The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018-11-29 Info Packeti � 1 n i ,p'> *x CITY 01 1OVVA CITY www.icgov.org City Council Information Packet IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule November 20 Work Session November 29, 2018 IP2. Work Session Agenda IP3. Memorandum from Assistant City Manager: Solar Feasibility Study IP4. Blue Stem Energy Solutions Executive Summary IP5. Blue Stem Energy Solutions Report IP6. Memorandum from City Manager: 12 Court Street Bonus Height Work Session IP7. Report from Axiom Consultants: Pre -Application for Height Bonus and Statement of Intent -12 E. Court Street IP8. Pending City Council Work Topics Miscellaneous IP9. Memorandum from Police Chief and City Attorney: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) recommendations for ordinance amendments November 29, 2018 City of Iowa City Page 1 Item Number: 1. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council TentaLive Meeting Schedule � r AWL U mi �`t CITY OF IOWA CITY Date City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule Subject to change Time Meeting November 29, 2018 Location Tuesday, December 4, 2018 4:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 18, 2018 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Saturday, January 5, 2019 8:00 AM Budget Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 8, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, January 14, 2019 4:00 PM Reception Jo. County Admin Bldg. 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting Wednesday, January 16, 2019 1:00 PM Budget Work Session (CIP) Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 22, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 5, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 19, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 12, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 2, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 16, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 7, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Work Session Agenda ATTACHMENTS: Description Work Session Agenda Item Number: 2. � r CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Council Work Session Agenda Tuesday, December 4, 2018 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 4:00 PM • Review solar feasibility study [I P3, I P4, I P5] • Discuss height bonus allowances for 12 Court Street [I P6, I P7] • Clarification of Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [November 22, November 29] • Council updates on assigned boards, commissions and committees Item Number: 3. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Memorandum from Assistant City Manager: Solar Feasibility Study ATTACHMENTS: Description Memorandum Irom Assistant City Manager: Solar Feasibility Study r `® CITY OF IOWA CITY �,�! r4 h �N�Rq� MEMORANDUM Date: November 29, 2018 To: City Council From: Ashley Monroe, Assistant City Manager Re: Solar Feasibility Study As requested by City Council, staff pursued exploration of possible installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems at several City -owned properties. In late 2017, a staff team comprised of the City Manager's Office, Engineering, Sustainability Office, and Government Buildings coordinated a Request for Proposal (RFP) and selected Bluestem Energy Solutions, from Omaha Nebraska, to fulfill the RFP objectives. The study consultant was tasked with assessing selected city sites, identifying structural and special feasibility, and calculating financial cost and savings projections for installation of ground or rooftop - mounted solar PV equipment. Highlighted elements of the study also included calculation of the carbon emissions (GHG) reduction and an evaluation of the visibility for such projects, often ideal as solar demonstration programs. Sites Studied City staff initially identified six facilities that might be appropriate for solar fixtures, including the Iowa City Airport, City Park pool house, Parks and Forestry building, Wastewater Treatment Plant, Streets building, and Mercer -Scanlon Recreation Center and Park. Two additional sites, Terry Trueblood Recreation Area and Robert A. Lee Recreation Center, were added through further discussion with the consultant team. These sites were selected because they varied in size and scope, building and roof type, and geographic location throughout town. For example, consideration of a demonstration site might require the area to have terrain appropriately level and sizable enough for system installation, along with some visibility to the general public. For a rooftop installation, review of the structural integrity of the roof, the span of area on the rooftop which is suitable for solar PV, and the exposure to sufficient sunlight hours are all factors of consideration. Staff avoided consultant assessment of rooftops less hospitable to frequent access or repair and roofs that have been newly repaired or constructed. Study Objectives A primary study objective was to define whether any of the selected City facilities could provide sufficient space to host different types of solar PV systems. If appropriate accommodations were deemed viable for installation, Bluestem was to identify and evaluate the feasibility of the following: • Levels of cost efficiency that could make installation and operation cost -neutral or cost-saving • Size and type of solar PV systems that could reduce GHG emissions • Visibility of locations that could permit a demonstration project • Possible financing options for city system purchase, system lease -purchase, or a public-private partnership Bluestem's final report (attached), along with collected information about City facilities and public engagement and education strategies, identifies technical responses to the questions above. The report's Executive Summary includes a recommendation, of which, they will explain at the December 4 Work Session. As presented, the Executive Summary's recommendation chart requires a bit of clarification regarding "Savings of PPA vs Ownership". This calculation shows the projected 25 -year net savings from the cost in the prior column ($2.6 or $2.3 million), rather than the estimated cost to the City over 25 years if a PPA is utilized (approximately $1 million or $2.1 million). The row citing "% change in greenhouse gas emissions" will also be clarified during the presentation. November 29, 2018 Page 2 Due to the final report's length, it may be most helpful to reference the following sections: • Page 143, Chapter 7 — Cost Analysis • Page 153, Chapter 8 - Financing Options (Related: Page 29, Chapter 5 —Tax incentives) • Page 168, Chapter 11— Summary and Conclusions Other Considerations The study outcomes show that there are a wide -range of variables to consider when it comes to solar PV installation, including weighing cost and feasibility with the potential for meeting community and Strategic Plan priorities. Steel tariffs and sourcing are a more recent complication in procuring PV systems, and the timing of purchase and installation can mean diminished or increased returns on investment. The structural systems and roof material condition vary greatly and the study did not include onsite rooftop examinations to determine costs of preparing a roof to bear the weight and installation of a PV system. Therefore, further investigation with a qualified structural engineer would be required for those estimates. In 2006, the City looked at structural modifications for a green or solar roof at the Senior Center. To accommodate either with the last reroofing project was cost prohibitive but since that time, PV systems have become more streamlined/lighter and less costly to purchase. Although the Public Works Streets building site at 3800 Napoleon was included in the Bluestem study, the study's timing did not align with the building design for the new Iowa City Public Works (ICPW) facility sited nearby at McCollister Blvd and S. Gilbert St. The ICPW building construction specifications do not include rooftop solar PV in the first phase. However, the building is designed to be solar ready if the City should determine it would like to proceed with a solar installation that offsets a peak load demand. Preliminary estimates for the feasibility of a PV rooftop system by the architect team and LEED consultant have been optimistic, but true estimates of cost and energy offsets will become known through PV system design. After review of the solar study process and consultant report, staff has decided to include design for a PV system at ICPW in the FY20 budget proposal. Pending Council approval of the proposed budget, installation of a solar array would be completed in coordination with building construction. Finally, with regard to fulfilling objectives of the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, the City has options. Iowa City will be powered by 100% renewable electricity by the end of 2021 and therefore the inclusion of new solar PV will not reduce aggregate greenhouse gases unless it is offsetting or preventing additional energy generation. It is necessary to use a diverse range of electrification projects, along with other Climate Plan projects, to meet carbon emissions goals. For example, Mid -American Energy has indicated support for a shared demonstration solar PV or similar project, even as they will proceed to 100%+ wind power generation in our region. City staff have researched and are prepared to implement alternative or additional opportunities to reduce emissions. Item Number: 4. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Blue Stem Energy Solutions Executive Summary ATTACHMENTS: Description Blue Stem Energy Executive Summary op n r rmi r: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Iowa City has a futuristic vision to set precedent for the development of solar energy technologies in Iowa City. The City government is particularly interested in exploring the application of solar photovoltaics (PV) in eight potential sites. To that effect, they solicited a request for proposal in September 2017, which eventually led to the selection of the Bluestem Energy Solutions research team to conduct a thorough solar feasibility study at the eight potential City locations. The scope of the research includes: 1. Assessment of the solar resource at all the eight locations. 2. Evaluating solar PV technologies for the eight sites. 3. Designing and planning of PV systems to determine the energy output. 4. Identification of innovative financing options. 5. Development of education and marketing concepts to promote outreach to the public. The research team showed the various available PV design options at each of the eight sites including a recommended feasibility design at each site. At most of the sites, a combination of parking structure PV and rooftop PV designs would provide optimal equipment visibility for the City of Iowa City. Involving a third -party developer will allow the City of Iowa City to take advantage of the available federal and state investment tax credits which are 30 % and 15 % respectively in 2018. Community solar, which is gaining popularity across the nation is also a beneficial option to promote a visible project. The research considered not only the return on investment (ROI) but also a return on visibility (ROV) when proposing the various design solutions. bluestemenergysolutions.com 1950 south 10th street suite 001, Omaha NE 68108 1 info@bstem.biz PROJECT ANALYSIS Bluestem Energy Solutions assessed options for installing one or more solar photovoltaic (PV) systems on eight different City -owned properties. Bluestem analyzed the expected cost, energy usage/output, and emissions reduction over the life of the installations while also analyzing the economics of visible (at each site) and recognizable solar PV with the City. Bluestem Energy Solutions compared each scenario financially by analyzing Net Present Values (NPV) of each scenario versus having a third party own public private partnership. These four scenarios are separated into 4 different scenarios: The financial analysis included two aspects: NPV and savings. This analysis was observed over a 25 -year period, at current electric rates, and projected future rate increases over the 25 -year period. The NPV is used to analyze the profitability of a project. This analysis was used for this City of Iowa City owned projects to analyze the cash flows of an investment made into solar PV projects. The savings was used to analyze the third party public private partnership as compared to ownership. This analysis takes into consideration the third -party generation (kWh), the cost avoidance, and the price of the new generation ($/kWh) over the life of the project to determine the savings (or loses) the City would receive. bluestemenergysolutions.com 1950 south 10th street suite 001, Omaha NE 68108 1 info@bstem.biz Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Visibility Minimal Minimal Maximum Maximum Recommended Sites • Mercer Park • Mercer Park • Mercer Park • Mercer Park • Wastewater • Wastewater • Iowa City Airport • Iowa City Airport Treatment Treatment • Wastewater • Wastewater • Robert A. Lee • Robert A. Lee Treatment, Treatment, Community Community • Parks & Forestry, • Parks & Forestry, Recreational Recreational • Terry Trueblood • Terry Trueblood Center Center Recreation Area Recreation Area • Robert A. Lee • Robert A. Lee Community Community Recreational Recreational Center Center Recommended • Rooftop • Rooftop • Rooftop • Rooftop Arrays (PV) • Ground mount • Ground mount • Ground mount • Ground mount • Carport • Carport Ownership Structure Iowa City owned Third party Public Iowa City owned Third party Public Private Partnership Private Partnership Discounted -$2,300,000 N/A -$2,600,000 N/A Incremental Cost (NPV) (NPV) (over 25 years) Savings of PPA vs N/A $1,300,000 N/A $500,000 Ownership Size of Solar PV (kW) 1200 1200 805 805 % Change in —16% —16% —10% —10% Greenhouse Gas Emissions The financial analysis included two aspects: NPV and savings. This analysis was observed over a 25 -year period, at current electric rates, and projected future rate increases over the 25 -year period. The NPV is used to analyze the profitability of a project. This analysis was used for this City of Iowa City owned projects to analyze the cash flows of an investment made into solar PV projects. The savings was used to analyze the third party public private partnership as compared to ownership. This analysis takes into consideration the third -party generation (kWh), the cost avoidance, and the price of the new generation ($/kWh) over the life of the project to determine the savings (or loses) the City would receive. bluestemenergysolutions.com 1950 south 10th street suite 001, Omaha NE 68108 1 info@bstem.biz N nrrmi r: RECOMMENDATION Bluestem Energy Solutions has analyzed the technical, contractual, and political opportunities of installing solar PV arrays at all eight sites. After initial analysis, Bluestem was able to eliminate the uneconomical sites (Pool House and Streets Facility) and looked at aggregating the remaining sights. Given our financial analysis, the City of Iowa City needs to determine political and intrinsic value of these projects along with their economics. For Iowa City to improve the NPVs or savings there will need to be an increased economy of scale. Based on the financial analysis at the City's current price and projected rate increases, the parameters in this report highlights the need for the City of Iowa City to expand the project to increase the economies of scale, to lead to more favorable economics. Bluestem suggests there may be opportunities to partner with the University of Iowa and or finding opportunities to partner with Eastern Iowa Power and Light and create a larger (kW) project within Eastern Iowa's territory. Bluestems recommends, if the City of Iowa City was to move forward with the current or future project, to move forward by utilizing a third party public private partnership. Given the current project, the City would see significant cost reduction versus ownership. Through our analysis if the City of Iowa City was to move forward with the above recommended projects we anticipate your electric cost would increase $4,500 to $7,000 a month. The best design given the parameters of this study would be to move forward with "Scenario 2" given the greenhouse gas emissions this project would offset, plus the cost reduction the City would receive versus owning this project. bluestemenergysolutions.com 1 950 south 10th street suite 001, Omaha NE 68108 1 info@bstem.biz Item Number: 5. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Blue Stem Energy Solutions Report ATTACHMENTS: Description Blue Stem Energy Solutions Report Elluesteiii ENERGY SOLUTIONS AFFORDABLE. RELIABLE. SUSTAINABLE Z�* moo* M =Irz wIP Im ;l,ip m�1�s7 DISCLAIMER The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the City of Iowa City. iii TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. N/A N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date A Comprehensive Study of the Solar Energy Power Systems November 28, 2018 for the City of Iowa City Locations 6. Performing Organization Code N/A 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Bluestem Energy Solutions Research Team N/A 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Bluestem Energy Solutions N/A 950 S 101b Street, Suite 001 11. Contract or Grant No. Omaha, NE 68108 N/A 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered City of Iowa City Research Report 410 East Washington Street January 16, 2018 to August 31, 2018 Iowa City, IA 52240 14. Sponsoring Agency Code N/A 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract 17. Keywords 18. Distribution Statement Solar Photovoltaics; Iowa City; PV Feasibility Study 19. Security Classif. (of this 20. Security Classif. (of this 21. No. of 22. Price report) page) Pages UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED lv A Comprehensive Study of the Solar Energy Power Systems for the City of Iowa City Locations Contract # 31sT August 2018 Bluestem Project Research Team Srikanth Madala, Research & Development Engineer (LEED Green Associate) Jamie Goldenberg, Energy Consultant Mitch Hyde, Project Engineer Chris Shank, Environmental Compliance Specialist Will Greene, Project Developer EPC Consultant (Boyd Jones Construction) Brian Ageton, Project Engineer Andrew Ebert, Boyd, Renewable Project Estimator v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Iowa City has a progressive vision to set precedent for the development of solar energy technologies in Iowa City. The Iowa City government is interested in exploring the application of solar photovoltaics (PV) at a variety of City -owned sites. To that effect, the City solicited a request for proposal in September 2017 seeking an independent energy consulting company to carry out an unbiased research, which eventually led to the selection of the Bluestein Energy Solutions research team to conduct a thorough solar feasibility study at eight potential City locations. The scope of the research included: 1. Assessment of the solar resource at all the eight locations. 2. Evaluating solar PV technologies for the eight sites. 3. Designing and planning of PV systems to determine the energy output maximizing the solar opportunity at each location subject to constraints by the site's energy usage, and the serving utility's net metering policy. 4. Identification of preferred financing options. 5. Development of education and marketing concepts to promote outreach to the public. Bluestein teams researched twenty—eight different PV design options at the eight proposed sites. As a tax-exempt government body, the City of Iowa City will be unable to take advantage of tax credits, therefore the compound payback period reflects higher project payback periods. Involving a third—parry developer will allow the City of Iowa City to take advantage of the available federal and Iowa state investment tax credits which are 30% and 15% respectively in 2018. The idea of community solar which is gaining popularity across the nation, included in the draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, is also a potential option. The research considers not only the return on investment (ROI) which is between 4% to 8% (without considering the tax incentives), but also a return on visibility (ROV) when proposing the various design solutions. ROV is a metric used to measure the economic value that a solar project visibility will bring about in a community. Bluestein Energy Solutions has analyzed the technical, contractual, and political opportunities of installing solar PV arrays at all eight sites. After initial analysis, Bluestein was able to eliminate the uneconomical sites (Pool House and Streets Facility) and looked at aggregating the remaining sights. Given our financial analysis, the City of Iowa City needs to determine political and intrinsic value of these projects along with their economics. vi For Iowa City to improve the NPVs or savings there will need to be an increased economy of scale. Based on the financial analysis at the City's current price and projected rate increases, the parameters in this report highlights the need for the City of Iowa City to expand the project to increase the economies of scale, to lead to more favorable economics. Bluestem Energy Solutions suggest the City of Iowa City to look at partnering with other shareholders in the community to increase the size of the project. Bluestems recommends, if the City of Iowa City was to move forward with the current or future project, to move forward by utilizing a third party public private partnership. Given the current project, the City would see significant cost reduction versus ownership. vii bluestemenergysolutions.com 1950 south 10th street suite 001, Omaha NE 68108 1 info@bstem.biz TABLE OF CONTENTS CoverPage Design...........................................................................................................................................i Disclaimer..................................................................................................................................................... iii Technical Report Documentation Page..........................................................................................................iv ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................................vi Listof Figures................................................................................................................................................xi Listof Tables...............................................................................................................................................xvi 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................. I 1.1. Iowa — Renewable Portfolio Standard Policy (RPS)............................................................................1 1.2. State Profile for Solar — Iowa...............................................................................................................3 1.3. Sustainability Measures by the City of Iowa City...............................................................................3 2. Technology Review................................................................................................................................5 2.1. Solar Photovoltaics(PV)......................................................................................................................5 2.2. Solar Mounting Systems....................................................................................................................11 2.3. Solar Tracking Systems.....................................................................................................................11 2.4. PV Inverters.......................................................................................................................................13 2.5. Battery System...................................................................................................................................13 2.6. Electrical Interconnection..................................................................................................................14 3. Solar resource assessment and site selection........................................................................................15 3.1. Meteorological Parameters................................................................................................................15 4. General Design Constraints..................................................................................................................20 4.1. 2018 International Fire Code (IFC)...................................................................................................20 4.2. Structural Constraints.........................................................................................................................24 4.3. Net metering and Interconnection Policies........................................................................................24 4.4. Zoning, Permits and approvals...........................................................................................................26 5. Tax incentives.......................................................................................................................................29 viii 5. 1. Federal Solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC).......................................................................................29 5.2. Federal Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit (PTC)............................................................30 5.3. Iowa State Solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC)..................................................................................30 5.4. Iowa State Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit (PTC).......................................................30 5.5. 