally executed and as it may b , amended from time to time in accordance with t e terms thereof. ❑ it epository Bonds" shall mean the Bonds as issued in the form of one global certificate for each maturity, registered in the Registration Books maintained by the Registrar in the name of DTC or its nominee. 7- ❑ "DTC" shall mean The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, a limited purpose trust company, or any successor book -entry securities depository appointed for the Bonds. ❑ "Issuer" and "City" shall mean the City of Iowa City, State of Iowa. ❑ "Participants"rlds ll mean those broker-dealers, anks and other financial institutions for which DTC h Bonds as securities depositgy. ❑ "Paying Agen ' shall mean US Bank, or su successor as maybe approved by Issuer as provide herein and who shall carr out the duties prescribed herein as Issuer's agent to pro 'de for the payment of pr' cipal of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall beco due. ❑ "Project Fund" s all mean the fund r quired to be established by this Resolution for the deposit of the roceeds of the B nds. ❑ "Rebate Fund" sha 1 mean the d so defined in and established pursuant to the Tax Exemption Certificate. ❑ "Registrar" shall me US ank of St. Paul, Minnesota, or such successor as may be approved by Issuer as pro ide erein and who shall carry out the duties prescribed herein with respect to mai t 'ning a register of the owners of the Bonds. Unless otherwise specified, the Regis r shall also act as Transfer Agent for the Bonds. ❑ "Representation Let r" ha Representations executed and del' ered y ❑ "Resolution" sh 1 mean th' ❑ "Tax Exemp on Certificate executed by the Treasurer nd delivered at Bonds. 1 mean the Blanket Issuer Letter of the Issuer to DTC on file with DTC. resolution authorizing the Bonds. all mean the Tax Exemption Certificate time of issuance and delivery of the ❑ "Treas er" shall mean the Finan e Director or such other officer as shall succeed to the same dfities and responsibilities th respect to the recording and payment of the Bonds issued ereunder. Section 2. Levy add Certification of Annual Tax; Other Funds to be U (a) I/evy of Annual Tax. That for the purpose of providing funds to pay the principal andkt,rest of the Bonds hereinafter authorize&to be issued, there is hereby levied for eature year the following direct annual tax on all of the taxable property in Iowa City,Ioto-wit: -8- AMOUNT FISCAL YEAR (JULY 1 TO JUNE 30) — YEAR OF COLLECTION (NOTE: For example the levy be made January 1, 2016 will be collect during t 2015/2016 2016/2017 2017/2018 2018/2019 2019/2020 2020/2021 2021/2022 2022/2023 2023/2024 2024/2025 certified against the taxable valuations of fiscal year commencing July 1, 2017.) (b) Resolution to be Ailed With County Auditor. A certified copy of this Resolution should be filed with the County Auditor of Johnson County, State of Iowa, and said Auditor is hereby instruq assess the tax hereby authorized i taxes are levied and assessed, and aforesaid be collected in like manr collected be used for the purpose c anticipation of said tax, and for no (c) :d in and for each of the years as provided, to levy and Section 2 of this Resolution, in like manner as other uch taxes so levied in and for each of the years V as other taxes of the City are collected, and when paying principal and interest on said Bonds issued in purpose whatsoever. ible. Principal and interest coming due at any time when the proceeds of said tax on and shall be insufficient to pay the same shall be promptly paid when due from current *ds of the City available for that purpose and reimbursement shall be made from such pecial fund in the amounts thus advanced. Section 3. Bond Fund. Said tax shall be c lected each year at the same time and in the same manner as, and in addition.4o, all other taxes n and for the City, and when collected they shall be converted into a special fund within the De t Service Fund to be known as the "GENERAL OBLIGATION POND FUND 2015 N 1" (the "Bond Fund"), which is hereby pledged for and shall be useq only for the payment of e principal of and interest on the Bonds hereinafter authorized to be issued; and also there shall e apportioned to said fund its proportion of taxes received by the Cil from property that is centra y assessed by the State of Iowa. Section 4. Applic4ion of Bond Proceeds. Proceeds f the Bonds other than accrued interest except as may b provided below shall be credited to the