2018 Federal Imported PV Tariff......................................................................................................31 6. PV system selection and design options...............................................................................................32 6.1. Site 1: City Park Pool House (200 E. Park Road, Iowa City, IA 52246) ...........................................34 6.2. Site 2: Mercer Park (2701 Bradford Dr., Iowa City, IA 52240)........................................................43 6.3. Site 3: Iowa City Airport (1801 S Riverside Dr., Iowa City, IA 52246) ...........................................60 6.4. Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility (4366 Napoleon St. SE, Iowa City, IA 52240)............81 6.5. Site 5: Streets Facility (3800 Napoleon Ln., Iowa City, IA 52240) ...................................................94 6.6. Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility (2275 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) ..................................112 6.7. Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility (579 McCollister Blvd., Iowa City, IA 52240) ................................................................................................................................................................125 6.8. Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Facility (220 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) ................................................................................................................................................................134 7. Project Cost Analysis..........................................................................................................................143 7.1. Commercial—Scale Carport PV Project Cost...................................................................................143 7.2. Commercial—Scale Rooftop PV Project Cost..................................................................................144 7.3. Utility—Scale Ground—Mount PV Project Cost................................................................................145 7.4. Residential—Scale Rooftop PV Project Cost....................................................................................147 7.5. Payback Period Evaluation..............................................................................................................148 8. Innovative Financing Options.............................................................................................................153 8.1. Power Purchase Agreement.............................................................................................................153 8.2. Lease Agreement.............................................................................................................................153 8.3. Own and Operate.............................................................................................................................153 8.4. Community Solar.............................................................................................................................154 ix 9. Environmental Studies........................................................................................................................157 9.1. Environmental Benefits of Solar Energy.........................................................................................157 9.2. Summary of Environmental Benefits of Solar Energy....................................................................159 10. Public Education and Marketing.....................................................................................................160 10.1. Audiences.......................................................................................................................................160 10.2. Solar Architecture — Aesthetic options for Solar PV.....................................................................163 11. Summary and conclusions..............................................................................................................168 11.1. Summary of all the PV Designs at eight sites................................................................................168 11.2. Bluestem's Final Recommendations..............................................................................................172 References...................................................................................................................................................176 Abbreviations..............................................................................................................................................180 APPENDIX—A: NREL Solar Resource Maps............................................................................................181 APPENDIX— B: FEMA Floodplain maps of the Eight sites......................................................................184 APPENDIX—C: Transmission Grid Interconnectivity Map........................................................................193 APPENDIX—D: Google Sunroof Imagery..................................................................................................194 APPENDIX—E: Innovative Solar PV Installations.....................................................................................202 Addendumto Project Report ......................................................................................................................206 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure................................................................................................................................... Page # Figure 1. Iowa's Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Solar Carve—out in comparison with the other 50 States of the country [2]. Infographic Courtesy: Solar Power Rocks...............................................2 Figure 2. Hierarchy of photovoltaics [10]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 Figure 3. Classification of Solar photovoltaic technologies...........................................................................7 Figure 4. Comparison of lab efficiencies of various types of solar cells (07/2018 Release) [ 12] ..................8 Figure 5. Global market share of photovoltaics by technology. Credit: SPV Market Research [11] .............9 Figure 6. Classification of solar trackers......................................................................................................12 Figure 7. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (-35—year average) comparedwith 2017 and 2016----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 Figure 8. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (-35—year average) comparedwith 2015 and 2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 Figure 9. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (-35—year average) comparedwith 2013 and 2012----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 Figure 10. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2017, and 2016 ................................17 Figure 11. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2015, and 2014 ................................17 Figure 12. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2013, and 2012 ................................18 Figure 13. Monthly average air temperature in 2017 and 2016 compared to the reference year (-35—year average).........................................................................................................................................................18 Figure 14. Monthly average air temperature in 2015 and 2014 compared to the reference year (-35—year average)---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 Figure 15. Monthly average air temperature in 2013 and 2012 compared to the reference year (-35—year average)---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 Figure 16. PV design on a gable roof------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21 Figure17. PV design on a hip roof---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21 Figure 18. PV design on a hip—and—valley roof-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------22 Figure 19. Design on commercial flat rooftop..............................................................................................23 Figure 20. The four PV design classifications at each site...........................................................................32 Figure 21. Typical Electric Vehicle Power Receptacles...............................................................................33 Figure 22. City Park pool house aerial view-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------34 Figure 23. Electric Energy usage at Site 1: City Park Pool House...............................................................36 Figure 24. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for City Park Pool House .............................36 xi Figure 25. The South -facing roof of City Park pool house with encircled Skylights..................................38 Figure 26. Design 1: Rooftop PV in Helioscope software at the City Park Pool House..............................38 Figure 27. Estimated annual production of the 12 kWDc solar array at City Park pool house .....................39 Figure 28. Estimated annual production of the 8 kWDc solar array at City Park pool house .......................41 Figure 29. CIGS material thin film PV module [28]....................................................................................43 Figure 30. Side canopy structures at City Park pool house...........................................................................43 Figure 31. Mercer Park Aquatic Center and James P. Scanlon Gymnasium (front entrance and aerial view of theroof) .........................................................................................................................................................44 Figure 32. Electric Energy usage at Site 2: Mercer Park..............................................................................45 Figure 33. All -in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Mercer Park...........................................46 Figure 34. Rooftop view of Mercer park aquatic center and James P. Scanlon gymnasium ........................48 Figure 35. Aerial view of Design 1: Mercer Park rooftop PV......................................................................49 Figure 36. Estimated annual production of the designed rooftop solar array at Mercer Park.......................49 Figure 37. Aerial view of Mercer Park parking lot.......................................................................................51 Figure 38. Mercer Park parking lot PV design plan-P1...............................................................................52 Figure 39. Mercer Park parking lot PV design plan-P2...............................................................................53 Figure 40. Estimated annual energy production from parking lot PV design plan -P1 at Mercer Park ........ 54 Figure 41. Estimated annual energy production from parking lot PV design plan -P2 at Mercer Park ........ 55 Figure 42. Mercer Park ground -mount PV design.......................................................................................56 Figure 43. Estimated annual production of the designed ground -mount PV at Mercer Park.......................57 Figure 44. Mercer Park Tennis and Pickleball Courts..................................................................................58 Figure 45. PV canopy design at the Tennis and Pickleball courts. Hexagonal blocks shown in the picture are simulating the shading effect of the trees in the southwest corner................................................................58 Figure 46. Estimated annual production of the designed pickleball court PV at Mercer Park .....................59 Figure 47. Iowa City Airport main building.................................................................................................60 Figure 48. Iowa City Airport's South buildings with low -pitch, metal roof................................................61 Figure 49. Iowa City Airport's North buildings with low -pitch, metal roof................................................62 Figure 50. Total load and demand on all meters summed up together with 60 kW PV generation..............63 Figure 51. All -in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh aggregating all Airport meters.....................64 Figure 52. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -1 (Meter # S64080217) ....................................65 Figure 53. All -in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Airport Meter -1 (Meter # S64080217)..65 Figure 54. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) ....................................66 Figure 55. All -in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) .........................66 Figure 56. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -3 (Meter # S64086562) ....................................67 xii Figure 57. All -in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -3 (Meter # S64086562) .........................67 Figure 58. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) ....................................68 Figure 59. All -in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) .........................68 Figure 60. Rooftop PV Design -R1 on Main Building (Bldg. E) at Iowa City Airport................................71 Figure 61. Rooftop PV Design -R2 on North Buildings (Bldg. A through Bldg. D) at Iowa City Airport..71 Figure 62. Rooftop PV Design -R3 on South Buildings (Bldg. F through Bldg. N) at Iowa City Airport ... 72 Figure 63. Estimated annual production of the Main Building PV design -R1 at the airport .......................73 Figure 64. Estimated annual production of the North Buildings PV design -R2 at the airport .....................74 Figure 65. Estimated annual production of the South Buildings PV design -R3 at the airport .....................75 Figure 66. Viable carport PV design near main building of the Airport.......................................................77 Figure 67. Estimated annual production of the parking lot PV design at the airport ....................................78 Figure 68. 40 -Acres of land available on the South -side of the airport for non -aviation developments ....79 Figure 69. Ground -mount PV design located land available on the South -side of the airport for non -aviation developments................................................................................................................................................80 Figure 70. Estimated annual production of the ground -mount PV design at the airport ..............................81 Figure 71. Aerial View of the Administrative and storage buildings...........................................................82 Figure 72. Building rooftop with pebble protection......................................................................................82 Figure 73. Pebble covered flat roof PV installation using ballasted system [3 1] .........................................83 Figure 74. Electric Energy usage at Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Facility.................................................84 Figure 75. All -in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Wastewater Treatment Facility..............85 Figure 76. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2015...........................................................................85 Figure 77. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2016...........................................................................86 Figure 78. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2017...........................................................................86 Figure 79. Rooftop PV potential at the wastewater treatment facility..........................................................88 Figure 80. Estimated annual production of the 699 kWDc solar array on all viable rooftops .......................89 Figure 81. Parking structure PV potential near the administrative building.................................................91 Figure 82. Estimated annual energy production from employee/guest parking lot PV design at the Wastewatertreatment facility.......................................................................................................................92 Figure 83. Wastewater treatment facility ground -mount PV design in the land area north of soccer fields with row spacing of 13.7 Feet. The total acreage occupied: Approximately 8 Acres...................................93 Figure 84. Estimated annual production of the ground -mount PV design at the wastewater facility ..........94 Figure 85. Streets facility aerial view...........................................................................................................95 Figure 86. Animal shelter that was reconstructed using FEMA funds after 2008 Iowa River Flood ........... 95 Figure 87. Building 2 with minimum electrical loads...................................................................................96 Figure 88. Aerial view of the fuel pumping station......................................................................................96 Figure89. Fuel pumping station...................................................................................................................97 Figure 90. Electric Energy usage at Site 5: Streets Facility (S64073477 Meter)..........................................98 Figure 91. All -in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Streets Facility (S64073477 Meter)....... 99 Figure 92. Rooftop PV design at Site 5......................................................................................................100 Figure 93. Estimated annual production of the designed Animal Shelter...................................................102 Figure 94. Estimated annual production of the designed Red Building 1 rooftop......................................103 Figure 95. Estimated annual production of the designed Red Building 2 rooftop......................................104 Figure 96. Estimated annual production of the designed Fuel Station rooftop...........................................105 Figure 97. Parking Structure PV Design P 1 at Site 5: Streets Facility .......................................................107 Figure 98. Parking Structure PV Design P2 at Site 5: Streets Facility .......................................................108 Figure 99. Estimated annual production of the designed Parking lot structure PV ....................................109 Figure 100. Estimated annual production of the designed Parking lot structure PV ..................................110 Figure 101. Fixed Ground mount PV Design at Site 5...............................................................................111 Figure 102. Estimated annual production of the designed Ground -mount PV ...........................................112 Figure 103. Aerial View of Site 6...............................................................................................................113 Figure 104. The Main Building view from Gilbert Street at Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility..................114 Figure 105. The additional building used as storage space.........................................................................114 Figure 106. Tin metal roof on the main building........................................................................................115 Figure 107. Electric Energy usage at Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility (Meter # S64073926) ..................116 Figure 108. All -in delivered price of electricity for Parks & Forestry Facility (Meter # S64073926) ......117 Figure 109. Rooftop PV design R1 at the Parks & Forestry Facility ..........................................................119 Figure 110. Rooftop PV design R2 at the Parks & Forestry Facility ..........................................................120 Figure 111. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design RI at the parks & forestry facility.. 121 Figure 112. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design R2 at the parks & forestry facility.. 122 Figure 113. Parking lot PV design at the Parks & Forestry Facility ...........................................................124 Figure 114. Estimated annual production of the parking structure PV design at the parks & forestry facility ....................................................................................................................................................................125 Figure 115. The rooftop at Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility ...........................................126 Figure 116. Aerial view of Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility ................................126 Figure 117. Electric Energy usage at Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge .............................128 Figure 118. All -in delivered price of electricity for Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge..................128 Figure 119. Rooftop PV design at Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge..................................130 xiv Figure 120. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodgefacility..............................................................................................................................................130 Figure 121. Parking lot PV design at Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge .............................132 Figure 122. Estimated annual production of the 198.2 kWDc solar array through viable caiports .............132 Figure 123. Alternate location for Parking Structure PV at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area ...........133 Figure 124. Estimated annual production of the 36.5 kWDC solar carports at the alternate parking lot .....134 Figure 125. Front Entrance view and Aerial view of the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center.. 135 Figure 126. Electric Energy usage at Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center .....................136 Figure 127. All—in delivered price of electricity for Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center .......... 137 Figure 128. Design 1: Rooftop PV in Helioscope software at Robert A. Lee Community Rec. Center ....138 Figure 129. Estimated annual production of the designed solar array on the building rooftop at site 8.....139 Figure 130. Standard louvered double style carport PV design [32] that's replicated in the parking space ...............................................................................................................................................................141 Figure 131. Design P1: Carport PV design at Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center at 10°—tilt facing dueSouth (Azimuth=180°).........................................................................................................................142 Figure 132. Estimated annual production of the designed carport solar array structure at Robert A. Lee CommunityRecreation Center...................................................................................................................142 Figure 133. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 1: City park pool house .........................................................184 Figure 134. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 2: Mercer Park Site................................................................185 Figure 135. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (North) ..........................................186 Figure 136. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (South) ..........................................187 Figure 137. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant .............................................188 Figure 138. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 5: Streets Facility Property....................................................189 Figure 139. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 6: Parks and Forestry.............................................................190 Figure 140. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge ..........................191 Figure 141. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center ..................192 Figure 142. Airport main building and North buildings.............................................................................196 Figure 143. Airport South buildings...........................................................................................................197 Figure 144. Aesthetic Solar Structures [47]................................................................................................203 Figure 145. Solar Flotovoltaics (SF—Floating PV System, 0°-20° module tilt) .........................................204 Figure 146. Solar PV quick mounting system filled with dirt or pebbles...................................................205 xv LIST OF TABLES Table#.................................................................................................................................... Page # Table 1. Utility -scale solar PV installations in Iowa......................................................................................3 Table 2. Setbacks defined by IFC for solar PV installations........................................................................20 Table 3. Typical solar PV module weights...................................................................................................24 Table 4. Zoning Requirements Summary.....................................................................................................26 Table 5. Permitting requirements Summary.................................................................................................27 Table 6. Solar ITC for the current and future years......................................................................................29 Table 7. Solar Federal ITC for the current and future years based on the eligible solar technology ............ 29 Table 8. Imported PV Tariff plan for the next four years.............................................................................31 Table 9. Summary of City Park pool house operations................................................................................35 Table 10. Summary of Design 1: South -facing pitched roof........................................................................39 Table 11. End of True -up period kWh optimization of PV design..............................................................40 Table 12. Summary of optimized Design 1: South -facing pitched roof.......................................................40 Table 13. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure.............................................................................42 Table 14. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure...................................................................42 Table 15. Summary of Mercer Park Aquatic Center and James P. Scanlon Gymnasium operations ........... 44 Table 16. Summary of Design RI: Flat rooftop PV at Mercer Park.............................................................47 Table 17. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure.............................................................................50 Table 18. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure...................................................................50 Table 19. Summary of Design PI and Design P2- Parking Structure PV at Mercer Park ........................... 51 Table 20. Summary of Ground -mount PV design at Mercer Park site.........................................................56 Table 21. Summary of Pickleball court PV Canopy design at Mercer Park site..........................................59 Table 22. Summary of Iowa City Airport operations...................................................................................62 Table 23. Summary of rooftop PV designs at Iowa City Airport site...........................................................70 Table 24. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure.............................................................................76 Table 25. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure...................................................................76 Table 26. Summary of Parking lot PV designs at Iowa City Airport site.....................................................77 Table 27. Summary of Design 3: Ground -mount PV...................................................................................79 Table 28. Summary of Wastewater Treatment Plant operations...................................................................83 Table 29. Summary of Design RI: Flat rooftop PV at the wastewater treatment facility .............................88 Table 30. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure.............................................................................90 Table 31. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure...................................................................90 xvi Table 32. Summary of parking lot PV design at the Wastewater treatment facility site..............................92 Table 33. Summary of Ground mount PV design at the Wastewater treatment facility site ........................93 Table 34. Summary of Streets Facility operations........................................................................................97 Table 35. Summary of Designs RI, R2, R3 and R4- Parking Structure PV at Mercer Park......................101 Table 36. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure...........................................................................106 Table 37. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure.................................................................106 Table 38. Summary of Parking Structure PV design at the Streets facility site..........................................107 Table 39. Summary of Ground mount PV design at the Streets facility site .............................................. III Table 40. Summary of Parks and Forestry Property operations.................................................................115 Table 41. Summary of Rooftop PV design at the Parks & Forestry facility site ........................................118 Table 42. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure...........................................................................123 Table 43. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure.................................................................123 Table 44. Summary of Parking structure PV design at the Parks & Forestry facility site ..........................124 Table 45. Summary of Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge operations .............................................127 Table 46. Site 7: Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South-west facing low-pitched roof .........................129 Table 47. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure...........................................................................131 Table 48. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure.................................................................131 Table 49. Summary of Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center operations .....................................135 Table 50. Site 7: Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South -facing flat roof................................................138 Table 51. Point load calculation step-by-step procedure...........................................................................140 Table 52. Distributed load calculation step-by-step procedure.................................................................140 Table 53. Site 7: Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South -facing flat roof................................................140 Table 54. EPC costs for a commercial scale carport PV installation ..........................................................143 Table 55. EPC costs for a commercial scale Rooftop PV installation ........................................................144 Table 56. EPC costs for a utility scale ground -mount PV installation .......................................................146 Table 57. EPC costs for a residential -scale ground -mount PV installation...............................................147 Table 58. Payback periods for the different PV system designs at all the eight sites.................................149 Table 59. Some Existing Community Solar Projects and their Financial Structures..................................154 Table 60. Amount of emissions displaced by annual generation from a single 100 MW trough plant with six hours of storage from a case study conducted by Black & Veatch [39] .....................................................158 Table 61. Summary of PV designs for the eight Iowa City sites................................................................168 Table 62. A Summary table of all PV Projects Analyzed...........................................................................174 xvii 1. INTRODUCTION The City of Iowa City's vision for clean, renewable energy as the primary energy source to run its operations is commendable. Today, there are 403 city mayors that are part of the Climate Mayors coalition, a non—partisan, peer—to—peer network of U.S. mayors working on mitigating the human impact on the climate. Iowa City Mayor Jim Throgmorton signed onto the coalition. As more and more cities in the U.S. opt for a green future, the City of Iowa City's vision will only prove to be a wise choice. This broader vision has led to the genesis of this solar feasibility study. The City of Iowa City narrowed down eight different City operational sites to explore the feasibility of solar photovoltaics (PV), the most prominent of the solar energy technologies, to produce electrical energy to meet their operational needs. Seven of these facilities are currently being served by MidAmerican Energy Company, and one facility is being served by Eastern Iowa Light and Power Cooperative (Wholesale power provider is Central Iowa Power Cooperative). Chapter 1 introduces the reader to general renewable energy trends in the state of Iowa, and more specifically solar energy in Iowa. It also has information regarding general solar PV feasibility in Iowa City and existing green initiatives by the City administration and the motivational factors that drove this project. 1.1. Iowa — Renewable Portfolio Standard Policy (RPS) Iowa is hailed as the first U.S. state to adopt a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) in 1983 by enacting the Alternative Energy Production Law [1]. The Iowa state's RPS is atypical compared to many other U.S. states. Iowa, unlike most U.S. States, doesn't have a percentage amount of renewable energy goal by a designated year. Instead, Iowa's alternative energy law aims at generating 105 MW through Investor— owned utilities (IOUs). The RPS regulation required Iowa's two investor—owned utilities — MidAmerican Energy and Alliant Energy Interstate Power & Light — to own or purchase renewable power from the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) approved renewable energy generating qualifying facilities for a combined total of 105 MW. However, Iowa has far—surpassed that goal by installing more than 7266 MW of Wind power, and more than 6.9 MW of solar power. By the end of February 2018, Iowa has approximately 7403 MW of name—plate renewable power generation. It is an interesting state where wind development has seen an exponential growth despite the absence of a strongly favorable RPS. Nonetheless, absence of a solar carve— out in the RPS has inhibited the growth of solar development in the state. There are eleven states geographically located at higher northern latitudes than Iowa (which have lower solar irradiation) and, yet, have a solar carve—out in their RPS. Figure 1 shows the comparison of the 50 States for RPS where Iowa is ranked 30' among all. 1 CT RI IL NV NH CO NM CT DE nr ID GA FL AR U hf(1 I Rocks l'� 1 kg Up to 100% < 179- < 12,5% Voluntary or No RPS by 2045 by 2022 by 2021 past dates IL NV MA PA OH INC MO NH CO MND AL AZ L ,; MID DC,, • • • , DE, no Solar Carve -Out NM, ORI, WY WI W7 kz NC MI WI )H AR ;CA CT FL GA EONS HI Inc utilities to generate some power from the sun. There are stiff penalties for noncompliance. Generally speaking, bigger solar carve -outs mean better incentives from utilities to homeowners, which results in quicker payback times and better financial returns for solar investments. II '• A B F Figure 1. Iowa's Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS) and Solar Carve—out in comparison with the other 50 States of the country [2]. Infographic Courtesy: Solar Power Rocks 2 1.2. State Profile for Solar — Iowa Iowa leads the nation in the production of corn, soybeans, and ethanol [1] [2], and has a significant industrial sector that ranks it 5' in the nation in terms of energy use per capita. Iowa has three utility scale solar PV installations in the state that are listed on Table 1 which accounts to 6.9 MW of generation. As per the available NREL's open PV project data [5] , the state also harnesses an additional 4.15 MW of solar power through residential, small, and large commercial PV installations. According to the Iowa Department of Revenue, $4.98 million in tax credits were claimed in 2017, and $2.04 million in 2018 so far [6]. This equates to solar PV investments of at least $33.2 million in 2017, and $13.6 million in 2018 so far in both commercial and residential sectors. Overall, since 2012, there were $21.6 million in tax credits claimed by nearly 3,400 solar PV projects with a total value of approximately $166 million that led to the creation of 700 new solar jobs throughout the state of Iowa [7]. Table 1. Utility—scale solar PV installations in Iowa 1.3. Sustainability Measures by the City of Iowa City The City of Iowa City was awarded the 4—STAR Community Rating for their excellence in sustainability. They are part of an elite list of 70 communities nation—wide that received the honor. The City administration is currently implementing energy conservation measures through energy efficiency upgrades laid out by the `Iowa City Municipal Facilities Space Needs Study and Master Plan' that was prepared in 2012. The Master plan analyzes 24 City of Iowa City facilities that are currently operational. The City administration has recently partnered with Johnson county, six other municipalities, and a Wisconsin—based non—profit to bring about awareness on household applications of solar energy technologies. 3 Capacity Plant Name Utility Name Location (MW) Central Iowa Power Eastern Iowa Solar Wilton, Muscatine, Iowa 1.8 Cooperative Interstate Power and Light Company West Dubuque Solar Dubuque, Dubuque, Iowa 3.8 (Subsidiary of Alliant Energy Corporation) Strawberry Point, Clayton, Strawberry Point DPC Solar SoCore Energy LLC 1.3 Iowa 1.3. Sustainability Measures by the City of Iowa City The City of Iowa City was awarded the 4—STAR Community Rating for their excellence in sustainability. They are part of an elite list of 70 communities nation—wide that received the honor. The City administration is currently implementing energy conservation measures through energy efficiency upgrades laid out by the `Iowa City Municipal Facilities Space Needs Study and Master Plan' that was prepared in 2012. The Master plan analyzes 24 City of Iowa City facilities that are currently operational. The City administration has recently partnered with Johnson county, six other municipalities, and a Wisconsin—based non—profit to bring about awareness on household applications of solar energy technologies. 3 The Climate Action and Adaptation Plan is a roadmap being developed by the City administration, a local Steering Committee, and a Chicago -based consultant to meet the target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% by year 2025 and 80% by year 2050, with the baseline year being 2005. All these past, current, and near future green initiatives resonate well with the goals of this solar PV feasibility study. 1.3.1. Iowa City Profile for Solar Photovoltaics According to National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) PV Rooftop LiDAR project [8], of the 15,549 total number of small buildings (defined as those buildings between 0 and 5,000 ft' footprint) analyzed in Iowa City, about 77% are suitable for solar rooftop PV installations. Iowa City has more buildings with flat, South—facing and West—facing rooftop areas in general. The South—facing rooftop solar PV modules installed in this region at latitude—tilt will have an average DC capacity factor of 18.6% while the West—facing rooftop solar PV modules will have an average DC capacity factor of 16.9%. The following chapter will introduce the reader to solar photovoltaics technology. 4 2. TECHNOLOGY REVIEW In Chapter 2, a detailed technology review of the currently existing solar photovoltaic system technologies is conducted. A typical PV system is comprised of a photovoltaic array, inverter(s), mounting and tracking system, electrical wiring, DC isolators, generation meter, charge controller, fuse box, AC isolator, electricity meter, and a battery system (optional). Often, a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system is also installed for supervisory monitoring, control and data acquisition. This chapter discusses the various solar photovoltaic (PV) technologies, mounting and tracking systems, inverter technologies, and the associated terms/definitions. Photovoltaic Array Inverter Mounting and tracking system Electrical Interconnections 2.1. Solar Photovoltaics (PV) 2.1.1. Terms and Definitions Some of the major terms and definitions as described by the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Energy Technology Office [9] are listed here under the following sub—categories. E 1. Photovoltaic (PV) cell — The smallest semiconductor element within a PV module to perform the immediate conversion of light into electrical energy (direct current voltage and current). Also called a solar cell. 2. Photovoltaic (PV) module — The smallest environmentally protected, essentially planar assembly of solar cells and ancillary parts, such as interconnections, terminals, (and protective devices such as diodes) intended to generate direct current power under unconcentrated sunlight. The structural (load carrying) member of a module can either be the top layer (superstrate) or the back layer (substrate). 3. Photovoltaic (PV) panel — often used interchangeably with PV module (especially in one—module systems), but more accurately used to refer to a physically connected collection of modules (i.e., a laminate string of modules used to achieve a required voltage and current). 4. Photovoltaic (PV) array — An interconnected system of PV modules that function as a single electricity—producing unit. The modules are assembled as separate structures, with common support or mounting. In smaller systems, an array can consist of a single module. Figure 2 shows the hierarchy of the photovoltaics from cell to an array. Photovoltaic (PV) Modula Cell Figure 2. Hierarchy ofphotovoltaics [101 2.1.2. Types of Photovoltaics There are various types of photovoltaic (PV) technologies that are available in today's market. And more PV technologies that are in the nascent stages of their market maturity. Figure 3 shows a detailed classification of these technologies. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has continually tested for improvements in efficiencies, and published their data as shown on Figure 4. As indicated by Figure 5, Multi or Poly—crystalline Silicon PV and Mono—crystalline Silicon PV dominates the current market, together accounting for over 95% of the total global PV sales [I I ]. The silicon—based PV technologies (both mono and poly) have become synonymous with solar photovoltaics today as their prices were reduced since 1998, more largely since 2010, due to economies of scale in production. Cel Bulk type solar cells Mono—crystalline Si Poly—crystalline Si Copper indium gallium � FDielenide (CIGS) V 0 a--+ !Thin film type solar cells Amorphous silicon (a—Si) 0 Cadmium 0 sulphide/cadmium 0 telluride (CdS/CdTe) i L Concentrated Tandem cells or multi— photovoltaics (CPV) junction cells Organic photovoltaic (Organic polymer) Emerging Technologies (Not Mature) Dye—synthesized Pervoskite Quantum dot Jl W Z ml El D 010. 4 ■ 4P4nemoosm> 00*004 1 A s 1 I �1 ; d s �t 1i 1� 4 _, N N Ile '.x - 1 r_� i�000O QQo.*i> I — E. E w u LoZ 5 E v c p a 71, y bL, t W 1 1 1 I L c� 'AQ { 1 1 N N a M CD R .pE�truLLtRE 7GS 3 P►v4oo yd®D �o■130 ti `00 - `�7 cM co N CN a0 d' O W Aoug1o1}j:4 R, Ile '.x - 1 r_� i�000O QQo.*i> I — E. E w u LoZ 5 E v c p a 71, y bL, a M CD R .pE�truLLtRE 7GS 3 P►v4oo yd®D �o■130 ti `00 - `�7 cM co N CN a0 d' O W Aoug1o1}j:4 R, 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% RV Global Shipment Share by Technology 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Others 4 Mono -Si 14 Multi -5i Figure 5. Global market share of photovoltaics by technology. Credit: SPV Market Research [111 2.1.3. Factors affecting electrical performance of a solar PV The electrical performance of a solar cell is substantially reduced when the operating conditions deviate from the standard test conditions (STC) i.e. 25°C for cell temperature, 1000 W/m2 for the solar insolation, and 1.5 AM (air mass) defining spectral distribution. The reduction in performance can be attributed to the following factors: 2.1.3.1. Cell Temperature The ambient temperature changes and, because of the thermal insulation provided by the encapsulation, solar radiation makes cells in a module heat up. Higher cell temperatures translate into reduced performance. This is usually the most significant performance degradation mechanism. 2.1.3.2. Angular Distribution of Solar Radiation Because of the diurnal and seasonal movements of the Sun, and the diffuse nature of solar radiation, the solar insolation is rarely normal to a fixed PV module, as would be the case when laboratory measurements are performed to determine the nominal efficiency. 2.1.3.3. Spectral Content of Light For the same power content, different spectra produce different cell photocurrents according to the spectral response. Furthermore, the solar spectrum varies with the sun's position, weather, pollution and other variables, and never exactly matches the AM 1.5 standard. W 2.1.3.4. Irradiance Level For a constant cell temperature, the efficiency of the module decreases with diminished irradiance levels. This is primarily due to the logarithmic dependence of open—circuit voltage on photocurrent. At very low illumination the efficiency loss is faster and less predictable. 2,1,4, Solar PV defects The major solar PV manufacturers are classified into three tiers by Bloomberg purely based on sales and product line. This classification is misleading as it is not from a technology soundness standpoint but rather from a business—economic standpoint. PV modules are susceptible to the following 8 major defects that are listed [13]: 1) Micro—Cracks 2) Hot Spots 3) Fire 4) Delamination 5) Shattering 6) Ingress' 7) Deformation 8) Discoloration M Hot Spot Delamination Ingress Discoloration 3tion 'Ingress is when water or moisture penetrates the module causing degradation. Poor module assembly, low quality materials and delamination are the typical causes of ingress. 10 2.2. Solar Mounting Systems A fixed type solar PV system installation involves different types of mounting systems: 2.2.1. Roof mounts 2.2.1.1. Flush mount Typically used on sloped roofs, flush mounts use aluminum rails, clamps, and roof penetrated joint supports. 2.2.1.2. Ballasted mount Typically used on flat roofs due to the simplicity in installation. No roof penetration is necessary in this design; however, additional weight is added due to the ballasts. This type of mount is often implemented to avoid a scenario where roof membrane warranties are voided due to structural penetration. 2,2,2. Ground mounts Some designs use additional concrete footing while others penetrate the ground surface directly. Metallic Aluminum is a popular choice for this design. 2.2.3. Carport mounts Carport mounts are becoming a popular option in limited space sites and also because of the additional shading benefit they provide. There are various designs of carport mounts among which the most popular ones are the cantilever design, T— design, and Y— design. 2.2.4. Pole mounts Pole mounts use steel or aluminum masts that are driven directly into the ground or embedded in concrete. 2.3. Solar Tracking Systems It is believed that tracking will increase the power output of PV panels by about 30-50%. See Figure 6 for classification of tracking systems. 2,11, Drive—train Technology Classification Based on the type of drive the tracking systems use, they are primarily classified into four categories as follows: 2.3.1.1. Active Trackers These use a solar direction—responsive feedback control that directs the motors and thereby the gear trains of the tracker. The feedback loop comprises two light sensing devices (photosensors) such as photodiodes that generate an output pulse when there is a flux difference in the sunlight received. Depending on that difference, the feedback control activates the motor and re—orients the whole system in 11 the direction of the Sun. Most trackers embed an intelligent feedback mechanism that would prevent response to changes in the flux on the photosensors if light intensity falls below a threshold that renders operating the motor no longer profitable. A cloudy phase of a day is a good example where the benefit of tracking is exceeded by the electric cost of operating the motor. 2.3.1.2. Passive Trackers These use a low boiling point compressed gas driven to one side or the other (by the solar heat creating gas pressure) to cause the tracker to move in response to an imbalance. The precision with which this system tracks the Sun is less than that of an active system. Because of this inherent disadvantage it cannot be used for high precision solar tracking applications like CPV, hybrid solar lighting (HSL), etc. These are also relatively cheaper compared to active and chronological tracking systems. But the market penetration of these technologies is minimal owing to operation & maintenance issues. 2.3.1.3. Chronological/Astronomical Trackers These counter the rotation of the Earth by turning in an opposite direction of its rotation with the same angular velocity of the Earth (15°/hour). Knowing the time chronological position of the Sun using astronomical data, electronic control can be used to control the movement of such trackers. They are very accurate and can track the Sun to an accuracy of 0.5°. 2.3.1.4. GPS—Controlled Trackers These use Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to find the position of the Sun and then adjust the tracker to that position. Solar Tracking Systems Figure 6. Classification of solar trackers 12 Passive Tracking Active Tracking Chronological GPS Controlled systems systems Tracking systems Single Dual Single Dual Single Dual Single Dual Axis Axis Axis Axis Axis Axis Axis Axis type type type type type type type type Figure 6. Classification of solar trackers 12 2,3,2. Directional Classification Depending on the number of directions in which the Sun's path is followed, the trackers are classified into Single—axis or dual—axis tracking systems. 