Project Fund and expended therefrom for the purpo es of issuance. Any amounts on hand the Project Fund shall be available for the paym t of the principal of or interest on the B nds at any time that other funds shall be insufficient to he purpose, in which event such funds shad be repaid to the Project Fund at the earliest opporturfity. Any balance on hand in the Project Fund and not immediately IRM required for its purposes may be invested not inconsistent with limitations provided by law or this Resolution. Accrued interest, if any, shall be c sited in the Bbnd Fund. Section 5. Investments of Bond provided for by Section 3 of this Resolutic Chapter 12B, Code of Iowa, 2013, as amei members of the Federal Deposit Insurance thereby and all such deposits exceeding th FDIC or its equivalent successor in any on compliance with Chapter 12C of the Code pledge of direct obligations of the United All such interim investments shall mature payment of principal of or interest on the I Section 6. Bond Details, Execution i roceeds. Allmoney held in the Bond Fund, shall be invested in i vestments permitted by ded, or deposited in fancial institutions which are Corporation and the eposits in which are insured maximum amount ' sured from time to time by financial instituti shall be continuously secured in Df Iowa, 2013, as ended, or otherwise by a valid ates Governme having an equivalent market value. fore the date o which the moneys are required for nds as herein rovided. (a) Bond Details. General Obliga $ , shall be issued pursuant to the of the Code of Iowa for the aforesaid purpose. OBLIGATION BOND, SERIES 2015", be da: thereof, until payment thereof, at the office of December 1, 2015, and semiannually thereafte until maturity at the rates hereinafter provided of the City in the amount of si ns of Sections 384.25, 384.26, and 384.28 onds shall be designated "GENERAL ane 2, 2015, and bear interest from the date 'aying Agent, said interest payable on the 1st day of June and December in each year The Bonds shall be executed by the an al or facsimile signature of the Mayor and attested by the manual or facsimile signat e of e Clerk, and impressed or printed with the seal of the City and shall be fully registered a to bot :principal and interest as provided in this Resolution; principal, interest and prem' m, if , shall be payable at the office of the Paying Agent by mailing of a check to the reg' tered o er of the Bond. The Bonds shall be in the denomination of $5,000 or multiples ereof. The onds shall mature and bear interest as follows: -10- Principal Amount Rate Maturity June 1 st $ 2016 $ 2017 $ 2018 $ 2019 $ 2020 $ 2021 $ 2022 $ 2023 $ 2024 $ 1 2025 (b) Redemption. Bonds matu ing after une 1, 2023, may be called for redemption by the Issuer and paid before maturity on sa d date o/ any date thereafter, from any funds regardless of source, in whole or from time to time i part, n any order of maturity and within an annual maturity by lot. The terms of redemption hall e par, plus accrued interest to date of call. Thirty days' written notice of rede ion shall be given to the registered owner of the Bond. Failure to give such notice ned any registered owner of the Bonds or any defect therein shall not affect the validityceedings for the redemption of the Bonds. All bonds or portions thereof called foti n will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided funds fd mption are on deposit at the place of payment. If selection by lot within ais r quired, the Registrar shall designate the bonds to be redeemed by random selectiones f the registered owners of the entire annual maturity until the total amount ofbe ca ed has been reached. Section 7. Issuance (a) Notwithstan ownership, transfer, payme the exchange of Depository be issued as Depository B of Bonds (or, if a portion prepaid amount); and su nominee of DTC. Pay nt wire transfer or New Y rk & Co. on the interest aym Representation Lette . �g the other provisions of this Resolution regarding registration, and exchange of the B ds, unless the Issuer determines to permit onds for Bonds in the A thorized Denominations, the Bonds shall ds in denominations of the f said principal amount is pre Depository Bonds shall be re; of semi-annual interest for ar Clearing House or equivalent ent date for the Bonds at the principal amount of each maturity said principal amount less the 'ed in the name of Cede & Co., as pository Bond shall be made by day funds to the account of Cede ss indicated in or pursuant to the (b) Wit respect to Depository Bonds, neither the Issuer nor the Paying Agent shall have any responsi lity or obligation to any Participant or to any Beneficial Owner. Without limiting the imme iately preceding sentence, neither the Issuer nor the Paying Agent shall have any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC or its -11- nominee or of any Participant with resranyor ownersl delivery to any Participant, any Benefor any c nominee, of any notice with respect to, (iii) the Beneficial Owner or any other personDTC or respect to the principal of, premium, ierest on provide any information or notificatioof any I The Issuer and the Paying Ag nominee to be, the absolute owner of premium, if any, and interest on such such Bond, for the purpose of register purposes whatsoever (except for the g the practices and procedures of DTC all principal of, premium, if any, and i Bondholders as shown on the Registra effective to fully satisfy and discharge premium, if any, and interest on the Bi of this Resolution to the contrary (incl surrender of Bonds, registration therec the Bonds are Depository Bonds, full E procedures and practices of DTC there interest in the Bonds, (ii) the -r person, other than DTC or its yment to any Participant, any nominee, of any amount with Bonds, or (iv) the failure of DTC to icinant or Beneficial Owner. r its nominee as, and deem DTC or its may treat DTC ch Bond for theurpose of payment of the principal of, end, for the p ose of all other matters with respect to g transfers wi respect to such Bonds, and for all other ing of certai Bond holder consents, in accordance with may be app icable thereto). The Paying Agent shall pay serest on t Bonds only to or upon the order of the on Books and all such payments shall be valid and he Issue s obligations with respect to the principal of, ids to t e extent so paid. Notwithstanding the provisions ing thout limitation those provisions relating to the and ssuance in Authorized Denominations), as long as c shall be given to the Representation Letter and the n r, and the Paying Agent shall comply therewith. (c) Upon (i) a determinatio the Issuer that DTC is no longer able to carry out its functions or is otherwise determined sat factory, or (ii) a determination by DTC that the Bonds are no longer eligible for its d positservices or (iii) a determination by the Paying Agent that DTC has resigned or dis ontinue its services for the Bonds, if such substitution is authorized by law, the Issuer shall A) desig to a satisfactory substitute depository as set forth below or, if a satisfactory substit e is not fo d, (B) provide for the exchange of Depository Bonds for replacement Bonds i Authorized (d) To the extent Othorized by law, theIssuer determines to provide for the exchange of Depository Bon s for Bonds in Ai orized Denominations, the Issuer shall so notify the Paying Agent and shall rovide the Registrar ith a supply of executed unauthenticated Bonds to be so exchanged. he Registrar shall the upon notify the owners of the Bonds and provide for such exchang , and to the extent that th Beneficial Owners are designated as the transferee by the owners the Bonds will be delivere in appropriate form, content and Authorized Denominatibns to the Beneficial Owners, as their interests appear. (e) Any Paying Agent. Any agency" as provide, substitute depositor registration and tra� depository or its n� Bonds in accordai< stitute depository shall be desig ate ch substitute depository shall be a u. in Section 17A of the Securities Exc a shall provide for (i) immobilization fer of interests in Depository Bonds b` anee and (iii) payment of principal of y with and as such interests may appear -12- . in writing by the Issuer to the lified and registered "clearing ige Act of 1934, as amended. The the Depository Bonds, (ii) book entries made on records of the emium, if any, and interest on the wi respect to such book entries. Section 8. Re isg trati Delivery; and Cancellation. (a) Registration. The ownership an entry upon the books kept for the registra no other way. US Bank is hereby appointed and under the provisions of a separate agreer part hereof by this reference. Registrar shall of ownership of the Bonds for the payment c in this Resolution. All Bonds shall be negoti Commercial Code and Section 384.31 of the registration and transfer contained in the Boi 'Bonds may be transferredmy by the making of )n and transfer of ownersh'p