2.3.2.1. Single—axis trackers Single—axis trackers can either have a horizontal or a vertical axle. The horizontal type is used in tropical regions where the sun gets very high at noon, but the days are short. The vertical type is used in high latitudes where the sun does not get very high, but days can be very long. A horizontal—axis tracker consists of a long horizontal shaft to which solar modules are attached. This shaft is aligned in a north—south direction, is supported on bearings mounted on pylons or frames, and rotates slowly on its axis to follow the sun's motion across the sky. 2.3.2.2. Dual—axis trackers Dual—axis trackers have both a horizontal and a vertical axle and can track the Sun's apparent motion exactly anywhere in the World. This type of trackers is used to control astronomical telescopes, and so there is plenty of software available to automatically predict and track the motion of the Sun across the sky. 2.3.3. Operations & Maintenance of Tracking Systems As far as maintenance of trackers is concerned, seasonal adjustment like Sun synchronizing may be needed. Annual inspection and lubrication of moving parts improves their performance. In highly corrosive environments, metal parts (most often mild steel) of the tracking system need to be protected by anti— corrosive measures like paint coating. Hurricane proofing is an important issue in dealing with tracking systems. Usually most of the trackers available on the market can withstand wind loads of 80 to 95 miles per hour. 2.4. PV Inverters The inverter converts the direct current (DC) electricity generated from the solar panels to alternating current (AC) so it can be injected into the grid or into your home or business. There are various types of PV inverters that are available in the market today. String inverters and Central inverters are the two popular categories. Microinverters are also gaining popularity in the residential PV sector. 2.5. Battery System Electrical energy storage has become a popular option for capacity firming of renewable energy technologies. Solar PV system installations are seeing a great growth in coupling with a battery storage system to reduce demand charges and to create a more uniform energy generation profile. 13 2.6. Electrical Interconnection 2,6,1, Wiring/Cabling The wiring is used to connect the solar panels together and to carry the electricity generated from the solar array to the delivery point. 2,6,2, Charge Controllers A charge controller is a current or voltage regulator that prevents the batteries from being overcharged by the solar panels. 2.6.3. Generation Meter (Revenue Meter) The generation meter monitors the electricity generated from the solar array at the point of interconnect to determine how much electricity the array has generated. The generation meter monitors in kWh. 2.6.4. Fusebox The fusebox/breaker monitors the amps coming from the solar array or going to the solar array and acts as a form of protection if a fault were to occur. 2.6.5. DC and AC Disconnects/Isolators DC and AC Disconnects/Isolators are a means of disconnecting the solar array from the grid. The disconnect/isolator gives you a visual open to confirm the solar array is or isn't connected to the grid. They are required by code. 2.6.6. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Monitoring Given the state of digital technology in 2018, the hourly generation monitoring of a PV system has become common place. This data will also enable to quickly detect faults in the PV system and enables faster maintenance. Bluestem Recommendations Bluestein recommends polycrystalline Silicon PV modules for stationary installations and monocrystalline Silicon PV modules for single—axis or dual—axis tracking installations. This recommendation is driven by various factors such as the market maturity, warranties, costs, and availability. For tracking systems, single—axis tracking system is recommended for Iowa City sites where applicable, as the energy gain is minimal opting for a dual—axis tracking system with an increased capital cost, and operation & maintenance cost. String inverters are preferred over central inverters because of the modular disconnect and isolation capability. PV Array faults are faster to detect as well with string inverters in operation. 14 3. SOLAR RESOURCE ASSESSMENT AND SITE SELECTION Chapter 3 analyzes the solar energy resource in Iowa City. RETScreen software is used in studying other important meteorological parameters that effect the solar photovoltaic system performance as well. Iowa City is located between the latitudinal coordinates of 41.607° N & 41.692° N, and longitudinal coordinates of 91.464° W & 91.609° W. The location has annual average global horizontal solar irradiance of 3.94 kWh/m2/day, and a latitude tilt of the collector will increase the solar gain by 16% up to 4.59 kWh/m2/day [14]. An annual solar generation of 1130 to 1232 kWh/kW is highly feasible on a horizontal flat plate PV PV collector. This implies that a 1 -kW solar array (roughly 3 solar modules) can produce approximately 1232 kWh of energy annually. This energy produced is roughly equivalent to operating 5 light bulbs (incandescent) at 12 hours a day for a whole year. 3.1. Meteorological Parameters The NASA climate data of Iowa City (41.7° N, 91.5° W) that is available through RETScreen software is analyzed over a period of 35 years (1983-2018). A reference year represents an average of all the 35 years of data. The following sub—sections will discuss each of the meteorological parameters in detail. 3.1.1. Daily Solar Radiation The average daily solar radiation on a horizontal plane in the Iowa City geographic location is shown for each month of the year on Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9. Each of the figures compare the reference year with two most recent years from 2012 through 2017. The reference year is evaluated using statistical averaging of 35 years (1983-2018) worth of daily solar radiation data. Figure 7 compares the years 2017 and 2016 with the reference year. Figure 8 compares the years 2015 and 2014 with the reference year. Figure 9 compares the years 2013 and 2012 with the reference year. 15 Figure 7. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (35 year average) compared with 2017 and 2016 Figure 8. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (35 year average) compared with 2015 and 2014 Figure 9. Daily average solar radiation during each month of the reference year (35 year average) compared with 2013 and 2012 L[: 3,1,2, Wind Speed The monthly average of wind speeds measured at 10—meter meteorological tower height are shown on Figure 10, Figure 11, and Figure 12. The reference year is evaluated using statistical averaging of 35 years (1983-2018) worth of wind data. Figure 10 compares the years 2017 and 2016 with the reference year. Figure 11 compares the years 2015 and 2014 with the reference year. Figure 12 compares the years 2013 and 2012 with the reference year. 140- 40120100a 120- 100— CL E B.Q 6.0 6.0 4.0- 2.0 O.Q Jan Feb Mar All May Jun Jul Aug Sep Od Nov Dec Legend di Wind speed - Reference year OV" Wind speed - {2017)' Wind speed - [2016) Figure 10. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2017, and 2016. 140- 40120100a 120- 100— CL E B.Q.. 6.0 4.0- .02.00.0 2.0- 0.0 Jan Feb Mar Ape May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend Id Wind speed - Reference year N` Wind speed - (2015)' Wind speed - (2014) Figure 11. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2015, and 2014. 17 140- 40120100a 120- 100— CL BA... ^ 6.0 S 4.0- .02.00.0 2.0- 0.0 25!C Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Id Wind speed - Reference year "% Wind speed - (20'_3) *V* Wind speed - [2012) Figure 12. Wind speed at 10—meter height during the reference year, 2013, and 2012. 3,1,3, Air Temperature The air temperature plays an important role in determining the cooling of photovoltaic modules. Hence, an understanding of the average air temperature in the recent years compared to the 35—year average is shown on Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15. This data corroborates well with the climate data in the heartland report that analyzes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) climate data to make future predictions [15], [16]. This report was a collaborative effort of five midwestern City municipalities (Iowa City being one among them) analyzes the historic climate data (1893-2010) from NOAA and determines that seven of the twelve hottest summers for Iowa City occurred between 1981 and 2010. The average of annual mean temperatures during 1981-2010 is 2.2 °F greater than the 1893-1980 average. The report also predicted that the annual average temperature of Iowa City will increase from 51.8 °F to 54.5 °F by 2050, and to 57.4 °F by 2080. Sc!_ 75 C r�! 1- 65C- 5J6c!C- 5C 551- 55J5c! 5c u 45L- 5J4C!s5_3C! 4C,-'- 75c— 'C 25!C 2C C 13C I II Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend MEN Air temperature - average - Reference year 1�4% Afr temperature - average -(2017) �.r' Air temperature - average - (2016) Figure 13. Monthly average air temperature in 2017 and 2016 compared to the reference year (-35—year average) 18 nc- 5C- 15 C- 55C- 5C C- 45, -- E 4C,-- 10.0 Jan re6 Man Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend Air temperature - average - Refer— year '%'i" Air temperature - average - (2015) A r � wia buw - average - (2014) Figure 14. Monthly average air temperature in 2015 and 2014 compared to the reference year (35yearaverage) QC 55!. DC C- 65C- 6CC- 55C- 5C C- 45, -- E 4C,-- 5C— WC 11- 25C - 2C C Jan Feb Ma, Ar May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend Air ttirp—tLire - average - Reference year 'i'%% Air temperature - average - (2013) Air temperature - average - (2012) Figure 15. Monthly average air temperature in 2013 and 2012 compared to the reference year (35—year average) 19 4. GENERAL DESIGN CONSTRAINTS This chapter discusses the important design constraints that should be taken into consideration whilst developing a PV design. It elucidates the design constraints that a PV designer needs to comply with throughout the process of design. 4.1. 2018 International Fire Code (IFC) The most recent international fire code documentation that was released in August 2017 dedicates the whole of chapter 12 to address the integration of energy generation and storage systems in, on and adjacent to buildings and facilities. These requirements that were previously scattered in Chapter 6 of previous versions of the IFC are now under dedicated Chapter 12 [17]. Section 1204 discusses solar photovoltaic power systems in detail. Most city administrations, including City of Iowa City, follow the IFC 2012 code regulations which are no different from the IFC 2015 or 2018 code regulations for PV installations. 4.1.1.1. Access and pathways In order to guarantee firefighter access to facilities, and to maintain a safe operating distance, setbacks are set forth by IFC standards since 2012. The regulations remain unchanged in 2012, 2015 and 2018 codes. Table 2 enumerates the different setbacks that are followed by the City administration based on IFC 2012. Table 2. Setbacks defined by IFC for solar PV installations Setback Property Measure (in feet) Comments Setback distance from ridge 3 See Figure 16 Setback distance from hip 1.5 See Figure 17 & Figure 18 if either of the axes > 250 feet. 6 Perimeter Setback on flat roof See Figure 19 installations if either of the axes < 250 feet 4 See Figure 19 Perimeter Setback on ground - 10 Clear, bush—free area mount installations Every 150 feet Interior pathways to PV arrays 4 See Figure 19 Interior pathways to roof 4 See Figure 19 standpipes or ventilation hatches Smoke Ventilation 4 See Figure 19 20 Figure 16. PV design on a gable roof Figure 17. PV design on a hip roof 21 Figure 18. PV design on a hip—and—valley roof 22 I o 1 Iaal05i ueyl ssa- i 1 i�— I I 1' I )aa309i ueyl SSGI i. i I 9 I I - I Figure 19. Design on commercial flat rooftop 23 5 U LU G g U to W CL SQ� W a� o via M �w O dj TLU CL 6 0 00 Uz LU Y � J X OL Cd LLI >- va P �aY Q ❑ G7 ;t V i6 o O O L 4.2. Structural Constraints The most common dead loads on a typical roof structure are added by the roofing (membrane or asphalt shingles — 3 lbf/ft2), roof sheathing (— 2.5 lbf/ft2), insulation material (— 0.51bf/ft2). In addition, snow adds dead load to roofs. The additional weight added by the PV system will be treated a constraint in rooftop designs. However, most structures built after 1970s are designed to support mechanical loads far greater than the 3-4 lbf/ft2 of additional dead load added by a typical PV system. Also, PV modules' slippery top glass surface allows for reduction of snow load on a pitched roof. Table 3 shows some typical weights of solar modules from different manufacturers. Table 3. Typical solar PV module weights Solar Panel Manufacturers Solar Module (60—Cell Modules) Weight (in lbs) SolarWorld 40-47 LG 38 Canadian Solar 40-51 Hyundai 38-41 Hanwha SolarOne 40-42 Hanwha Q CELLS 41 Trina 41-50 SunPower 33-41 Axitec 39-41 Kyocera 42-44 4.3. Net metering and Interconnection Policies Net metering and interconnection policies are an important constraint in determining the design size (kW) of a solar PV array. The currently explored eight City of Iowa City sites are being served by two utilities: 1. MidAmerican Energy 2. Eastern Iowa Light and Power Cooperative Both the utilities have different net metering and interconnection policies which will be discussed in the following sections. 24 4,3,1, MidAmerican Energy Company's Iowa net billing and interconnection policy The net billing service in place by MidAmerican Energy allows the qualifying alternate energy generating facilities (as defined by Section 476.42 of Iowa Code) with nameplate capacity of up to 1000 kilowatts or less (up to 100% of the customer's load = average of total annual kWh). Solar energy is one among the qualifying alternate energy options. This net metering policy doesn't allow for sharing of energy among neighboring facilities. Neither does it allow for the remote location of the generating PV facility i.e. the PV facility must be located at the site property of energy usage. The net billing allows a leased PV system or third—party power purchase financial structure under the Private Generation (PG) pilot rate plan. The excess kWh energy generation from PV is banked for use in the subsequent months until the completion of an annual cycle known as True—up period. After the true—up period end date, the banked kWhs are reset to zero. The customer is allowed to make a one—time selection of the annual True—up period end date as January 31" or April 30th. Bluestem's design recommendation will include which date to choose based on site specific PV generation and site specific electrical energy demand. The customer will need to submit an application for interconnection requesting treatment under `Rate PG Pilot' i.e. Net Billing of Private Generation Facilities Pilot and follow the private generation interconnection process. A Special electric meter that is required to measure the generation and consumption at the net billing facility will be installed by MidAmerican Energy at no expense to the customer if the net metered generation is below 1 MW. 4.3.2. Eastern Iowa Light and Power net metering The net metering policy of Eastern Iowa Light and Power allows up to 20 kW systems to be net metered. Any PV power system larger than 20 kW can be connected to the Grid and will not be considered a net metered system. However, an avoided electric energy cost will be paid at $.10712 per kWh generated during on peak (4 p.m. to 9 p.m.) and $0.03012 per kWh generated during off peak hours (all remaining hours) in compliance with the PURPA regulations. The interconnection requirements for the Co—op specifies that the member requesting interconnection for a generating facility need to comply with the following criteria: 1. Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems, ANSWEE Standard 1547-2003. For guidance in applying IEEE Standard 1547, the Cooperative may refer to: (1) IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems — IEEE Standard 519-1992; and (2) IEC/TR3 61000-3-7 Assessment of emission limits for fluctuating in MV and HV power systems. 2. Iowa Electrical Safety Code, as defined in 199—Chapter 25 3 25 3. National Electrical Code, ANSI/NFPA 70 The member—consumer facility shall be equipped with automatic disconnection upon loss of electric voltage supplied by the Cooperative. The member—consumer shall furnish and install an overcurrent device on the facility to automatically disconnect the facility at all currents that exceed the full—load current rating of the facility. The member—consumer shall furnish the Cooperative with sufficient data in order to verify that all the above conditions are met. 4.4. Zoning, Permits and approvals All the 8 sites are in zone PI (Neighborhood Public). Table 4 discusses in detail the requirements of a PV installation in this zone. The City of Iowa City also has the following checklist of permit documentation that needs to be submitted as enumerated on Table 5. Table 4. Zoning Requirements Summary Zoning Jurisdiction Project Name Iowa City Solar City/County Iowa City, IA Date 2/12/2018 Site Address For all eight sites Identified Zone PI (Neighborhood Public) Zoning Requirements (For Roof Mounted) Details Roof perimeter access path (Flat roof) Minimum 4 feet clear perimeter. Path must be 6 feet wide if both roof axes exceed 250 feet. Roof perimeter access path (Hip, Single ridge, Hips and Valleys roofs) Following IFC 2012 605.11.1.2.2, 605.11.1.2.3, 605.11.1.2.4 respectively with 3—foot setbacks. W Zoning Requirements Permitting Authority (For Ground Details Mounted) Iowa City, IA If there is an abutting a residential zone, setback is equal to the setbacks in Mike Marling at the City of Iowa City said abutting zone. (ground—mounted scenario) 25' is max setback in Property Line Setback 2/12/2018 Site Address residential zones abutting the facility (see details in "backup" tab). For all eight sites wastewater P1 (Neighborhood Public) All ground level mechanical/utility equip. screened from view to S2 Screening Submission Process Commercial Checklist standard (see details in "backup" tab). Landowner String or micro—inverter City of Iowa City Information Table 5. Permitting requirements Summary 27 Permitting Authority Project Name Iowa City Solar City/County Iowa City, IA Authority Assistance Mike Marling at the City of Iowa City Date 2/12/2018 Site Address For all eight sites Identified Zone P1 (Neighborhood Public) Permit Documentation Required Document weblink Submission Process Commercial Checklist https://www.ic og v.or /g soIgMermit Checklist String or micro—inverter htips://www.ic og v.or /g solaMermit Online (Webform) Solar Photovoltaic Permit Application htips://www.ic og v.or /g solaMermit Online (Webform) Roof engineering (if roof—mounted) htlps://www.icgov.org/soIgMermit Online (PDF) 27 Dimensions of Roof / Site Plan https://www.ic og v.or /g solgoermit Online (PDF) Additional Notes 1. Districts roof & ground mounted solar are allowed in all zones per Mike Marling, Electrical Inspector at the City of Iowa City (2/12/18) 2. Submit the documentation for administrative approval of stamped submittal (Mike Marling at City reviews) 3. Permit submittal cost: Two fees might apply (City & Schools fee). The city fee does not apply if project is on a city structure. The "Iowa City Community Schools Fee" does apply at rate of $35 for first $1,000 in value and $15 for each additional $1,000 (materials & labor) 28 5. TAX INCENTIVES This Chapter is a review of the present and near future tax incentives offered at the federal and state levels. It discusses the federal and state incentives that are applicable to the prospective solar projects by the City of Iowa City. Both investment and production tax credits at federal and state levels are discussed in detail along with the recently imposed import tariffs which will all play a vital role in financial decision— making of a solar PV project. Since, the City of Iowa City is a non—profit government entity, it is important to understand that a public—private partnership with an independent power provider (IPP) is necessary for the City government to take advantage of these tax credits. 5.1. Federal Solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC) The ITC is a direct dollar—for—dollar reduction in federal income taxes. Currently, it is setup at 30% tax credit [18] on the total cost of solar energy project at residential (under section 25D), commercial or utility scale (under section 48). The following Table 6 shows how the solar ITC will vary in the coming years. Table 6. Solar ITC for the current and future years NOTE: The Commercial and Utility projects which have commenced construction before Dec. 31sT, 2021 may still qualify for the 30%, 26% or 22% ITC if they are placed in service before Dec. 31ST, 2023. The IRS will set—up guidelines on deciding the ITC bracket depending on when the project was started. Table 7. Solar Federal ITC for the current and future years based on the eligible solar technology °�° °� 2022 & 2018 2019 2020 2021 After For Commercial & Utility Scale Solar Projects 30% 30% 26% 22% 10% Residential Solar Projects 30% 30% 26% 22% 0% NOTE: The Commercial and Utility projects which have commenced construction before Dec. 31sT, 2021 may still qualify for the 30%, 26% or 22% ITC if they are placed in service before Dec. 31ST, 2023. The IRS will set—up guidelines on deciding the ITC bracket depending on when the project was started. Table 7. Solar Federal ITC for the current and future years based on the eligible solar technology 29 °�° °� N cNv Future Technology N years N N N N N N PV, Solar Water Heating, Solar Space 30% 30% 30% 30% 26% 22% 10% 10% Heating/Cooling, Solar Process Heat Hybrid Solar Lighting 30% 30% 30% 30% 26% 22% 22% N/A 29 Note: Eligible solar energy property includes equipment that uses solar energy to generate electricity, to heat or cool (or provide hot water for use in) a structure, or to provide solar process heat. Hybrid solar lighting systems, which use solar energy to illuminate the inside of a structure using fiber—optic distributed sunlight, are eligible. Passive solar systems and solar pool—heating systems are not eligible [19]. Bluestem Advice Since the City of Iowa City is a non—profit entity for federal and state tax purposes, it is beneficial to involve a 3rd party (a for—profit business) to take advantage of the ITC benefit. The City of Iowa City can partner with independent solar power providers (IPP) and enter into a long—term (20-25 years) power purchase agreement (PPA) or leasing arrangements. That way, since the IPP will be a for—profit business, it can take advantage of the Solar ITC which should in—turn lower the capital expenditure on the solar projects. 5.2. Federal Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit (PTC) The federal production tax credit for solar energy systems (not claiming ITC) was phased out since January 1St, 2017. So, the previously available $0.023/kWh [20] production tax credit is no more an option for solar projects. However, it is still available for wind projects at $0.019/kWh for the first 10—years of project operation which will also not be applicable for projects commencing construction after December 31St, 2019. 5.3. Iowa State Solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Iowa State tax credit of 15% is earned on solar energy projects installed after January 1St, 2016. The law in Iowa allows both residential and commercial customers to claim a tax credit which is equivalent to 50% of federal tax credit (currently at 30%) but not to exceed $20,000 for commercial installations [21]. 5.4. Iowa State Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit (PTC) The Iowa Code Chapter 476C [22] establishes a renewable energy production tax credit of $0.015/kWh on eligible solar energy systems for the first 10—years of project operation. However, this is a first—come first—serve incentive with a cap of 63 MW amongst which 10 MW is exclusively reserved for solar projects (<1.5 MW size) that are owned or contracted by a municipal utility, a rural electric cooperative or an investor—owned utility. To date, as per the Iowa Utilities Board report [23], there is 13.7 MW (out—of-43 MWs) and 1.02 MW (out—of--10 MWs) of available capacity left on all non—wind renewables, and solar— exclusive categories. However, eligible facilities must be placed into service before January 1, 2018. There is a future possibility that the left -over subscription will be rolled over depending on the state legislation decision. 30 5.5. 2018 Federal Imported PV Tariff The United States federal government approved a 30% import tariff on both crystalline silicon (most commonly used solar photovoltaic material) PV modules and cells on Jan. 22, 2018 [24] [25]. The tariff will incrementally reduce by 5% every year until 2021. The tariff has some easement for imported crystalline silicon cells of up to 2.5 GW capacity (on first—come, first—serve basis for a given year) which could potentially be assembled in to solar PV modules in the United States. The annual demand for PV modules in the U.S. market is currently at approximately 2 GW every quarter. This tariff is expected to increase the prices of solar modules marginally for the next few years as shown on Table 8. Table 8. Imported PV Tariff plan for the next four years The solar industry research companies — Greentech Media (GTM) and Energy Sage — are predicting a change in the solar module prices due to the imposed tariffs as shown on Table 8. In the coming few years, the solar project prices are expected to be higher than they would have been without the PV tariff in place. Recently, there were federal tariffs added on imported Steel and Aluminum as well which adds burden to the mounting costs for PV installations. 31 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 (2018) (2019) (2020) (2021) Safeguard Tariff on 30% 25% 20% 15% Modules and Cells Cells Exempted from Tariff 2.5 gigawatts 2.5 gigawatts 2.5 gigawatts 2.5 gigawatts GTM Research Price $0.10 to $0.095 to $0.09 to $0.85 to Increment Prediction $0.15/Watt $0.1425/Watt $0.135/Watt $0.1275/Watt Energy Sage Research Price $0.10 to $0.08 to $0.06 to $0.04 to Increment Prediction [26] $0.12/Watt $0.10/Watt $0.07/Watt $0.05/Watt The solar industry research companies — Greentech Media (GTM) and Energy Sage — are predicting a change in the solar module prices due to the imposed tariffs as shown on Table 8. In the coming few years, the solar project prices are expected to be higher than they would have been without the PV tariff in place. Recently, there were federal tariffs added on imported Steel and Aluminum as well which adds burden to the mounting costs for PV installations. 31 6. PV SYSTEM SELECTION AND DESIGN OPTIONS Chapter 6 discusses each of the eight sites in detail with information on site energy usage, operational schedules, any site—specific constraints, and the PV system designs and feasibility. At each of the eight City of Iowa City site locations, the PV system design options are classified into the following four categories as shown on Figure 20. Roof—mount PV Designs The roof—mount PV design encompasses PV installation on a roof structure. This roof structure can be one of the common structures — a flat roof, a low—pitch roof, a hip roof, a gable roof, or a hip—and—valley roof. Except for the flat roof, in all the other cases, the PV modules are typically installed on the pitched roof as flush—mounts. In case of flat roof installations, depending on the inter—row spacing, an optimum tilt anywhere between 20° and Latitude angle (-42°) can be used. All the roof—mount installations are typically stationary installations. Flat roof, Low pitch roof, Gable roof, Hip roof, Hip—and—valley roof etc. Figure 20. The four PV design classifications at each site Ground—mount PV Design The PV installation on a leveled brown—field is classified as ground—mount PV design. A ground—mount PV design can be either stationary, single—axis or dual—axis tracking installation. The order of productivity is usually: [Stationary < Single—axis < Dual—axis]. Since there is a diminishing return on PV productivity by enhancing to dual—axis tracking from single—axis tracking in most geographic locations and project 32 Roof—mount PV design (R1, R2 etc.) � U Ground—mount PV design U N (G1, G2 etc.) 3 Parking structure PV design��' (P1, P2 etc.) Miscellaneous structure PV design (M1, M2 etc.) Flat roof, Low pitch roof, Gable roof, Hip roof, Hip—and—valley roof etc. Figure 20. The four PV design classifications at each site Ground—mount PV Design The PV installation on a leveled brown—field is classified as ground—mount PV design. A ground—mount PV design can be either stationary, single—axis or dual—axis tracking installation. The order of productivity is usually: [Stationary < Single—axis < Dual—axis]. Since there is a diminishing return on PV productivity by enhancing to dual—axis tracking from single—axis tracking in most geographic locations and project 32 sizes, single—axis tracking is often the go—to option. The single—axis tracking systems are often installed with the axis in the N—S direction, tracking the Sun's path throughout the day. Parking Structure PV Designs The parking structure PV designs are becoming a popular option in recent times owing to the double benefit of providing protection from natural forces (Sun, rain, and snow) for the vehicles as well as allowing power generation. Depending on the manufacturer, there are multiple carport designs such as cantilever, T— shaped, two—column style, louvered style, and other styles that can be installed these days. Moreover, these structures have high visibility and high usability from a general public stand point. A lot of PV carports are often added premium features such as electric vehicle charging stations and night time lighting owing to the established interconnectivity to the grid. PV Carports as Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations The society of automobile engineers (SAE) has standardized the electric vehicle (EV) power receptacles according to SAE J1772 standard. Most electric vehicles are equipped with two receptacles as shown in Figure 21. The Level 1 and Level 2 charging equipment are plugged into receptacle encircled in blue. DC fast charger is plugged into receptacle encircled in green. Level 1 and Level 2 charging equipment use 120V AC power input and 240V / 208V AC power input respectively. These charging equipment delivers power at `2 to 5 miles of range per hour of charging' and '10 to 20 miles of range per hour of charging' respectively. DC fast charger uses 480 V AC input and is available only in all -electric vehicles and not hybrid vehicles. It can deliver power at `60 to 80 miles of range per 20 minutes of charging' [27]. Figure 21. Typical Electric Vehicle Power Receptacles 33 Miscellaneous PV Designs The last category of designs are miscellaneous design options are customized site—specific ideas for PV installations. These designs serve a strong educational and public visibility purpose along with serving the intended electrical loads. There are a few of these design options such as solar canopies, solar architecture etc. that are discussed as a part of this design group. 6.1. Site 1: City Park Pool House (200 E. Park Road, Iowa City, IA 52246) The City Park pool house encompasses an area of 17,475 Sq. ft. on a 78—acre City—owned land. The pool house has a natural gas heating system, and electric cooling system while the ventilation is provided by exhaust fans with exterior louvres. The facility has no building automation system in place. The pool house is not in the 100—year and 500—year floodplain although the City park land North and South of the facility is in the floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix—B). Figure 22. City Park pool house aerial view 6.1.1. Operational Schedules The facility operates from Memorial Day through Labor Day i.e. open to the public during spring and summer months. Start up and close out procedures append an additional month on both ends of those dates. It is shutdown rest of the year. Hence, this is considered a seasonal load for PV design purposes. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 9. 34 Table 9. Summary of City Park pool house operations No. of Operating Days in a year 100-150 days Mon—Fri, 5:30 AM to 8:30 PM Operating Days hours Sat—Sun, 11:00 AM to 8:30 PM Night—time pool lighting Fluid filtration system: a. 3—phase induction motor Major Electrical Loads (5 HP, 1.15 SF => 5.75 total HP) b. 1—phase motor (1 HP, 1.25 SF => 1.25 total HP) c. Indoor lighting 6,1,2, Site Energy, and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 is shown on Figure 23. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 3002 kWh. An average monthly energy of 1392 kWh is consumed at the facility ignoring the non—operational months with less than 100 kWh energy consumption. The site is billed under Mid—American Energy's Rate GE— General Energy Service tariff. The site pays a median price for electricity at 11.97 cents/kWh. During the non—operational months the price is considerably more due to fixed costs associated with delivery of small amounts of energy. There are no demand charges associated with this location as the loads are considerably small, and comparable to large residential loads. The average demand during operational months is expected to be 3.4 kW. The facility is expected to operate for an average of 411 hours every month during the operational season. The building operations are at a minimum during night times, and almost zero during non—operational months. 35 Figure 23. Electric Energy usage at Site 1: City Park Pool House Figure 24. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for City Park Pool House M 6.1.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop PV design. Seasonal building loads The pool house is only used in the spring and summer months, open from Memorial Day through Labor Day, this type of facility operation will mean that the PV system will be underutilized through the non— operational time of the year. However, Mid—American Energy's net—metering policy comes to the rescue allowing the procured kWh credits to be rolled over to the following month until the annual true—up period end date which can either be chosen to be Jan 31St or April 30th. In this case, it is beneficial to choose Jan 31St as the annual true—up period end date based on the load analysis. Skylights The South—facing roof of the pool building has skylights that shouldn't be shaded after installing the rooftop solar PV. Roof Shingles The South—facing roof structure as shown in Figure 25 may require additional upgrades. Some shingles of the roof were not in great condition and appeared to be damaged. Shading from nearby trees The trees on the west side of the building will shade some western area on the south—facing roof. Hence, the design should avoid PV modules in that western area of the roof. 6.1.4. Bluestein Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are two viable design options at this location — a rooftop PV design on the South—facing roof and a miscellaneous PV design on the side canopies. 6.1.4.1. Design RI: Rooftop PV The city park pool house building has a roof structure with hips and valleys. The building's solar PV feasible roof (as shown in Figure 25) is oriented in the South—West direction with an azimuth angle of around 190.5° (Due South = 180°). A flush—mount rooftop PV design on the South—facing roof is proposed at this location as shown in Figure 26. The shading from the trees in the south—west is considered in the design. The 3—foot setback from the ridge of the roof, smoke vents and skylights, and 1.5—foot setback from the hip of the roof are all considered as well. A total of 33 PV modules can be accommodated on the unshaded, available South—facing roof area. This design will yield in a maximum name—plate PV design of 12 kWDc. Since, the solar PV system will not be able to generate energy during night time, any excess generation fed to the grid during the daytime will be offset by consumption in the night from the grid. 37 MidAmerican Electric's beneficial net metering policy allowing PV system size up to 100% of the customer load (= total annual kWh consumption) is important in achieving a good feasible design without need for a battery storage system. This rooftop PV design yields an annual energy output of 1344.5 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 16194 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 15.40%. Table 10 summarizes the details of the rooftop PV design, and Figure 27 is the result of Helioscope software simulation. The monthly energy generation (kWh) added to the grid is shown on the software simulation. Figure 25. The South facing roof of City Park pool house with encircled Skylights Figure 26. Design 1: Rooftop PV in Helioscope software at the City Park Pool House 38 Table 10. Summary of Design 1: South facing pitched roof Design 1- Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity Name -plate DC Capacity (kW) 12 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 33 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 10 kW) 1 Orientation (in degrees) 10° West of Due South Module Tilt (in degrees) 26° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.46 2000 15010 1000 Y 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep w Nov Dec month GHI PGOA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/rn2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49,3 75.6 73.9 842.4 818.8 February 62.3 80.5 77.9 889.3 864.3 March 115.4 140.1 136.8 1,570.3 1,453.9 April 153.3 169.2 167.0 1,919.4 1,658.2 May 172.6 174.1 173.5 1,984.5 1,722.2 June 180.8 178.7 178.4 2,044.6 1,694.8 July 192.6 193.7 193.2 2,214.6 1,828.6 August 171.4 183.9 182.1 2,090.2 1,709.2 September 136.9 161,1 158.0 1,813.2 1,524.9 October 89.7 116.8 114.1 1,308.2 1,167,5 November 60.0 90.9 89,2 1,020.6 954.8 December 46.9 73.7 72,7 829.8 797.2 Figure 27. Estimated annual production of the 12 kWnc solar array at City Park pool house 39 Optimization of Rooftop PV Design The rooftop PV design is optimized based on the net billing policy of Mid—American Energy Company which trues up every year on Jan 31St or April 30t' as chosen one—time by the customer. In this scenario, it is identified that choosing Jan 31St as true—up period end date is beneficial. The design with 8 kW rooftop PV installation is optimum based on the minimum annual true—up period loss as shown on Table 11. Table 11. End of True—up period kWh optimization of PV design DC Size of the Energy left in Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 8 Simple Payback 22 bank at the end Average monthly Average PV Period without PV system of True—up bill ($) Savings ($) tax incentives (kWDc) period (kWh) (in ears) 12 2882.98 1.96 105.42 25.58 10 1100.17 7.75 99.63 22.56 8 452.25 23.74 83.64 21.49 6 298.51 45.50 61.88 21.79 Table 12. Summary of optimized Design 1: South facing pitched roof Design 1— Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 8 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 22 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 7.6 kW) 1 Orientation (in degrees) 10° West of Due South Module Tilt (in degrees) 26° from the horizontal plane 40 t'ati! I t Y U J2a[1 !�et. filar A; r %tla Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 75.6 73.3 531.9 516.7 February 62.3 80.5 77.4 562.7 547.1 March 115.4 140.1 136.3 996.1 927.1 April 153.3 169.2 166.6 1,218.8 1,056.5 May 172.6 174.1 172.5 1,256.3 1,091.1 June 180.8 178.7 177.3 1,293.6 1.073.0 July 192.6 193.7 192.1 1,402.2 1,159.0 August 171.4 183.9 181.6 1,326.9 1,086.2 September 136.9 161.1 157.4 1,150.8 968.7 October 89.7 116.8 113.5 828.9 740.1 November 60.0 90.9 88.5 644,8 603.3 December 46.9 73.7 72.2 524.2 503.1 Figure 28. Estimated annual production of the 8 kWnc solar arrUy at City Park pool house Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation In rooftop designs, the solar array will add a considerable amount of weight on the roof due to the weight of the modules and mounting system. Besides that, there are also snow loading and wind loading considerations that are important. Two types of loading calculations are commonly used by PV design engineers - point load calculation and distributed load calculation. During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step-by-step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. 41 Table 13. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure a. Number of PV modules in the array fe 22 b. Number of connections to the roof ftp 38 X 2 = 76 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 110 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 1394.8 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.4 Note: Weight at each connection should be < 451bf, Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbf. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 14. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure g. Area of each PV module fe 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ftp 459.58 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbUft2 3.03 Note: Typically, Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 6.1.4.2. Design M1: Solar PV canopy— side canopy (existing structure) In the east and west directions of the pool, there are canopy structures (as shown in Figure 30) that can potentially be retrofitted with Solar PV to supply the visitors with phone or laptop charging ports. This will be a retrofit custom design to accommodate PV modules. CIGS thin film modules as shown in Figure 29 are recommended for this design to custom build a solar canopy. It should be noted that the west side canopy structure is highly susceptible to shading from trees nearby and, hence, rejected. An alternate option would be to install a solar structure to yield a return on visibility from public education and solar PV technology marketing as shown on Figure 144 in APPENDIX—E. These systems 42 cost anywhere between $25,000 to $45,000 and can mount anywhere from 6 to 18 PV modules i.e. 2.2 kW to 6.8 kW. They can also be coupled with outdoor tables with power outlets, signage, LED lighting etc. Figure 29. CIGS material thin film PV module [281 Figure 30. Side canopy structures at City Park pool house 6.2. Site 2: Mercer Park (2701 Bradford Dr., Iowa City, IA 52240) Site 2 is the location with Mercer Park Aquatic Center and James P Scanlon Gymnasium which is a 53,000 Sq. ft. facility on a City—owned land. The Aquatic Center and gymnasium building has a central plant to serve its heating and cooling needs. The central plant uses natural gas heating system, and electric cooling system while the ventilation is provided by air handling units. The facility also has a building automation system in place. The Mercer Park location is not in the 100—year and 500—year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix—B). The site has parking spaces on the east—side and vacant ground space on 43 the north—side of the aquatic center building. There are some tennis courts and pickleball courts in the south—eastern corner of the site location near baseball fields. Figure 31. Mercer Park Aquatic Center and James P. Scanlon Gymnasium (front entrance and aerial view of the roofi 6.2.1. Operational Schedules The aquatic center and gymnasium facility operates almost all through the year except on public holidays. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 15. Table 15. Summary of Mercer Park Aquatic Center and James P. Scanlon Gymnasium operations No. of Operating Days in a year 345-350 days Mon—Fri, 6:15 AM to 9 PM Operating Days hours Saturday, 6:15 AM to 8 PM Sunday, 11 AM to 8 PM a. Mercer park aquatic center and Scanlon Gym operations b. Baseball field lighting c. Lighting for 3 tennis courts, 8 Pickleball courts constructed Major Electrical Loads in Spring 2017. d. Storage building, clubhouse, and concessions are all intermittent electrical loads 44 6,2.2, Site Energy and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 is shown on Figure 32. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 103,760 kWh. An average monthly energy of 87,748.5 kWh is consumed at this location. Peak summer energy consumption is slightly higher than peak winter energy consumption. The site pays an average price for electricity at 6.11 cents/kWh. There are demand charges associated with this location as the loads are commercial scale. The peak kW demand in summer months is larger than peak kW demand in winter months. The average monthly peak kW demand is 167.3 kW, and the maximum demand among all the considered months is 207.5 kW. The facility is expected to operate for an average of 430 working hours every month, and the setbacks will kick in for the rest of the 317 operating hours on an average. It can be noticed from Figure 33 that the all—in delivered cost of electricity is greater in summer months compared to the rest of the year. Hence, a solar array design that can generate more energy in summer is more valuable. Figure 32. Electric Energy usage at Site 2: Mercer Park 45 120,000 250 --4--kWh (Energy) —w --kW (Demand) - Linear (kWh (Energy)) Linear (kW (demand)) iao,aaa 200 80,000 _.... ......... .. ........ .... .. 150 -- 60,000 a m a� E w 100 p 40,000 50 20,000 00 m N m m m v � N v v v Ln N ti Ln Ln %0 %0 a ti N ti w n n n n ti N W ti N ti o ti ti ani a ti ti �' ti .. ti `m ani a g 4 z o d O d z g in o d Billing Date Figure 32. Electric Energy usage at Site 2: Mercer Park 45 Figure 33. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Mercer Park 6,2.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, parking lot structure, and other miscellaneous PV designs. Distance to the interconnection point The parking lot PV structure is at a considerable distance from the grid interconnection point on site. This will add some additional wiring costs associated with the design. Skylights The aquatic center & gymnasium building roof has skylights that shouldn't be shaded after installing the rooftop solar PV. Also, there is a sunroof over the entrance lobby of the facility which shouldn't be shaded. Roof Structural Strength Although, the flat rooftop of the facility is at a desirable N—S orientation with ample solar insolation, the structural strength of the roof is questionable. The additional distributed and point loads that a PV system would add will be discussed in a following sub—section. Shading from nearby trees The trees near the parking lot should be avoided or relocated in certain areas of the parking lot to avoid carport mount PV system shading. Refer to Figure 37 to identify the trees near by the parking lot. ., 6,2.4. Bluestein Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are five different PV designs that are investigated at this location — a rooftop PV design, two parking lot PV designs, a ground mount PV design, and a miscellaneous PV canopy design at pickleball courts. 6.2.4.1. Design RI: Rooftop PV The Mercer park aquatic center and James P. Scanlon gymnasium has multiple flat roof areas which are at different elevations as shown in Figure 34. A flat rooftop PV design is proposed at this location as shown in Figure 35. All the flat roof areas are well oriented in a perfect N—S direction with an azimuth angle of 180° (Due South = 180°). The flat roof on the northern part of the building is covered with skylights. Some of the roofs shade one another due to elevation difference. The whole available flat roof area is classified into 8 sections. Each of these 8 sections has its own elevation. Inter—roof shading due to different elevations of the roofs is considered in the design. The 4—foot setbacks from the walls of the roof sections, smoke vents, storm water drains, and skylights of the roof are all considered as well. 486 PV modules can be accommodated on all the flat roofs in total. All the modules are tilted at 30°, facing due South direction with appropriate row spacing to avoid inter—row shading. This design will yield in a name—plate PV design capacity of 177.4 kWDc. Since, the solar PV system will not be able to generate energy during night time, any excess generation fed to the grid during the daytime will be offset by consumption in the night from the grid. MidAmerican Electric's beneficial net metering policy allowing PV system size up to 100% of the customer load is important in achieving a good feasible design without a need for battery storage system. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1407.4 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 249,660 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 16.07%. A summary of the design details is shown on Table 16. Table 16. Summary of Design Rl: Flat rooftop PV at Mercer Park Design 1— Rooftop PV Attributes Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 177.4 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 486 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 27.6 kW) 6 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth = 180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 30° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 16.07 47 Figure 34. Rooftop view of Mercer park aquatic center and James A Scanlon gymnasium 48 Figure 35. Aerial view of Design 1: Mercer Park rooftop PV 40k 30k L 20k 1N 0 Jan FOL, 'Alar Apr May JLn Jul ALJ) Sep Oct Nov Doc Month GNI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWhlmz) (kWh7m2) (kWhlmz) (kWh) (kWh) January 51.7 83.4 69.3 11,724.6 11,662.0 February 81.7 119.2 113.2 19,174.4 18,776,4 March 123.3 153.5 147.6 25,005.1 23,704.7 April 136.6 148.3 143.7 24,302.1 22,423.6 May 173.1 172.7 167.3 28,230.0 25,748.3 June 177,6 171.8 166.5 28.133.3 25,140.5 July 200.3 198.3 192.5 32,556.7 28,599.2 August 172.6 184.8 179.3 30,370.6 26,913.5 September 135.0 163.6 159.0 26,973.4 23,994.5 October SG.9 118.4 114,0 19,320.4 17,919.4 November 60.8 93.0 85.8 14,542.3 14,103.5 December 48.2 80.4 64.0 10,827.0 10,673.8 Figure 36. Estimated annual production of the designed rooftop solar array at Mercer Park 49 Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub—sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. Table 17. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure a. Number of PV modules in the array ff 486 b. Number of connections to the roof ff 1679 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 2430 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 30812.4 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.4 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf, Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 18. Distributed load calculation step-by—step procedure g. Area of each PV module ff 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ff 10152.54 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbUft2 3.03 Note: Typically, Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 50 6.2.4.2. Design P1 & Design P2: Parking structure PV The ample open parking lot space on the east—side of the facility is a viable location for South—facing carport design PV systems. The interconnectivity to the grid can be run underground. Figure 37 shows this available parking space on the east—side of the Aquatic Center building. The parking space perfectly oriented in the E—W direction. So, a PV array design with 180° azimuth angle is possible as shown by the two design ideas for parking lot space on Figure 38 (plan—P1) and Figure 39 (plan—P2). In design plan—P1, the parking lot near the aquatic center building as well as the parking lot farther from the building — both are utilized. A lot more trees need to be displaced for this design when compared with design plan—P2. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1,330 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 597,953 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 15.18%. In design plan—P2, the carport structures are oriented in the E—W direction and tilted at 100 towards the South sky. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1,387 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 765,411 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 15.83%. Both the design parameters are summarized on Table 19. Figure 37. Aerial view of Mercer Park parking lot Table 19. Summary of Design PI and Design P2— Parking Structure PV at Mercer Park Parking Structure PV Attribute Quantity (Design P1) Quantity (Design P2) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 449.7 551.9 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 1232 1512 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 66.6 kW) 6 7 51 Orientation (in degrees) 10° West of Due South Due South (Azimuth= 180') Module Tilt (in degrees) 26° from the horizontal plane 10° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.18 15.83 Figure 38. Mercer Park parking lot PV design plan PI 52 Figure 39. Mercer Park parking lot PV design plan P2 53 75k 50k 25k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec (Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWhft� (kWh) (kWh) January 51.7 83.4 60.5 25,878.6 26,008.6 February 81.7 119.2 101.7 43,660.5 42,550.7 March 123.3 152.5 145.2 62,333.7 58,547.4 April 136.6 148.3 140.8 60,366.2 55,140.4 May 173.1 172.7 163.7 70,019.8 63,019.2 June 177.6 171.8 163.0 69,810.1 61,458.9 July 200.3 198.3 189.1 81,047.2 69,963.2 August 172.6 184.8 175.9 75,513.7 65,721.3 September 135.0 163.6 157.0 67,505.3 59,183.1 October 86.9 118.4 107.1 46,015.4 42,137.9 November 60.8 93.0 71.4 30,606.1 29,536.1 December 48.2 80.4 57.9 24,804.2 24,686.0 Figure 40. Estimated annual energy production from parking lot PV design plan -PI at Mercer Park 54 I 00 75k 50k 25k 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep G+ct Nov Doc Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kwhlrnj January 51.7 69.3 69.2 35„615.6 35,924.7 February 81.7 103.2 103.2 53,585A 52,952.8 March 123.3 141.6 141.6 73,991.6 70,115.1 April 136.6 146.2 145.2 76,542.3 69,720.6 May 173.1 177.3 177.3 92,794.7 82,946.7 June 177.6 179.2 179.2 93,916.1 81.988.0 July 200.3 204.7 204.7 107,433.5 92,295.3 August 172.6 183.5 183.5 96,312.4 83,843.2. September 135.0 153.5 153.5 80,452.4 71.170.6 October 86.9 105.4 105.4 54,899.3 50,986.5 November 60.8 78.9 78.9 40,893.4 39,569.4 December 48.2 66.0 65.9 33,973.8 33,897.8 Figure 41. Estimated annual energy production from parking lot PV design plan -P2 at Mercer Park 55 6.2.4.3. Design Gl: Ground mount PV The ground mount PV installation is a stationary installation in the available open space in the North of the Aquatic center building as shown in Figure 42. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1351.7 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 53,283 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 15.43%. The design parameters are shown on Table 20. Table 20. Summary of Ground—mount PV design at Mercer Park site Design GI — Ground—mount PV Attribute Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 39.4 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 108 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 34 kW) 1 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth= 180') Module Tilt (in degrees) 40° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.43 Figure 42. Mercer Park ground—mount PV design 56 �q M .X k 2K 0 Jam Fell Mer Apr May Jun Jul Aup Sep W Nov Dec Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/M2) (kWh/M2) (kwhimz) (kWh) (kWh) January 51.7 90.4 74.7 2,818.7 2,649.3 February 81.7 126.3 120.5 4,550.7 4,214.8 March 123.3 155.2 150.0 5,649.3 5,075.8 April 136.6 145.5 139.9 5,250.3 4,653.9 May 173.1 164.9 158.1 5,910.3 5,261.1 June 177.6 162.4 155.7 5,822.5 5,108.3 July 200.3 188.4 181.2. 6,782.7 5,849.6 August 172.6 180.2 173.4 6,513.9 5,645.5 September 135.0 165.3 160.2 6,039.0 5,170.6 October 86.9 123.5 119.2. 4,498.6 3,988.4 November 60.8 99.5 92.0 3,476.8 3,249,0 December 48.2 87.7 685 2,589.1 2,417.1 Figure 43. Estimated annual production of the designed ground -mount PV at Mercer Park 6.2.4.4. Design M1: Miscellaneous PV Design at Pickleball Courts The newly developed 8 pickleball courts and 3 tennis courts consume night time lighting energy. And since the City administration also intends to construct player rest benches, a PV canopy structure would be ideal to provide shade and provide the power needs for night-time court lighting (when coupled with a battery storage system) and charging smartphones. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1267.1 kWh/kWp. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 22,200 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 14.46%. The design parameters are shown on Table 21. 57 Figure 44. Mercer Park Tennis and Pickleball Courts Figure 45. PV canopy design at the Tennis and Pickleball courts. Hexagonal blocks shown in the picture are simulating the shading effect of the trees in the southwest corner 58 Table 21. Summary of Pickleball court PV Canopy design at Mercer Park site Design 1- Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity Name -plate DC Capacity (kW) 17.5 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 48 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 7.6 kW) 2 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth= 180') Module Tilt (in degrees) 0° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 14.46 4k 3k 2k 1k Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sap Oct Nov Dec Month GWI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (Wftm� (kWh) (kWh) January 51.7 51.5 51.4 815.7 848.7 February 81.7 81.6 81.5 1,315.8 1,362.4 March 123.3 123.3 123.2 2,020.9 1,996.9 April 136.6 136.5 136.5 2,255.2 2,108.6 May 173.1 173.1 173.0 2,865.6 2,606.6 June 177.6 177.6 177.5 2,948.5 2,609.1 July 200.3 20D.3 200.1 3,327.1 2,914.8 August 172.6 172.5 172.4 2,858.4 2,569.8 September 135.0 134.9 134.9 2,222.8 2,055.5 October 86.9 86.8 86.8 1,411.1 1,368.0 November 60.8 60.7 60.6 974.0 976.1 December 48.2 48.0 48.0 761.2 783.2 Figure 46. Estimated annual production of the designed pickleball court PV at Mercer Park 59 6.3. Site 3: Iowa City Airport (1801 S Riverside Dr., Iowa City, IA 52246) The Iowa City airport has one main building (as shown in Figure 47), and 13 low—pitch, metal roof buildings (as shown in Figure 48 and Figure 49) which encompasses a total 116,371 Sq. ft. on site area of 258 acres. The airport location is in the 100—year and 500—year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix—B). Some buildings have natural gas heating systems, and electric cooling systems with air handling units while others are naturally ventilated. Most of the buildings have their own local controls. Except the main building, all the other buildings have sheet metal envelope with steel beam skeleton underneath. These buildings are named alphabetically `A' through `N' and are mostly single—use buildings with different sizes. Viz. 150'X70', 60'X60', 100'X 100' etc. Figure 47. Iowa City Airport main building 60 t Figure 48. Iowa City Airport's South buildings with lox—pitch, metal roof 61 Figure 49. Iowa City Airport's North buildings with low pitch, metal roof 6.3. 1. Operational Schedules The Iowa City Airport operates all through the year, and Table 22 shows the operational schedule of the airport. Table 22. Summary of Iowa City Airport operations No. of Operating Days in a year 365 days Mon—Fri, 6:30 AM to 8:30 PM Operating hours Sat—Sun, 7 AM to 7 PM a. Runway beacon lights Major Electrical Loads b. Main building operations c. Intermittent operations at North and South buildings 6.3.2. Site Energy and Monthly Demand There are four different electric meters in operation at the airport site whose load profiles and respective electric prices are shown on Figure 52 through Figure 59. When all the four meters are aggregated into one, CL the monthly load and demand profiles from February 2013 through January 2018 are as shown on Figure 50. The maximum energy consumed during this period is 24,858 kWh. An average monthly energy of 10,558 kWh is consumed at the airport site. Unlike other sites, the peak winter energy consumption is higher than peak summer energy consumption here. The site pays an average price for electricity at 9.44 cents/kWh. Three of the four meters have demand charges associated as the loads are comparable to small commercial scale. Unlike other sites, the peak demand in winter months is larger than the peak demand in summer months. The average monthly peak demand is 27.6 kW, and the maximum demand among all the considered months is 60 kW. The facility is expected to operate for an average of 381 working hours every month, and the setbacks will kick in for the rest of the 349 operating hours on an average. Figure 50. Total loud and demand on all meters summed up together with 60 kW PV generation 63 30000 70 +kWh (Energy) PV Generation 25000 --a--kW (Demand) • •-•• • Linear (kWh (Energy)) 60 ••• Linear (kW (Demand)) 50 20000 Y 40 s � -= 15000 a � v 30 LU p 10000 20 5000 10 0 0 M m m m v a a a Ln Ln Ln w m to in n n n n C TOp 9 C M (}. V - C o T to % Figure 51. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh aggregating all Airport meters 64 Monthly Energy and Demand Variation 1,4003.5 —+—kWh (Energy) —+—kW (Demand) Linear (kWh (Energy)) Linear (kW (Demand)} 1,200 1,000 400 200 N M M M M w Q C v IA Ln 1A 0 0 w w n ti N P w w Om 3 ❑ ° v° o a Q ❑ R c°n G q Billing Date Figure 52. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -1 (Meter # S64080217) Figure 53. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Airport Meter—I (Meter # S64080217) 65 6,000 , 5,000 4,000 3 s 3,000 'T a 2,000 1.,000 D r I C Monthly Energy and Demand Variation 20 —kWh(Energy) --Q—kW(Demand) ----- - Linear (kWh (Energy)) ---- Linear (kW (Demand)) Figure 54. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) Figure 55. All—in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) 66 18 16 14 12 E 8 ❑ 6 4 2 0 rn K m M a a a, ID w CO .i .+ m m a a a S ti m A o a a a z n ❑ c o 2 a z ❑ a RILI..ING DATE Figure 54. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) Figure 55. All—in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -2 (Meter # S64080540) 66 Figure 56. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -3 (Meter # S64086562) Monthly variation in the price of electricity 12.00 10.00 L 8.00 Y Vr .L 6.00 w 0 d -' 4.00 a` 2.00 0.00 S` � d � d N O 2 ❑ � � d � Q cn � 2 ❑ ii' Billing Date Figure 57. All—in delivered price of electricity for Airport Meter -3 (Meter # S64086562) 67 Figure 58. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) Figure 59. All—in delivered price of'electricity for Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) 68 Monthly Energy and Demand variation 5,000 1 —.kWh (Energy) —►—kW (Demand) -----Linear (kWh (Energy)) — Linear (kW (Dernand)) 4,500 0.9 4,000 0.8 3,S00 0.7 w 3,000 0.6 - L Y 2,500 `--------- - ---- ----------- 0.5 LN m ----- w 2,000 0.4 d 1,500 0.3 1,000 0.2 500 0.1 0 ry M m m rn a v a a M m 0 �D n i n n n m 0 CO ¢ Z 15, vi ❑ Q0 Z vai ❑ Q Billing Date Figure 58. Electric Energy usage at Site 3: Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) Figure 59. All—in delivered price of'electricity for Airport Meter -4 (Meter # S71113992) 68 6.3.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, parking lot structure, and ground—mount PV designs. 1. The airport grounds are under the authority of the Airport Commission. They would need to approve any projects at this site; similar but separate from City Council approval. 2. Also impacting a project significantly are the federal laws regarding revenue diversion (any revenue generated by the airport or its facilities is to be used by the airport for the benefit of the airport). Usually, revenue generated at the airport should be used for airport development activities and cannot be used for other city development activities. 3. A potential reflectivity issue as some modules have been known to cause significant glare issues. But more recently, anti—reflective coatings are utilized by most solar PV manufacturers. FAA has a guidance document [29] that has valuable information regarding the design and development of solar PV projects at airports. In accordance with Title 14 of Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77.9, the `FAA Form 7460-1' —Notice of proposed construction or alteration on airport should be submitted by the owner via electronic portal [30] or manually at least 45 days in advance before the commencement of construction. 4. The buildings had flood vents near the base given the proximity to the Iowa river on the east and the flood plain on the south side. There are storm drains along the eastern boundary of the airport. 6,14, Bluestem Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are three PV design solutions proposed at this location. Based on the site load profile, it is beneficial to assign true—up end date as April 30th instead of Jan. 1St. This is because the congregate demand of all the meters is peaking in Winter, and not in Summer. 6.3.4.1. Design R: Rooftop PV The rooftop PV design is divided into three categories: A. Design RI: Main Building rooftop (Bldg. E) 30 PV modules can be accommodated on the main building rooftop. All the modules are tilted at 350 facing due South direction. This design will yield in a name—plate PV design capacity of 11 kWDc. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1204.6 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 13,191 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 13.75%. A summary of the design details is shown on •' B. Design R2: North Buildings rooftops (Bldg. A through Bldg. D) PV modules can be accommodated on the main building rooftop. All the modules are tilted at 35° facing due South direction. This design will yield in a name—plate PV design capacity of kWDc. This site design yields an annual energy output of kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of %. A summary of the design details is shown on C. Design R3: South Buildings rooftops (Bldg. F through Bldg. N) PV modules can be accommodated on the main building rooftop. All the modules are tilted at 7.5° facing almost—east or almost—west direction at solar azimuth angles of 92° and 272° (Due South=180°) respectively. This design will yield in a name—plate PV design capacity of 591 kWDc. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1,147 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 677,728 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 13.1%. A summary of the design details is shown on Table 23. Table 23. Summary of rooftop PV designs at Iowa City Airport site 70 Quantity Quantity Quantity Rooftop PV Attribute (Design RI) (Design R2) (Design R3) Name plate DC Capacity (kW) 12 207.7 590.9 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 33 569 1619 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 18.82 18.82 No. of Inverters (@10 kW,30 kW,24 kW) 1 6 20 Due West (267°) Due West (272°) Orientation (in degrees) Due South (180°) & Due East (87°) & Due East (92°) Fixed tilt (@ 35° Flush mount (at Flush mount (at Module Tilt (in degrees) from horizontal) roof tilt of 7.50) roof tilt of 7.50) Capacity Factor (%) 15.46 13.46 13.1 70 Figure 60. Rooftop PV Design R1 on Main Building (Bldg. E) at Iowa City Airport Figure 61. Rooftop PV Design R2 on North Buildings (Bldg. A through Bldg. D) at Iowa City Airport 71 Figure 62. Rooftop PV Design -R3 on South Buildings (Bldg. F through Bldg. N) at Iowa City Airport 72 1500 1000 500 Jan Feta Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct. Nov Dec GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid Month (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) 'I (kWh/M2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 81.7 60.4 626.3 631.3 February 62.3 84.1 71.9 746.9 771.9 March 115.4 143.0 128.7 1,342.6 1,345.6 April 153.3 168.7 152.0 1,585.2 1,503.0 May 172.6 169.0 153.5 1,593.4 1,502.9 June 180.8 171.4 155.5 1,616.2 1,472.4 July 192.6 187.1 169.6 1,763.9 1,600.1 August 171.4 181.5 163.9 1,707.2 1,537.1 September 136.9 1641 147,8 1,542,2 1,417.0 October 89.7 122.9 106.5 1,111.5 1,064.5 November 60.0 98.7 72.7 754.8 736.8 December 46.9 80.5 59.3 616.1 614.5 Figure 63. Estimated annual production of the Main Building PV design -RI at the airport 73 40k 30k 2ok 10k 0 Jars Fab Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sap Oct Nov Dec Month GHI PGOA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/M2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 49.3 49.2 9,305.1 9,288.6 February 62.3 62.2 62.1 11,948.8 11,908.2 March 115.4 115.3 115.2 22,420.7 21,271.1 April 153.3 152.9 152.8 29,998.4 26,180.1 May 172.6 172.2 172.1 33,829.1 29,296.5 June 180.8 180.4 180.4 35,573.1 29,396.8 July 192.6 192.2 192.1 37,882.7 31,287.1 August 171.4 171.0 171.0 33,604.3 27,847.5 September 136.9 136.7 136.6 26,679.5 22,944.7 October 89.7 89.5 89.5 17,309.5 15,877.1 November 60.0 59.9 59.8 11,373.8 10,908.9 [december 46.9 46.8 46.7 8,809.1 8,701.7 Figure 64. Estimated annual production of the North Buildings PV design -R2 at the airport 74 I 00 75k 50k Y 75k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 65. Estimated annual production of the South Buildings PV design -R3 at the airport Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. 75 GNI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid Month (kWh1m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/M2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 49.4 49.4 26,470.6 25,476.8 February 62.3 62.3 62.2 33,956.6 32,706.4 March 115.4 115.4 115.3 63,671.5 58,620.6 April 153.3 153.0 152.9 85,176.4 72,588.0 May 172.6 172.2 172.2 96,010.1 81,143.8 June 180.8 180.4 180.4 100,926.2 81,341.6 July 192.6 192.2 192.2 107,506.7 86,471.9 August 171 .4 171.1 171.1 95,396.2 76,646.5 September 136.9 136.9 136.8 75,799.0 63,088.3 October 89.7 89.7 89.7 49,225.1 43,689.5 November 60.0 60.1 60.0 32,382.7 29,974.3 December 46.9 47.0 46.9 25,088.8 23,911.3 Figure 65. Estimated annual production of the South Buildings PV design -R3 at the airport Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. 75 Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. Table 24. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 25. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure R1 R2 R3 a. Number of PV modules in the array ft2 30 569 1619 b. Number of connections to the roof ft2 104 1966 5593 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 58.4 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 150 2845 8095 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 1902 36074.6 102644.6 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.3 18.3 18.4 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf; Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 25. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure W R1 R2 R3 g. Area of each PV module ft2 20.89 20.89 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft2 626.7 11886.41 33820.91 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbf/fe 3.03 3.03 3.03 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. W 6.3.4.2. Design P1: Parking structure PV There are four viable parking space locations near the main building that can accommodate carports as shown in Figure 66. 332 PV modules can be accommodated on these carport structures. All the modules are at 0°—tilt facing due South direction at solar azimuth angles of 180°. This design will yield in a name— plate PV design capacity of 121.2 kWDc. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1,228 kWh/kWP. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 148,765 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 14.02%. A summary of the design details is shown on Table 26. Table 26. Summary of Parking lot PV designs at Iowa City Airport site Parking lot PV Attribute Quantity (Design P1) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 121.2 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 332 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@6 kW) 17 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) Fixed tilt (@ 0° from horizontal) Capacity Factor (%) 14.02 Figure 66. Viable carport PV design near main building of the Airport 77 20k 15k an r 3: 10k. 5k a Jan Feb Mar Apr F.' ,p -n Month GHI PDA Shaded 17,528.5 (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/M2) January 49,3 49.2 49.1 February 62.3 62.1 62.1 March 115.4 115.3 115.2 April 153.3 153.2 1S3.1 May 172.6 172.5 172.5 June 180,8 180.8 180.7 July 192.6 192.6 192.5 August 171.4 171.3 171.2 September 136.9 136.8 136.8 October 89.7 89.6 89.6 November 60.0 59.8 59.8 December 46.9 46.7 46.7 1 Nameplate Grid (kWh) (kWh) 5,392.1 5,596.3 6,945.9 7,217.0 13,061.8 12,869.5 17,528.5 15,642.7 19,761.7 17,631.4 20,789.5 17,784.2 22,138.3 19,034.9 19,621.8 17,135,1 15,566.1 14,167.8 10,095.5 9,774.4 6,618.1 6,644.0 5,128.9 5,267.8 Figure 67. Estimated annual production of the parking lot PV design at the airport 6.3.4.3. Design GI: Ground mount PV on non -aviation purpose land The airport has 40 acres of land purposed for non -aviation uses, located on the southern edge. This land is currently being used for seasonal agriculture (corn or soy bean crop typically) purposes. This parcel of land is shown in Figure 68. 24,840 PV modules can be accommodated on the available land space. All the modules are at 40° -tilt facing due South direction at solar azimuth angles of 180°. This design will yield in a name -plate PV design capacity of 9070 kWDc. This site design yields an annual energy output of 1,396.6 kWh/kWp. The total annual energy to the grid is approximately 12,662,500 kWh which equates to an annual average capacity factor of 15.94%. A summary of the design details is shown on Table 27. Since the land is susceptible to flooding, the solar modules design is raised by 8.5 feet. 78 Table 27. Summary of Design 3: Ground—mount PV Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity (Design 1A) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 9070 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 24,840 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 100 kW) 73 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) Fixed tilt (@ 40° from horizontal) Capacity Factor (%) 15.94 Figure 68. 40 Acres of land available on the South—side of the airport for non—aviation developments 79 Figure 69. Ground -mount PV design located land available on the South -side of the airport for non- aviation developments 80 Ja, May Jinn Jul Aug Sep oat Nov flee Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) January 49.3 84,6 80.3 696,043.6 694,970.7 February 62.3 85.5 81.8 707,015.5 705.347.4 March 115,4 143,7 138.2 1,196,905.9 1,146,887,4 April 153.3 166.9 160.6 1,389, 545.7 1,255,411.5 May 172.6 1643 157.1 1,351,669.2 1,250,2.14.9 June 1801.8 166.1 158.6 1,365,680.5 1,227,848,0 July 192.6 181.9 174.0 1,4.99,517.0 1,342,526.6 August 171.4 178.6 171.4 1,480,485.4 1,313,751.9 September 136.9 164.2 158.0 1,368,036.3 1,231,160.2 October 89.7 124.9 120.4 1,045,097.5 977,661.0 November 60.0 102.0 98.2 853,727.6 833,457.6 December 46.9 83.6 79.2 687,406.5 683,272.2 Figure 70. Estimated annual production of the ground -mount PV design at the airport 6.4. Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility (4366 Napoleon St. SE, Iowa City, IA 52240) The South wastewater treatment plant facility encompasses an area of 68,086 Sq. ft. on a 50 -acre City - owned land. There are 24 facility infrastructures located at this site. All the buildings on this site were constructed after 1996. The buildings have a decentralized method to provide for heating and cooling needs. The facilities operate on natural gas heating, and electric cooling while the ventilation is provided by mechanical air handling units at each building. The building automation system is coupled with process automation system. A major portion of this site is in the 100 year floodplain but not in the 500 -year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix -B). 81 4 �a 4.'l� Figure 71. Aerial View of the Adininistrative and storage buildings Figure 72. Building rooftop with pebble protection 82 Figure 73. Pebble covered flat roof PV installation using ballasted system [31] 6.4.1. Operational Schedules The wastewater treatment plant operates all through the year except a few hours throughout the year for maintenance shutdowns. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 28. Table 28. Summary of Wastewater Treatment Plant operations No. of Operating Days in a year 365 days Mon—Fri, 7 AM to 3:30 PM Operating Days hours Sat—Sun, 7 AM to 5 PM a. North building houses 300 HP motors and heavy— duty blowers which are the major electrical energy consumers on site. There are 6 pumps, 7 blowers, Major Electrical Loads transfer pumps, sludge presses (10 hours/day) and sludge thickeners (24 hours/day) b. Cold Storage c. HVAC and Lighting for buildings 83 6,4,2, Site Energy and Monthly Demand This site facilities have the largest electricity usage of all the six locations. However, it also has the lowest electricity prices as well. This is the only site that is served by Eastern Iowa Power and Light Cooperative among the eight sites. The site has a power supply through 480V grid line. The total energy consumption by the wastewater treatment plant has increased over the past three years showing an increasing trend. The monthly energy consumption from January 2015 through December 2017 is shown on Figure 74. The maximum energy consumed during this time period is 905,808 kWh. An average monthly energy of 743,722 kWh is consumed by the wastewater treatment plant facilities. The site pays a median price for electricity at 5.32 cents/kWh. The electricity prices are comparatively higher in summer months as shown on Figure 75. There are demand charges associated with location as the overall demand is industrial—scale. The average demand at this site is expected to be 1,316 kW. The facility is expected to operate 720-744 hours every month except during a few hours of occasional shutdowns for maintenance. The hourly electric energy demand of wastewater facility has seen an increase over the past three years (2015 through 2017) as shown on Figure 76, Figure 77, and Figure 78. Figure 74. Electric Energy usage at Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Facility 84 Monthly Energy and Demand Variation 1,000,000 1,600 900,000 1,400 800,000 .. ......... . . ... .. ........ 