of the Bonds, and in Band Registrar under th terms of this Resolution int with the Issuer filed erewith which is made a iaintain the books of th Issuer for the registration principal of and intere t on the Bonds as provided )le as provided in Art' le 8 of the Uniform 4ode of Iowa, subje to the provisions for [� and in this Reso (b) Transfer. The ownership of any o Registration Books kept for the registration and r thereof at the office of the Registrar together wit his duly authorized attorney in fact in such form with the address and social security number or fe transferee (or, if registration is to be made in the n transferees). In the event that the address of the rej registered owner which is the nominee of the brok dealer, there must be disclosed on the Registration registered owner required above. Upon the transf nd may be tr nsferred only upon the ansfer of B nds and only upon surrender an assigndient duly executed by the holder or shall b satisfactory to the Registrar, along Bond, of any denomination or denominations pe itt amount equal to the unmatured and unredeeme prim registered Bond, and bearing interest at the sa e "rate shall be delivered by the Registrar. (c) Registration of Transfe Registrar shall register, at the earliest accordance with the provisions of this (d) Ownership. As to shall be registered on the Registrn the absolute owner thereof for all such Bonds and the premium, if of the registered owner thereof effectual to satisfy and discha ge loyer identification number of such multiple individuals, of all such ed owner of a Bond (other than a dealer in question) is that of a broker or ks the information pertaining to the ny such Bond, a new fully registered I by this Resolution in aggregate principal 1 amount of such transferred fully 1 maturing on the same date or dates . In all ces of the transfer of the Bonds, the time, on a Registration Books, the Bonds, in any ond, the person in wh se name the ownership of the same tt' n Books of the Registrar hall be deemed and regarded as urposes, and payment of or on account of the principal of any ny, and interest thereon shall e made only to or upon the order his legal representative. All s ch payments shall be valid and the liability upon such Bond, i luding the interest thereon, to the extent of the sum or sum so paid. \ (e) Cancellatio / All Bonds which have been redeemed be cancelled by the Regis rar. All Bonds which are cancelled by the and a certificate of the dOstruction thereof shall be furnished prompt if the Issuer shall so direct, the Registrar shall forward the cancelled -13- ill not be reissued but shall -gistrar shall be destroyed to the Issuer; provided that onds to the Issuer. (f) Non -Presentment of Bonds. In the event any payment check representing payment of principal of or interest on the Bonds is returned to the Paying Agent or if any bond is not presented for payment of principal at the aturity or redemption date, if funds sufficient to pay such principal of or interest on Bonds s all have been made available to the Paying Agent for the benefit of the owner thereof, all liabili y of the Issuer to the owner t ereof for such interest or payment of such Bonds shall forthwit cease, terminate and be co pletely discharged, and thereupon it shall be the duty of the Pa ing Agent to hold such fu ds, without liability for interest thereon, for the benefit of the o er of such Bonds who all thereafter be restricted exclusively to such funds for any claim f whatever nature on s part under this Resolution or on, or with respect to, such interest or Bo ds. The Paying Age is obligation to hold such funds shall continue for a period equal to two y ars and six months ollowing the date on which such interest or principal became due, whether t maturity, or at t e date fixed for redemption thereof, or otherwise, at which time the Paying Ag t, shall surr. er any remaining funds so held to the Issuer, whereupon any claim under this Res lution by th Owners of such interest or Bonds of whatever nature shall be made upon the Issu r. (g) Transfer Feesk The Issuer's expense, one bond for each annual matprity, in lesser denominations (but not less than them'n' requests. Section 9. Reissuance of Mutilated, D stro ed outstanding Bond shall become mutilated or e des oyi request of Registrar authenticate and deliv r a new on mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost, inex ange and 1 Registrar, upon surrender of such mutil ed Bond, or i destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing th the Registrar Issuer that such Bond has been destr�yed, stolen or lost upon furnishing the Registrar and I suer with satisfacto other reasonable regulations as thVIssuer or its agent in the Issuer may incur in connection therewith. Section 10. Record E redemption, made in respect their designated agent as tho month preceding the payn),er Issuer in respect of such Por only be made upon surrOde istrar may furnish to each owner, at the .e Registrar shall furnish additional bonds denomination) to an owner who so ►tolen or Lost Bonds. In case any ;d, stolen or lost, the Issuer shall at the I of like tenor and amount as the Bond so ,stitution for such mutilated Bond to lieu of and substitution for the Bond ;vidence satisfactory to the Registrar and land proof of ownership thereof, and tescribe demnity and complying with such and paying such expenses as a e. Payments of principal and\nt of any Bond, shall be made tot e same appear on the books of the t date. All such payments shall fu ds to the extent of the, payments si of the Bond to the Paying Agent. Section 11. Exkcution, A of ,rest, otherwise than upon full registered holder thereof or to .egistrar on the 15th day of the ly discharge the obligations of the \made. Payment of principal shall this Resolution, the ayor and Clerk shall execute and deliver the shall authenticate th Bonds and deliver the same to or upon order o shall be valid or ob igatory for any purpose or shall be entitled to any unless the Registr shall duly endorse and execute on such Bond a C substantially in th form of the Certificate herein set forth. Such Cert executed on behalf of the Issuer shall be conclusive evidence that the -14- nds. Upon the adoption of onds to the Registrar, who the Purchaser. No Bond ight or benefit hereunder e ifrcate of Authentication ific to upon any Bond Bond so authenticated has been duly issued under this Resolution ancj that the holder thereo 'is entitled to the benefits of this Resolution. / No Bonds shall be authenticated d delivered by the gistrar unless and until there shall have been provided the following: 1. A certified copy of the Resol ion of Issuer thorizing the issuance of the Bonds; 2. A written order of Issuer signed y the Fi ce Director of the Issuer directing the authentication and delivery of th Bonds o or upon the order of the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase pri as t forth therein; 3. The approving opinion of Ahlers & oney, P.C., Bond Counsel, concerning the validity and legality of all the Bond roposed to be issued. Section 12. Right to Name Substitute Pa ' ent or Re istrar. Issuer reserves the right to name a substitute, successor Registrar or Payi g A nt upon giving prompt written notice to each registered bondholder. 062 -16- FIGURE 2 (Back) -17- (10) (Continued) (16) FIGURE 2 (Back) -17- The text of the Bonds to be located thereon at the item follows: Item 1, figure 1= "STATE F IOWA" Item 2, figure 1= Item 3, figure 1= Item 4, figure 1= Item 5, figure 1= Item 6, figure 1= Item 7, figure 1= Item 8, figure 1= "COUNTY OF JOHNSON" "CITY O IOWA CITY" "GENE L OBLIGATION BO "SERIES015" / "CORPO TE PURPOSE" Rate: Maturity: Bond Date: J ne 2, 2015 CUSIP No.: "Registered" Certificate No. Principal Amou t: $ shown shall be as Item 9, figure 1= The City of Iowa ity, State of Iowa, a municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of Constitution and laws of the State of Iowa (the "Issuer"), for value received, promises to/par the source and as hereinafter provided, on the maturity date indicated above, to Item 9A, figure 1 = (Registratio panel t be completed by Registrar or Printer with name of Registered Owner). Item 10, figure 1 = or re in long form) THOUSAND DOLL maturity date shown above, only u Bank, Paying Agent of this issue, ( until paid at the rate per annum sp) thereafter on the 1 st day of June fir st red assigns, t e principal sum of (enter principal amount S in lawful mo ey of the United States of America, on the in presentation an surrender hereof at the office of US its successor, with 'nterest on the sum from the date hereof .feed above, payable on December 1, 2015, and semiannually December in each v . Interest and principal sht ll be paid to the registered older of the Bond as shown on the records of ownership maintained by the Registrar as of the 1 th day of the month preceding such interest payment date. Interesy'shall be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. f f s This Bond is issue4l'3pursuant to the provisions of Sectionk384.25, 384.26, and 384.28 of the Code of Iowa, for thepurpose of paying costs of: a) the opening, widening, extending, grading, and draining of the right-of-way of streets, sidewalks, highways, avenues, alleys, public grounds, and market places, pedestrian underpasses and overpasses; the construction, reconstruction, and -18- repairing of any street improvements; the acquisition, installation, and repair of traffic control devices and street lighting; and the acquisition ¢f real estate needed for any of the foregoing purposes; J b) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, extension, mprovement, and equipping of works and faciliti s useful for the collection, reatment, and disposal of sewage and industrial wast in a sanitary manner, and or the collection and disposal of surface waters an streams; c) the acquisition, constructio , reconstruction, enlar ement, improvement, and repair of bridges, culverts, reta'ning walls, viaducts nderpasses, grade crossing separations, and approaches th eto; d) the rehabilitation and impr removal, replacement and play and improvements commonly e) the acquisition, construction, equipping of waterworks, water property, useful for providing pc f) the aiding in the planning, un projects under the authority of c section 403.12, including the Ri Project and the Riverside Drive .ent of parks /lready owned, including the of trees in toe parks, and facilities, equipment, d in city p rks; ion, improvement, repair, and extensions, and real and personal to residents of a city; g, and carrying out of urban renewal )3, and all of the purposes set out in Crossings project, the CBD Streetscape u1 tunnel; g) the construction of public recreation facilities in a joint undertaking with the Iowa City Community Schoo istrict; h) the acquisition, construct,%n, reconstruc 'on, enlargement, improvement, and equipping of city buildings and the acquisit n of real estate therefore, including city hall improvements adfiber optic conne tivity for city communications and computer systems; and i) the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, nlargement, improvement, and equipping of recreation grounds, trails, recreatio buildings, juvenile playgrounds, recreation centers an4 parks, in conformity to a Resolutipn of the Council of said City Unless this certificate is presented by an authorized Trust Company, a limited purpose trust company ("DTC"), registration of transfer, exchange or payment, and any certif of Cede & Co. or such other name as requested by an author payment is made to Cede & Co. or to such other Issuer as is representative of DTC), ANY TRANSFER, PLEDGE OR ( -19- passed and approved. sentative of The Depository Issuer or its agent for issued is registered in the name representative of DTC (and any sted by an authorized USE HEREOF FOR VALUE OR OTHERWISE BY OR TO ANY PERSON IS WRONGFUL inasmuch as the registered owner hereof, Cede & Co., has an interest herein. Bonds maturing after June 1, 2P23, may be calledfor redemption by the Issuer and paid before maturity on said date or any #te thereafter, from any rids regardless of source, in whole or from time to time in part, in any rder of maturity and wi in an annual maturity by lot. The terms of redemption shall be par, plus accrued interest to doe of call. Thirty days' written notice redemption shall be iven to the registered owner of the Bond. Failure to give such notice b mail to any register owner of the Bonds or any defect therein shall not affect the validity o any proceedings f the redemption of the Bonds. All bonds or portions thereof called for r demption will ce e to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided funds for t eir redemption e on deposit at the place of payment. If selection by lot within a mat ity is requ/dha's the Registrar shall designate the bonds to be redeemed by random selection of th names ofgistered owners of the entire annual maturity until the total amount of bonds o be call been reached. Ownership of this Bond may be tr ns purpose by US Bank, St. Paul, Minnesota, th only upon presentation and surrender of th below, together with an assignment duly ex attorney in the form as shall be satisfactory the Registrar and Paying Agent but shall, o, bondholders of such change. All bonds s all Uniform Commercial Code and Section 84. registration and transfer contained in t e Bor This Bond is a "qualified tax Section 265(b)(3)(B) of the Internay -rybd only by transfer upon the books kept for such egistrar. Such transfer on the books shall occur ,ond at the office of the Registrar as designated .rted by the owner hereof or his duly authorized the Registrar. Issuer reserves the right to substitute ever, promptly give notice to registered e negotiable as provided in Article 8 of the � of the Code of Iowa, subject to the provisions for obligation" designated by the City for purposes of Co e of 1986. And it is hereby represent d and certified ` at all acts, conditions and things requisite, according to the laws and Const' ution of the State f Iowa, to exist, to be had, to be done, or to be performed precedent to the 1 wful issue of this nd, have been existent, had, done and performed as required by law; at provision has be made for the levy of a sufficient continuing annual tax on all t e taxable property wit 'n the territory of the Issuer for the payment of the principal and interest this Bond as the same ill respectively become due; that the faith, credit, revenues and resourc s and all the real and pers nal property of the Issuer are irrevocably pledged for the prompt pay ent hereof, both principal d interest; and the total indebtedness of the Issuer including this Band, does not exceed the const utional or statutory limitations. IN TESTIMONY signed by the facsimile si Clerk, with the seal of tw of an authorized revrese# WHEREOF, the Issuer by its Co ;nature of its Mayor and attested b City printed hereon, and to be auth ative of the Registrar, US Bank, St. -20- il, has caused this Bond to be the facsimile signature of its City pticated by the manual signature �aul, Minnesota. Item 11, figure 1 = Date of authentication: Item 12, figure 1 = This is one of the Bonds described in the within mentioned Resolution, as registered by US Bank. US BANK, Registrar St. Paul, Minnesota Authorized Signature Item 13, figure 1 = Registrar and Transfer Agent: US Bank Paying Agent: US Bank SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS Item 14, figure 1 = (Seal) Item 15, figure 1 = (Signature lock) CITY OF IO A CITY, STATE OF IOWA ATTEST: By: f City l� 1 Item 16 figure 1 / g = (Assignment Block) (Information Required -21- facsimile facsimile Registration) ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto (Social Security or Tax Identification No. ) within Bond and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney in fact to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: (Person(s) executing this SIGNATURE) GUARANTEED) IMPORT The signature(s) to this Power must c of the certificate(s) or bond(s) in eves change whatever. Signature guarante standards and procedures of the Regi procedures may require signature to institutions that participate in a recti INFORMATION REQ Name of Transferee(s) Address of Transferee(s) Social Security or Tax Identificat Number of Transferee(s) VA the Oond with the name(s) as written upon the face rticular without alteration or enlargement or any st be provided in accordance with the prevailing and Transfer Agent. Such standards and aranteed by certain eligible guarantor signature guarantee program. REGISTRATION OF TRANSFER Transferee is a(n): Individual* Corporation Partnership Trust *If the Bond is to be registered in the names of multip e individual owners, the names of all such owners and one address and'social security number mu t be provided. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, shall be construed as though *itten out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as to ants in common TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties JT TEN - as joint tenants with rights of survivorship and not as tenants in common -22- IA UNIF TRANS MIN ACT - .......... Custodian .......... (Cust) (Minor) Under Iowa Uniform Transfers to Minors Act ................... (State) ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS MAY ,! ALSO BE USED THOUGH NOT IN THE ABOVE FIST Section 14. Contract Between Issuer and Purchaser. This Reso tion constitutes a contract between said City and the purchaser of the Bonds. Section 15. Non -Arbitrage Covenants. The Issuer reasona y expects and covenants that no use will be made of the proceeds from th 'issuance and sale o the Bonds issued hereunder which will cause any of the Bonds to be cla sifted as arbitrage onds within the meaning of Sections 148(a) and (b) of the Internal Reve ue Code of the U ited States, as amended, and that throughout the term of the Bonds it will co ply with the re irements of statutes and regulations issued thereunder. To the best knowledge and belief of I would materially change the foregoing staten the proceeds of the Bonds will be used in a rr bonds. Without limiting the generality of the the provisions of the Tax Exemption Certifca Certificate are hereby incorporated by referer is hereby directed to make and insert all calci the Tax Exemption Certificate in all respects Certificate at issuance of the Bonds to certify the Issuer at that date. Section 16. Severability Clause. Resolution be held invalid, such invalidi hereof, and this Resolution shall become Section 17. Continuing Disc comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing Disclo of this Resolution and made a part h Issuer, t ere are no facts or circumstances that its ort conclusion that it is not expected that ner t t would cause the Bonds to be arbitrage ego' g, the Issuer hereby agrees to comply with the provisions of the Tax Exemption part of this Resolution. The Finance Director ons and determinations necessary to complete to execute and deliver the Tax Exemption o the reasonable expectations and covenants of [f,My sect'on, paragraph, clause or provision of this k shall no affect any of the remaining provisions effective i mediately upon its passage and approval. •e. The Issue hereby covenants and agrees that it will visions of the ontinuing Disclosure Certificate, and the Certificate areereby incorporated by reference as part f. Notwithstan 'ng any other provision of this Resolution, failure of the Issuer to comply with the Cont uing Disclosure Certificate shall not be considered an event of default under this Resolution; h wever, any holder of the Bonds or Beneficial Owner may take such actions as may be necess ry and appropriate, including seeking specific performance by court order, to cause the Issuer to mply with its obligations under the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. For purposes of this secti n, "Beneficial Owner" means any person which (a) has the power, directly or indirectly, to vote or consent with respect to, or to dispose of ownership of, any Bond (including persons holding onds through nominees, IWAIE depositories or other intermediaries), or (b) is treated as the owner of any Bonds for federal income tax purposes. Section 18. Additional Covenants, Representations and Warranties of the Issuer. The Issuer certifies and covenants with the purchasers and holders of the Bonds from time to time outstanding that the Issuer through its officers, (a) will make such further specific covenants, representations and assurances as may be necessary or advisable; (b) comply with all representations, covenants and assurances contained in the Tax Exe ' tion Certificate, which Tax Exemption Certificate shall constitute a part of the, contract bet een the Issuer and the owners of the Bonds;(c) consult with bond counsel (as defined in e Tax Exemption Certificate); (d) pay to the United States, as necessary, such su of money representing required rebates of excess arbitrage profits relating to the Bonds;(e) file uch forms, statements and supporting documents as may be required and in a timely ma er; and (f) if deemed necessary or advisable by its officers, to employ and pay fiscal agents, fi4ricial advisors, attorneys and other persons to assist the Issuer in such compliance. ° Section 19. Amendment of., Resolution to Maintain Tax Exemption. This Resolution may be amended without the consent o ny owner of the $finds if, in the opinion of bond counsel, such amendment is necessary to ma ntain tax exemption with respect to the Bonds under applicable Federal law or regulation . r Section 20. Qualified Tax -Ex t Obli `tions. For the sole purpose of qualifying the Bonds as "Qualified Tax -Exempt Obli ations"'ursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of the United States, the Issuer designates the Bondas qualified tax-exempt obligations and represents that the reasonably anticipated amount f t exempt governmental obligations which will be issued during the current calendar year AilVnot exceed Ten (10) Million Dollars. Section 21. Repeal of Conflictin esolutions or Ordinances. That all ordinances and resolutions and parts of ordinances and/eslutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. PASSED AND APPROVED �his 5tl day of May, 2015. ATTEST: City Clerk -24-