1,200 700,00a ... 1,000 600,000 3 3 c 500,000 800 `-' 400,000 E `L Notal Monthly kWhs 600 a 300,000 9 Interuptable 15 -minute Peak kW 400 206,000 Linear (Total Monthly kWhs) 100,000 Linear (Interuptable 15 -minute Peak kW) 200 0 0 m n .i ri r r r a .r r ry r m r ry .i .i r r ry oN n n h ry r .ti rro m .ti r m r r rry r o� rr n v .ti vs oo Billing date n m v Figure 74. Electric Energy usage at Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Facility 84 Figure 75. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Wastewater Treatment Facility Figure 76. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2015 85 Hourly Demand in 2015 1600 —KW Linear (KW) 1400 1200 Y 1000 c 800 E m a 600 O 2 400 200 0 N LM LA N N N N LM N N M N Ln N Ln N LLQ 1O N 0 ri 0 Ii 0 � ri 0 N 0 1 N 0 ri N N ri a o a a N o ri a 0 v N o 0 n N �. N ei ri N 1 N LA ri 1 N N H 1 M M 1 ri ! N m o Ln m N N rl ! 1 1 1 W Ln W n m 1 Oil so N 1 (n m N ! O N r. �"� ^► •i N N Lo N ! ! N N N Billing Date Figure 76. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2015 85 Figure 77. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2016 Figure 78. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2017 :: Hourly Demand in 2016 1600 —KW Linear (KW) 1400 1200 s 1009 c C C E B00 a T = 600 O 2 400 200 a Ln um Ln cO 0 %a m to W 1D lb 1G m m a 18 n .a v N ri o N rt v N ra r4 v v N N ra v N .a v N ri ri .a .a o a o a N N N N .a v N ra v N ra v N ra v N .a v N .a v N N 'f l_n N N O M cc N n -- N ! LO H IA ri r.. N ri M .-! r N N 1 1 N M H Z. V ri '� N N N N W 1 1 -a �G r. c0 I r G1 0 .4 H .4 N N N 1 N ri 1 Billing Date Figure 77. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2016 Figure 78. Hourly demand of Wastewater facility in 2017 :: 6.4.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, parking lot structure, and ground—mount PV designs. 1. Pebbles on the rooftop are already adding to the overall weight levied on the trusses and columns. However, they also help in uniform distribution of the weight. 2. Accurate leveling of solar mounts may be time consuming exercise. 3. New roof should replace the old one that is damaged by winds on the storage building. Retrofitting the roof structure is necessary before PV installation. 4. The sludge processing building releases Ammonia (NH3), Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and Sulfur—di— oxide (SO2) which may be highly corrosive to the PV infrastructure, more investigation is needed. 5. Administrative building roof membrane would leak sometimes suggesting wear and tear. 6. The transformer on site is raised about 3'6" above the ground level since the Iowa river flood of 2008. Any ground mount installations on—site should be elevated. 7. For ground—mount installation on area along the North—Western boundary (just North of soccer fields) will replace the trail and, also, displaces some trees. 6.4.4. Bluestein Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are three PV design solutions proposed at this location — rooftop, parking lots, and ground—mount in the north—field near soccer fields. The lower electricity prices hamper the PV savings at this site. 6.4.4.1. Design RI: Rooftop PV There is available roof area on the administrative building, storage building, metal—roof building, sledge processing facility expansion building, and another north building. They all have mostly flat roofs or low— pitched roofs. All the buildings with solar PV feasible roof are shown on Figure 79, and are all oriented in due South direction with an azimuth angle of 180°. The 4—foot setbacks from the edges of the roof, smoke vents and skylights are all considered as well. A total of 1,914 PV modules can be accommodated on the available roof area. This design will yield in a maximum name—plate PV design of 698.6 kWDc. 87 Figure 79. Rooftop PV potential at the wastewater treatment facility Table 29. Summary of Design RI: Flat rooftop PV at the wastewater treatment facility Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity (Design RI) Name plate DC Capacity (kW) 698.98 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 1914 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@33.3 kW) 17 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) Fixed tilt (@ 20° to 30° from horizontal) Capacity Factor (%) 15.36 125k 100k 75k ,c Y 50k 25k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr %lay Jun. Jul Aug Sep orl Nov Dec Month GHI POA shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m=) (kWh/m2) (kWhrm7) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 75.7 61.9 41,115.2 40,879.2 February 62.3 80.6 75.5 50,135.0 49,770.0 March 115.4 139.7 135.4 90,170.8 85,612.7 April 153.3 169.1 164.5 109,790.0 96,694.4 May 172.6 173.6 168.1 111,809.6 100,765.8 June 180.8 177.5 172.2 114,751.1 100,605.6 July 192.6 192.8 187.2 124,763.9 109,265.2 August 171.4 183.4 178.2 1.18,831.0 103,788.9 September 136.9 161 .5 156.9 104,583.0 92,972.9 October 89.7 117,8 112.8 75,191.7 69,957.9 November 60.0 91.7 80-9 51866.2 52.150.3 December 46.9 74.2 58.0 38,542.8 37,987.2 Figure 80. Estimated annual production of the 699 kWDc solar arr(q on all viable rooftops Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 30 shows the step-by-step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. 9- Table 30. Point load calculation ste b tep procedure a. Number of PV modules in the array ft2 1914 b. Number of connections to the roof ft2 6612 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 9570 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 121347.6 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.4 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf; Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 31 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 31. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure g. Area of each PV module ft2 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft2 39983.46 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbUft2 3.03 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. •o 6.4.4.2. Design P1: Parking structure PV The employee parking spaces can be covered with carport PV as shown on Figure 81. The larger of the carport installations is tilted at 100 facing due—south while the other two installations are tilted at 0°, and oriented due—south. The shading from near—by admin buildings are considered as well. Figure 81. Parking structure PV potential near the administrative building 91 MR 15k 10k 6k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GHik POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/mt) (kWhlmz) (kWhlm2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 57.8 57.5 5,892.7 6,041.2 February 62.3 68.5 68.4 7,083.2 7,265.8 March 115.4 124.3 124.3 12,990.0 12,722.1 April 15 3.3 160.4 160.4 16, 879.0 15, 207.9 May 172.6 175.5 175.5 18,445.1 16,599.6 June 180.8 182.7 182.7 19,266.1 16,683.9 July 192.6 195.8 195.8 2.0,645.6 17,915.7 August 171.4 177.7 177.7 18,701.0 16,338.6 September 136.9 146.4 146.4 15,339.0 13,848.1 October 89.7 99.4 99.3 10,349.8 9,876.4 November 60.0 70.2 70.1 7,227.4 7,165.3 December 46.9 55.6 55.4 5,682.1 5,765.5 Figure 82. Estimated annual energy production from employee/guest parking lot PV design at the Wastewater treatment facility Table 32. Summary of parking lot PV design at the Wastewater treatment facility site Design 1- Rooftop PV Attribute Quantity Name -plate DC Capacity (kW) 111 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 304 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 30 kW) 3 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth=180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 0° to 10° from the horizontal plane 92 6.4.4.3. Design G1: Ground mount PV on the field north of the soccer fields The ground mount solar array design at the wastewater treatment facility is shown on Figure 83. The orange highlighted lines show 12—feet wide access roads on—site. The summary of the design is enumerated on Table 33. Table 33. Summary of Ground mount PV design at the Wastewater treatment facility site Design GI — Ground mount PV Attribute Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 1,040 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 2,836 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 82.8 kW) 11 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth= 180') Module Tilt (in degrees) 40° from the horizontal plane Figure 83. Wastewater treatment facility ground—mount PV design in the land area north of soccer fields with row spacing of 13.7 Feet. The total acreage occupied: Approximately 8 Acres 93 2D0k isk t00k SAtc J"r' c: -,r Apr May Jun Ad Aug Sep Od Nov Doc GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid Month (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 84.6 82.2 81,270.8 78,554,1 February 62.3 85.5 82.9 81,762.5 79,142.7 March 115.4 143.7 139.7 138,058.6 127,688.6 April 153.3 166.9 162.0 160, 057.3 139,893.0 May 172.6 164.7 159.0 156,129.5 138,225.0 June 180.8 166.1 160.3 157,576.2 135,114,2 July 192.6 181.9 175.8 172,964.6 147,522.5 August 171.4 178.6 173.1 170,686.5 144,184,2 September 136.9 164.2 159-6 157,674.3 135,452.8 October 89.7 124.9 121.6 120,512.5 108,062.1 November 60.0 102,0 995 98,661.5 92,039.7 December 46.9 83.6 81.1 80,304.3 76,955.9 Figure 84. Estimated annual production of the ground -mount PV design at the wastewater facility 6.5. Site 5: Streets Facility (3800 Napoleon Ln., Iowa City, IA 52240) The Streets facility location encompasses all the area between Gilbert Street in the East, Iowa River Corridor Trail in the West, McCollister Boulevard in the South, and the Napoleon Park Baseball fields in the North. The City administration is working with Neumann Monson Architects on phase I of their expansion projects at this location where there is a strong potential for building integrated PV (BiPV) incorporation as some of these projects are aiming for LEED certification. It has one animal shelter building (as shown in Figure 86), and two other buildings (as shown in Figure 87) on site area of 32 acres. Although the Animal shelter has considerable loads, the other two building have minimum electrical loads. Most of this location is not in the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix -B) except for the tree covered, western end corridor along the Iowa River. Some buildings have natural gas heating systems, and electric cooling systems with ventilation provided by mechanical units at the furnace. Most of 94 the buildings have their own local controls. There is an on—site fuel pumping station on the Southern end of the site as shown in Figure 88 and Figure 89 which has some rooftop solar PV potential. The rooftop of this station is also evaluated for rooftop PV. Figure 85. Streets facility aerial view Figure 86. Animal shelter that was reconstructed using FEMA funds after 2008 Iowa River Flood 95 Figure 87. Building 2 with minimum electrical loads 4e s Figure 88. Aerial view of the fuel pumping station 96 wry Figure 89. Fuel pumping station 6.5.1. Operational Schedules The Parks & Forestry facility operates almost all throughout the year except on public holidays and weekends. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 34. Table 34. Summary of Streets Facility operations No. of Operating Days in a year 252 days Operating hours M—F 6:30 AM to 3:30 PM a. Animal shelter operations b. Lift—pumping station operation Major Electrical Loads c. Administrative building operations d. Fuel—pump station operations 6.5.2. Site Energy and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 at Site 5 is shown on Figure 90. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 5561 kWh. An average monthly energy of 4214.8 kWh is consumed at the facility. The site is billed under Mid—American Energy's Rate GE— General Energy Service tariff. The site pays a median price for electricity at 7.83 cents/kWh. There are no demand charges associated with this location 97 as the loads are considerably small, and comparable to small commercial loads. The average demand during operational hours is expected to be 9 kW. The facility is expected to operate for an average of 202 hours every month at higher loads. The building operations are at a minimum during night times, and weekends which comprises approximately 545 hours. 6,000 5,000 4,000 t s c 3,000 a c LU 2,000 1,000 Monthly Energy and Demand Variation kWh (Energy) a kW (Demand) Linear (kWh (Energy)) Linear (kW (Demand)) 18 16 14 12 10 Y c m 8 v 0 6 4 2 0 ' 0 M M rn M q q q Ln Ln Ln LC LD tO z r` r` r` r` 14 C OD�! L = Q I.i L � it i UO L r- a V CP Q Z In Qdo O rj Q Z N Billing Date Figure 90. Electric Energy usage at Site 5: Streets Facility (S64073477 Meter) Figure 91. All—in delivered price of electricity in Cents/kWh for Streets Facility (564073477 Meter) 6.5.3« Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, parking lot structure, and ground—mount PV designs. 1. The west—side of the site near the animal—shelter building is covered with trees which can because of potential shading on the animal—shelter building roof. 2. Flood plain height needed to be verified which is a concern for any ground mount installations due the proximity to Iowa river. 3. The two red storage buildings, fuel station canopy, and the parking lot are far from the major loads at the animal—shelter building. 4. Neumann Monson Architects working on phase I of their expansion projects at this site can change the future landscape of the site. 5. On—site geothermal energy ground location should be avoided for ground—mount PV designs. 2 http://neumannmonson.com/ 6,5,4, Bluestem Explored and Proposed PV Designs 6.5.4.1. Designs R: Rooftop PV The rooftop design at this site is an aggregation of four different rooftop designs — R1, R2, R3 and R4 as shown in Figure 92. Each of these four design categories are further discussed in the following sub— sections. A summary of all the four rooftop designs are shown on Table 35. Figure 92. Rooftop PV design at Site 5 A. Design RI: Animal Shelter Building rooftop The Animal shelter rooftop has good roof pitch angle of approximately 35° and faces the South—east direction (at an Azimuth angle = 156°) as shown in Figure 92. This design can accommodate up to 29.6 kWDc. This is the only selected final design owing to the proximity to loads and higher production. 100 B. Design R2: Red Building I rooftop This is a storage building adjacent to the Animal shelter building as shown on Figure 92. The building has low pitched rooftops — one facing North-East direction and the other facing South-West direction. This rooftop can accommodate PV system of up to 66.8 kWDc. However, due to poor orientation of the roofs, the capacity factor is low. C. Design R3: Red Building 2 rooftop This is another storage building adjacent to the Animal shelter building as shown on Figure 92. It has similarly low-pitched rooftops in the same orientation as Red Building 1. This rooftop can accommodate PV system of up to 90.9 kWDc. However, due to poor orientation of the roofs, the capacity factor is low. D. Design R4: Fuel pump station canopy rooftop The fuel pump station canopy is located on the southern -most edge of the site boundaries as shown on Figure 92. It has good orientation, but the farther distance from the major loads at the Animal shelter is a concern. This rooftop can accommodate up to 48.2 kWDc PV system. Table 35. Summary of Designs Rl, R2, R3 and R4— Parking Structure PV at Mercer Park 101 Quantity Quantity Quantity Quantity Rooftop PV Attribute (Design Rl) (Design R2) (Design R3) (Design R4) Name—plate DC 29.6 66.8 90.9 48.2 Capacity (kW) No. of solar PV 81 183 249 132 modules (@ 365 W) Efficiency of the 18.82 18.82 18.82 18.82 module (%) No. of Inverters 1 2 3 1 (@ 43.2 kW) (@ 27.6 kW) 66° West of Due 66° West of Due Orientation 24° East of Due South or 66° South or 66° 10° West of Due (in degrees) South East of Due East of Due South North North Module Tilt 35° from the 10° from the 10° from the 0° from the (in degrees) horizontal plane horizontal plane horizontal plane horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.04 13.38 13.39 14.21 101 5k U 3k Y 2k 1k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GHI POA Shaded (Nameplate Grid (kWh/MZ) (kWhlmz) (kWhlm2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 76.1 72.2 2,028.5 1,948.1 February 62.3 80.4 79.0 2,215.0 2,152.5 March 115.4 137.0 136.5 3,841.8 3,570.1 April 153.3 165.9 165.8 4,672.3 4,044.8 May 172.6 169.3 169.3 4,751.3 4,123.4 June 180.8 170.5 170.5 4,785.5 3,980.1 July 192.6 186.6 186.6 5,245.1 4,339.0 August 171.4 179.1 179.1 5,040.1 4,121.3 September 136.9 160.9 160.6 4,526.1 3,783.9 October 89.7 119.8 118.8 3,351.0 2,965.3 November 60.0 93.8 91.2 2,569.2 2,380.5 December 46.9 75.9 71.8 2,020.8 1,916.6 Figure 93. Estimated annual production of the designed Animal Shelter rooftop solar array at the Streets Facility (Design RI) 102 12.5k 10k 7.5k 5k 2.5k 0 Jean Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Month GHI POA Shaded 6,845.0 (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/M2) January 49.3 50.5 50.1 February 62.3 62.9 62.3 March 115.4 116.3 115.0 April 153.3 15 3.2 151.0 May 172.6 172.0 168.8 June 180.8 180.1 177.4 July 192.6 191.9 188.7 August 171,4 171.3 168.7 September 136.9 137.4 135.3 October 89.7 90.3 89.4 November 60.0 61.0 60.4 December 46.9 47.8 47.5 Aug Sep Oct Nov Doc Nameplate Grid (kWh) (kWh) 3,054.7 3,020.3 3,870.5 3,836.3 7,214.2 6,845.0 9,545.4 8,399.6 10,677.9 9,312.3 11,234.2 9,343.2 11,971.4 9,932.2 10,674.3 8,840.3 81512.6 7,295.3 5,572.7 51089.1 3,708.5 3,527.9 2,896.8 2,836.9 Figure 94. Estimated annual production of the designed Red Building 1 rooftop solar array at the Streets Facility (Design R2) 103 15k 44 L -T- -T- Jan E 17t May Jun Jul Aute Sep O, t Nov Dec Month GH6 POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/mz) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 48.9 48.3 3,997.1 3,973.3 February 62.3 61.7 61.4 5,178.1 5,149.6 March 115.4 114.4 114.1 9,715.2 9,226.1 Apri 1 153.3 152.0 151.9 13,445.9 11,434.3 May 172.6 171.5 171.5 14,746.3 12,816.1 June 180.8 179.6 179.6 15,499.4 12,883.1 July 192.6 191.4 191.3 16,506.9 13,702.4 August 171.4 170.1 170.0 14,623.3 12,145.2 September 136.9 135.9 135.7 11,599.6 9,976.9 October 89.7 89.0 88.8 7,516.3 6,885.2 November 60.0 59.3 59.0 4,914.7 4,598.6 December 46.9 46.3 46.1 3,8153 3,755.3 Figure 95. Estimated annual production of the designed Red Building 2 rooftop solar array at the Streets Facility (Design R3) 104 10k 7.5k 3: 5k Y 2 5k D Jan Feb I.' it Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWhlm2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 49.2 49,2 2,144.5 2,192.4 February 62.3 62.1 62.1 2,763.7 2,846.1 March 115.4 115.3 115.3 5,195.2 5.193.9 April 153.3 153.2 153.2 6,971.6 6,569.3 May 172.6 172.5 172.5 7,858.1 7,316.6 June 180.8 180.8 180.8 8,267.5 7,422.9 July 192.6 192.6 192.6 8,803.6 7,879.5 August 171.4 171.3 171.3 7,802.5 6,961.8 September 136.9 136.8 136.8 6,191.2 5,663.9 October 89.7 89.6 89.6 4,016.0 3,846.3 November 60.0 59.8 59.8 2,632.0 2,602.6 December 46.9 46.7 46.7 2,040.0 2,064.2 Figure 96. Estimated annual production of the designed Fuel Station rooftop solar array at the Streets Facility (Design R4) Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step-by-step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. 105 Table 36. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 37. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure R1 R2 R3 R4 a. Number of PV modules in the array ft2 81 183 249 132 b. Number of connections to the roof ft' 280 632 860 456 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 55.4 56.4 57.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 405 915 1245 660 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 5135.4 11053.2 15288.6 8236.8 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.3 17.5 17.8 18.1 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf; Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 37. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure R1 R2 R3 R4 g. Area of each PV module ft2 20.89 20.89 20.89 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft' 1692.09 3822.87 5201.61 2757.48 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbf/ft' 3.03 2.89 2.94 2.99 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 6.5.4.2. Design PI & Design P2: Parking structure PV The parking structures at the Streets Facility are located towards the northwest edge of the site closer to the pump station building. The two designs are shown on Figure 97 and Figure 98. Their respective monthly generation tables are shown on Figure 99 and Figure 100. The design attributes of both the parking structure designs — P 1 and P2 are shown in Table 40. Table 38. Summary of Parking Structure PV design at the Streets facility site Figure 97. Parking Structure PV Design PI at Site 5: Streets Facility 107 Quantity Quantity Parking structure PV Attribute (Design PI) (Design P2) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 418 200.2 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 1,161 556 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 27.6, @82.8 kW) 13 2 Facing Southwest or Facing Southeast Orientation (in degrees) Northeast (Azimuth=67° and (Azimuth=157°) 247°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 10° from the horizontal plane 30° from the horizontal plane Figure 97. Parking Structure PV Design PI at Site 5: Streets Facility 107 Figure 98. Parking Structure PV Design P2 at Site 5: Streets Facility 108 80k 60k L 40k 20k i 0 Jan Fab Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Doc Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/M2) (kWhlm2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 49.4 49.0 18,653.0 18,449.9 February 62.3 62.0 61.8 23,967.7 23,721.8 March 115.4 115.0 114.8 44,988.0 42,693.3 April 153.3 152.4 152.2 60,164.2 52,877.3 May 172.6 171.7 171.6 67,903.7 59,127.6 June 180.8 179.8 179.7 71,374.2 59,445.2 July 192.6 191.5 191.5 76,014.1 63,237.9 August 171.4 170.5 170.4 67,415.7 56,093.8 September 136.9 136.4 136.2 53,570.0 46,165.4 October 89.7 89.4 89.2 34,758.9 31,842.5 November 60.0 59.8 59.5 22,820.2 21,777.5 December 46.9 46.8 46.5 17,709.2 17,349.4 Figure 99. Estimated annual production of the designed Parking lot structure PV solar array at the Streets Facility (Design PI) 109 40k 30k c -3: 201, x 10k 0 Jan Fob Mar Apr May Jun Jul 13,974.2 GH6 POA Shaded Month (kWh/Mz) (kWh/rn2) (kWhlmr) January 49.3 73.7 64.3 February 62.3 79.2 73.6 March 115,4 136.3 131.8 April 153.3 166.9 162.6 May 172.6 172.4 167.2 June 180.8 175.0 169.9 July 192.6 190.8 185.5 August 171.4 181.1 176.2 September 136.9 160.3 156.1 October 89.7 117.7 111.9 November 60.0 90.8 80.0 December 469 73.2 62.0 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Nameplate Grid (kWh) (kWh) 12,167.8 12,105.9 13,974.2 13,986.1 25,156.3 24,418.6 31,117,1 28,270.9 31,861.7 29,295.8 32,391.7 28,999.0 35,386.2 31,563.8 33,660.3 29,850.7 29,840.0 26,975.8 21,365.6 20,084.3 15,222.2 14,690.0 11,753.5 11,567.4 Figure 100. Estimated annual production of the designed Parking lot structure PV solar arr(q at the Streets Facility (Design P2) 6.5.4.3. Design GI: Ground mount PV on the field behind the pumping lift station A ground -mount installation is investigated at the Streets facility behind the pumping lift station. The design is as shown on Figure 101, and the associated production by the array is shown on Figure 102. The design attributes of ground mount array are shown in Table 39. 110 Table 39. Summary of Ground mount PV design at the Streets facility site Ground mount PV Attribute Quantity (Design Gl) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 47.2 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 131 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 14.4 kW) 3 Orientation (in degrees) Facing due South (Azimuth= 180') Module Tilt (in degrees) 30° from the horizontal plane Figure 101. Fixed Ground mount PV Design at Site 5 111 10k 7.511c. 6k 2.5ic a Jan Feb Mar Apr Play .lu. .1,111 Acaq Sen ort Nov Dec MonthGHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/rnz) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 78.3 66.2 2,976.8 2,906.1 February 62.3 82.3 78.1 3,502.7 3,432.3 March 115.4 141.5 137.7 6,193.8 5,836.3 April 153.3 169.5 165.5 7,456.3 6,590.5 May 172.6 172.4 167.4 7,514.4 6,738.7 June 180.8 175.7 170.8 7,680.4 6,694.8 July 192.6 191.2 186.1 8,369.9 7,270.9 August 171.4 183.3 178.6 8,041.5 6,940.8 September 136.9 163.1 159.0 7,159.8 6,297.4 October 89.7 120.2 116.4 5,244.8 4,817.0 November 60.0 94.7 86.4 3,894.8 3,699.6 December 46.9 76.9 62.0 2,790.1 2,686.8 Figure 102. Estimated annual production of the designed Ground -mount PV solar array at the Streets Facility (Design GI) 6.6. Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility (2275 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) The parks & forestry facility buildings encompass an area of 12,530 Sq. ft. on a 29 -acre City -owned land. The Western, North-western, and Northern ends of this site are in the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix -B). There are 2 buildings - main building (office space) and an additional building (storage space) - located at this site. Both the buildings have a standing seam tin metal roof structure with good tensile strength. The buildings are equipped with natural gas heating, and electric cooling while the ventilation is provided manually through mechanical means in garage, maintenance & storage area. Both the buildings have local control systems in place. The power to the 112 additional building is supplied from the main building that is interconnected to the grid. Besides the buildings this site also hosts soccer and baseball fields that received national certification of environmental practices for their energy efficient operations. Field lighting is being retrofit with LEDs and the soccer fields are also adding WiFi connectivity. Figure 103. Aerial View of Site 6 113 Figure 104. The Main Building view from Gilbert Street at Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility Figure 105. The additional building used as storage space 114 f Figure 106. Tin metal roof on the main building 6,6,1, Operational Schedules The Parks & Forestry facility operates almost all throughout the year except on public holidays. On weekdays the hours of operation are longer compared to weekends. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 40. Table 40. Summary of Parks and Forestry Property operations No. of Operating Days in a year 210 days 155 days Mon—Fri 6 AM to 6 PM; Operating Days hours All days, 6 AM to 11 PM Sat—Sun 6 AM to 3 PM Admin building operations — HVAC, lighting etc. Major Electrical Loads Storage/repair shop building operations 6.6.2, Site Energy and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 is shown on Figure 107. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 8,757 kWh. An average monthly energy of 5,487 kWh is consumed at the facility. 115 The site is billed under Mid—American Energy's Rate GE— General Energy Service tariff. The site pays a median price for electricity at 8.21 cents/kWh. During the summer months the price of energy is considerably more due to summer peaks experienced by MidAmerican Energy. There are no demand charges associated with this location as the loads are considerably small, and comparable to small commercial loads. The median demand during operational hours is expected to be 10 kW. The facility is expected to operate for an average of 348 hours every month. The building operations are at a minimum during night times which comprise approximately 399 hours on an average every month. Figure 107. Electric Energy usage at Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility (Meter # S64073926) 116 Monthly Energy and [remand variation 10,000 30.00 —r -kWh (Energy) -ter - kW (Dernand) Linear (kWh (Energy)) Linear (kW (Demand)) 4,000.................. .................. ... 25.00 $,000 7,000 20.00 � 6,000 ..................... c e- V 5,000 15.00-o c y, CU W 4,000 v 0 10.00 3,000 2,000 5.00 1,000 0 0.00 e } cA a Q. } y a' z° (n a a o X z° o Billing Crate Figure 107. Electric Energy usage at Site 6: Parks & Forestry Facility (Meter # S64073926) 116 Figure 108. All—in delivered price of electricity for Parks & Forestry Facility (Meter # S64073926) 6.6.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, parking lot structure, and ground—mount PV designs. 1. Building 2 — storage space building rooftop is completely shaded by the tree cover in south—west and west directions. 2. Both the buildings at this site has standing seam tin roofs which can get hot in summers. Proper air flow should be facilitated to ensure that there is no over—heating of the rooftop PV modules. 3. The main building roof has multiple keep outs such as vent pipes, ventilation fans etc. that needs to be considered during the design. 117 6,6A Bluestem Explored and Proposed PV Designs 6.6.4.1. Design RI & Design R2: Rooftop PV The rooftop PV design RI at the Parks & Forestry facility is as shown in Figure 109. The trees on the west of the facility prevent any rooftop PV opportunity on the storage/workshop building to the west of the main building. Table 41 summarizes the related design attributes of both the designs — RI and R2 at the Parks & Forestry Facility. The monthly kWh productions of these PV designs are shown on Figure 111 and Figure 112. Although, Design R2 has a smaller system size, it has a substantially higher capacity factor due to its south facing orientation. Table 41. Summary of Rooftop PV design at the Parks & Forestry facility site 118 Quantity Quantity Rooftop PV Attribute (Design R1) (Design R2) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 83.2 31.8 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 228 87 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 18.82 No. of Inverters (@25 kW, @27.6 kW) 3 1 Facing Northeast Facing due South Orientation (in degrees) (Azimuth=68.5°) or (Azimuth= 180') Southwest (Azimuth=248°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 5° from the horizontal plane 40° from the horizontal plane 118 Figure 109. Rooftop PV design RI at the Parks & Foreshy Facility 119 Figure 110. Rooftop PV design R2 at the Parks & Forestry Facility 120 15k 10k 5k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Month GHi (kWh/M2) January 493 February 62.3 March 115.4 April 153.3 May 172.6 June 180.8 July 192.6 August 171.4 September 136.9 October 89.7 November 60.0 December 46,9 POA (kWh/m2) 49.0 62.0 115.0 153.0 172.5 180.7 192.5 171.2 136.7 89.5 59.7 46.6 48.2 61.5 114.5 152.4 171.9 180.2 191.9 170.5 136.1 89.1 59.1 46.0 Jul Aug Sep Od Nov Dec xgay,;i„,1 Nameplate Grid (kWh) (kWh) 3,650.8 3,644.1 -74,742.2 4,737.5 8,925.0 8,522.2 11,990.1 10,554.8 13,537.0 11,807.5 14,243.7 11, 878.2 15,168.2 12,632.9 13,432.4 11,195.4 10,647.5 9,193.6 6,904.3 6,353.5 4,502.9 4,323.5 3,478.3 3,434.2 Figure HL Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design RI at the parks & forestry facility 121 6k ak L 2k 0 ,Ian Feb Mar A,r May Jun Jul Au., Oct NOV Dei Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kwh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 84.6 75.0 2,279.6 2,244.2 February 62.3 85.5 81.6 2,472.6 2,523.1 March 115.4 143.7 138.8 4,212.0 4,176.4 April 153.3 166.9 161.6 4,896.2 4,591,4 May 172.6 164.7 158.4 4,773.0 4,450.2 June 180.8 166.1 159.8 4,818.9 4,342.7 July 192.6 181.9 175.3 5,289.3 4,744,6 August 171.4 178.6 172.6 5,220.3 4,645.6 September 136.9 164.2 159.0 4,820.3 4,374.5 October 89.7 124.9 120.7 3,669.6 3,475.8 November 60.0 102.0 96.1 2,924.6 2,846.2 December 46.9 83.6 72.6 2,209.9 2,150.2 Figure 112. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design R2 at the parks & forestry facility Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. 122 Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. Table 42. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 43. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure Design R1 Design R2 a. Number of PV modules in the array ftz 228 87 b. Number of connections to the roof ft2 788 301 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 59.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 1140 435 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 14455.2 5602.8 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.3 18.6 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf; Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 43. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure 123 Design R1 Design R2 g. Area of each PV module ftz 20.89 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft2 4762.92 1817.43 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbUft2 3.03 3.08 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 123 6.6.4.2. Design P1: Parking structure PV The parking structure PV design P1 at the Parks & Forestry facility is as shown in Figure 113. The shading from main building to the South of the parking lot prevents expansion further. Table 44 summarizes the related design attributes of parking structure design at the Parks & Forestry Facility. The monthly kWh production of this PV design is shown on Figure 114. Table 44. Summary of Parking structure PV design at the Parks & Forestry facility site Parking structure PV Attribute Quantity (Design P1) Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 29.2 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 80 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 25 kW) 1 Orientation (in degrees) Facing due Southeast (Azimuth=159°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 10° from the horizontal plane Figure 113. Parking lot PV design at the Parks & Forestry Facility 124 5k 4k r 2k 0 .Pan Feb %lar Apr AABy Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov pea Month 'OHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWh/m2) (kWh/nn (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 493 58.9 58.2 1.576.8 1,610.5 February 62.3 69.5 69.3 1,891.0 1,943.0 March 115.4 125.5 12.5.4 3,450.9 3,433.8 April 153.3 161.8 161.8 4,481.4 4,192.3 May 172.6 176.3 176.3 4,878.1 - 4,522.0 June 180.8 182.9 182.9 5,076.4 4,544.6 July 192.6 196.5 196.5 5,453.1 4,865.9 August 171.4 178.9 178.5 4,956.1 4,403.7 September 136.9 148.3 148.3 4,094.6 3,727.4 October 89.7 101.6 101.5 2,787.8 2,659.8 November 60.0 72.1 71.8 1,954.7 1,931.9 December 46.9 57.1 56.6 1,531.9 1,548.0 Figure 114. Estimated annual production of the parking structure PV design at the parks & forestry facility 6.7. Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility (579 McCollister Blvd., Iowa City, IA 52240) The Terry Trueblood recreation area lodge facility encompasses an area of 5,870 Sq. ft. on a 207 -acre City -owned land which includes a lake. It has intermittent operations based on the scheduled event. Although it is near the sand lake, the site is situated outside the 100 -year and 500 -ye ar floodplains (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix -B) due to higher ground elevation. This building came into operation in 2013 and can accommodate up to 150 people. The lodge building has a central plant to provide for heating and cooling needs. This plant operates on natural gas heating, and electric cooling while the ventilation is 125 provided by mechanical fans at the building. The lodge building is equipped with automated building controls. Both the building and the parking lot as shown in Figure 116 are oriented at an average of 20° West of due South. Figure 115. The rooftop at Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility Figure 116. Aerial view of Site 7. Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility 126 6,7.1. Operational Schedules The Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge facility is open intermittently on event basis throughout the year. It can accommodate almost all through the year except on public holidays. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 45. Table 45. Summary of Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge operations No. of Operating Days in a year 180 to 250 days Intermittent, based on the scheduled event Operating hours 7 A.M to 12 A.M during event days a. Park Lodge Building Lighting Major Electrical Loads b. HVAC loads c. Kitchen Amenities 6.7.2, Site Energy and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 is shown on Figure 117. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 8,158 kWh. An average monthly energy of 4,451 kWh is consumed at the facility. The site is billed under Mid—American Energy's Rate GE— General Energy Service tariff. The site pays a median price for electricity at 9 cents/kWh. During the summer months the price of energy is considerably more due to summer peaks experienced by MidAmerican Energy. There are no demand charges associated with this location as the loads are considerably small, and comparable to small commercial loads. The average demand during operational hours is expected to be 19 kW. 127 Pigure 11 /. Liectrac Lnergy usage at sate /: 1 eriy 1 rueblood Kecreataon Area Lodge r agure 116. All—an delivered price of electricity for 1 eray 1 rueblood Kecreataon Area Lodge 128 6.7.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of a rooftop, and parking lot structure PV designs. 1. The facility is in proximity to a larger water body. The scope of flooding is a future concern although the ground is at a higher level and not in the 100—year or 500—year flood plains. So, any ground—mount PV installations should consider this issue. 2. The facility operations are intermittent based on a scheduled event. This may lead under usage of the designed PV system. Hence, optimization of PV system size should take into consideration all the available historic electric energy usage data. 6.7.4. Bluestem Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are two designs proposed at this site location — Rooftop PV and Parking lot structure PV. Both the designs are discussed in further detail in the following sections. 6.7.4.1. Design RI: Rooftop PV The Terry Trueblood Recreation Area lodge building roof is a low—pitched roof that can accommodate up to 79.9 kWDc PV system as shown on Figure 119. The annual generation of this system is shown on Figure 120. However, this size system will be underutilized due to the intermittent nature of the facility electric loads. Hence, after optimization, the recommended PV system size for this rooftop is 35.5 kWDc. Table 46. Site 7.• Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South—west facing low—pitched roof Design 1— Rooftop PV Attributes Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 79.9 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 219 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 17 kW) 4 Orientation (in degrees) 21° West of Due South (Azimuth = 201°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 12° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 14.60 129 Figure 119. Rooftop PV design at Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge 0 Jan Fe[) Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec; Figure 120. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge facility 130 GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid Month (kWh/ma} (kWhrm2) (kWh/m1) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 62.3 62.2 4,618.0 4,550.0 February 62.3 71.6 71.5 5,352.2 5,263.2 March 115,4 129.0 128,9 9,729.4 9,085.4 April 153.3 163.4 163.2 12,390.7 10,665.4 May 172.6 176.2 176.0 13,342.4 11,487.5 June 180.8 183.2 183.1 13,922.0 11,478.3 July 1916 196.6 196.5 14,939.3 12,286.7 August 171.4 180.3 180.1 13,672.4 11,199.0 September 136.9 150.3 150.2 11,357.8 9,618.5 October 89.7 103.3 103.2 1,772.3 7,013.7 November 60.0 75.0 74.9 5,592.7 5,290.1 December 46.9 59.8 59.9 4,440.2 4,325.1 Figure 120. Estimated annual production of the Rooftop PV Design at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge facility 130 Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub—sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. Table 47. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure a. Number of PV modules in the array ft2 219 b. Number of connections to the roof ft2 757 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 1095 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 13884.6 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.3 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf, Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 48. Distributed load calculation step—by—step procedure g. Area of each PV module ft2 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft2 4574.91 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbf/ft2 3.03 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 131 6.7.4.2. Design P1: Parking structure PV The parking structure PV design at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area is as shown on Figure 121. Although, the ample space available at this location allows for a geographic maximum PV project size of 198.2 kWDc, the facility electric loads demand only for a maximum of 35.5 kWDc. The five most closely South -facing arrays as encircled in green shown on Figure 121 should be chosen from among all the different arrays. Figure 121. Parking lot PV design at Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Jan Fet Mar .44)r May Jun Jul .4ug Sep Oct Nev Doc Month GHI POAShaded Nameplate Grid f$I%VhIm2) tklMh,•112) f*4vhlm2) (kWh) (kWh) J,u iudty 49.3 54.4 54.3 9,867.9 10,099.0 Feoruary 62.3 66.0 65.9 12,141.7 12,488.8 March 115.4 121.0 121.0 22,523.6 22,322.4 April 153.3 157.6 157.6 29,585.5 27,133.2 May 172.6 174.5 174,5 32,743.0 29,886.9 June 180.8 182.4 182.4 34,347.3 30,295.9 July 192.6 194.8 194.8 36,680.0 32,383.3 August 171.4 175.3 1753 32,926.9 29,208.2 September 136.9 142.5 142.5 26,607.5 24,242.0 October 89.7 95.2 95.1 17,638.0 16,853.3 November 60.0 65.9 65.8 12,032.6 11,899.7 December 46.9 51.9 51.9 9,419.2 9,539.3 Figure 122. Estimated annual production of the 198.2 kWDc solar array through viable carports 132 6.7.4.3. Alternate Design P1: Parking structure PV An alternate location for the parking structure PV has been identified with the help of City administration and investigated for its viability. The alternate location is shown on Figure 123. A solar simulation has been carried out at this location to yield monthly generation as shown in Figure 124. The interconnection point is approximately 200 feet farther away in this scenario compared to the original case discussed in the previous sub -section. Also, the orientation of the PV modules is slightly less desirable compared to the previous layout. However, if this layout has better return on visibility, the City administration should pursue this alternate design. Figure 123. Alternate location for Parking Structure PV at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area 133 8k 6k 4k 2k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JW Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GNI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid ( MWmz) (kWh/M2) (kWh/M2) (kWh) (kWh) ,January 49.3 54.9 54.9 1,838.6 1,885.0 February 62.3 66.4 66.4 2,253.3 2,319.4 March 115.4 121.6 121.6 4,171.3 4,146.4 April 153.3 158.2 158.2 5,471.1 5,095.9 May 172.6 174.8 174.8 6,043.1 5,573.3 June 180.8 182.6 182.6 6,334.4 5,648.2 July 192.6 195.1 195.1 6,768.3 6,020.3 August 171.4 175.8 175.8 6,084.4 5,397.3 September 136.9 143.2 143.2 4,928.6 4,486.6 October 89.7 95.9 95.9 3,276.3 3,130.4 November 60.0 66.6 66.6 2,244.0 2,222.0 December 46.9 52.5 52.5 1,757.9 1,783.7 Figure 124. Estimated annual production of the 36.5 kWnc solar carports at the alternate parking lot 6.8. Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center Facility (220 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) Site 8 is the location with Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center which is a 44,000 Sq. ft. facility on a City -owned land. It was built in the year 1964. As per the City administration's master plan for future expansion, there are some additional expansion proposals at this location that are being considered on the east end of the facility. The south branch of the Ralston creek runs along the eastern edge of the site and, thus, this location is in the 100 -year and 500 -year floodplain (Refer to FEMA maps on Appendix -B). This facility has a central plant to serve its heating and cooling needs. The central plant uses natural gas heating system, and electric cooling system while the ventilation is provided by rooftop air handling units. 134 Figure 125. Front Entrance view and Aerial view of the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 641. Operational Schedules The Robert A. Lee community recreation center facility operates almost all through the year except on public holidays. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 49. Table 49. Summary of Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center operations No. of Operating Days in a year 345-350 days Mon—Fri, 6:15 AM to 9 PM Operating Days hours [,x51 CuN1!` � �Lf C � a..-..-��•�.�'� ' Figure 125. Front Entrance view and Aerial view of the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 641. Operational Schedules The Robert A. Lee community recreation center facility operates almost all through the year except on public holidays. The typical operational information of the facility is shown on Table 49. Table 49. Summary of Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center operations No. of Operating Days in a year 345-350 days Mon—Fri, 6:15 AM to 9 PM Operating Days hours Saturday, 6:15 AM to 8 PM Sunday, 11 AM to 8 PM 135 a. Recreation Center Lighting Major Electrical Loads b. HVAC systems c. Pool—water filtration system d. Fitness equipment 6.8.2. Site Energy and Monthly Demand The monthly energy consumption from February 2013 through January 2018 is shown on Figure 126. The maximum monthly energy consumed during this period is 78,480 kWh. An average monthly energy of 45,114 kWh is consumed at the facility. The site is billed under Mid—American Energy's Rate GE— General Energy Service tariff. The site pays a median price for electricity at 6.02 cents/kWh. During the summer months the price of energy is considerably more due to summer peaks experienced by MidAmerican Energy. There are no demand charges associated with this location although the loads are comparable to large commercial loads. The median demand during operational months is expected to be 101 kW. Figure 126. Electric Energy usage at Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 136 Figure 12 7. All—in delivered price of electricity for Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 6.8.3. Site Constraints and Infrastructure Issues It is noticed that this site experienced the following constraints and infrastructure issues for the implementation of rooftop and/or parking lot structure PV designs. 1. Displacement of six fully grown trees in the parking lot. Potential displacement of the eastern tree cover will be needed as well. 2. Avoid the HVAC equipment and other keep outs on the rooftops. 6.8.4. Bluestem Explored and Proposed PV Designs There are two designs proposed at this site location — Rooftop PV and Parking lot PV. 6.8.4.1. Design Rl: Rooftop PV The Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center building roof is a flat roof that can accommodate up to 147.5 kWDc PV system as shown on Figure 128. The annual generation profile of this system is shown on Figure 129. After the PV size optimization exercise, it is recommended that a system size be reduced to 123.4 kWDc, which when added with carport PV design will equal to the site optimum of 338 kWDc. 137 Table 50. Site 7: Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South facing flat roof Design 1— Rooftop PV Attributes Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 147.5 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 404 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 No. of Inverters (@ 27.6 kW) 5 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth = 180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 30° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.95 14 " '`. 40 40 AOL Figure 128. Design 1: Rooftop PV in Helioscope software at Robert A. Lee Community Rec. Center 138 30k 20k L 101% U Jan Feb filar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month GNI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWhlm2) (kWhlm2) (kWhIm2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 78.3 72.8 10,217.5 10,287.3 February 62.3 82.3 789 11,057.8 11,098.5 March 115.4 141.5 137.1 19,277.0 18,557.4 April 153.3 169.5 164.8 23,218.6 20,899.3 May 172.6 172.4 166.6 23,378.4 21,321.4 June 180.8 175.7 170.1 23,912.4 21,164.1 July 192.6 191.2 185.3 26,058.1 23,004.6 August 171.4 183.3 177.9 25,036.1 21,985.1 September 1369 163.1 158.3 22,281.9 19,918,3 October 89.7 120.2 116.4 16,392.5 15,333.1 November 60.0 94.7 90.4 12,720.3 12,432.6 December 46.9 76.9 71.4 10,030.9 10,018.8 Figure 129. Estimated annual production of the designed solar array on the building rooftop at site 8 Solar Array Weight and Loading Calculation During the project design and construction phase, a structural engineer will need to review the roof condition to ensure that there is no existing roof damage. However, the point load and distributed load calculations are the solar industry practice to evaluate. The following sub -sections will discuss these two calculations in detail. Point Load Calculation Point loads are acting on the individual roof connection points. The whole PV system weight is bore by these roof connections. The major contributors to the system weight on a roof are PV modules and the mounting system. Table 13 shows the step-by-step procedure to be followed in calculating the point load. 139 Table 51. Point load calculation step—by—step procedure a. Number of PV modules in the array ft' 404 b. Number of connections to the roof ft' 1396 c. Weight of each PV module lbf 58.4 d. Weight of the mounting system lbf 2020 e. Total PV system weight = [(a X c) + d] lbf 25613.6 f. Weight at each connection = [e - b] lbf 18.3 Note: Weight at each connection < 451bf; Combined point loads not to exceed 200 lbs. at any one member Distributed Load Calculation Distributed loads are acting on the whole surface of the roof that is covered by the PV modules. Table 14 shows the step—by—step procedure to be followed in calculating the distributed load. Table 52. Distributed load calculation step-by—step procedure g. Area of each PV module ft' 20.89 h. Total PV array area [h = a X g] ft' 8439.56 i. Distributed load [i = e - h] lbf/ft'` 3.03 Note: Max. allowable distributed load is 5 lbf per sq. ft. 6.8.4.2. Design P1: Parking structure PV The Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center parking lot can accommodate carport structures of standard louvered style as shown on Figure 130. It can accommodate up to 214.6 kWDc PV system as shown on Figure 131. The annual generation profile of this PV system is shown on Figure 132. Table 53. Site 7.• Summary of Rooftop Design RI: South facing flat roof Design 1— Rooftop PV Attributes Quantity Name—plate DC Capacity (kW) 214.6 No. of solar PV modules (@ 365 W) 588 Efficiency of the module (%) 18.82 140 No. of Inverters (@ 27.6 kW) 7 Orientation (in degrees) Due South (Azimuth = 180°) Module Tilt (in degrees) 10° from the horizontal plane Capacity Factor (%) 15.95 Figure 130. Standard louvered double style carport PV design [34 that's replicated in the parking space 141 7�. , W , ,1 r L r Figure 131. Design PI: Carport PV design at Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center at 10° -tilt facing due South (Azimuth=180°) 40k 30k L s 20k 10k U Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Dd Nov Dec Month GHI POA Shaded Nameplate Grid (kWhlm2) (kWh/m2) (kWh/m2) (kWh) (kWh) January 49.3 60.3 57.5 11,506.7 11,724.0 February 62.3 70.4 68.3 13,771.3 14,085.3 March 115.4 127.0 124.7 25,325.7 24,818.5 April 153.3 162.6 160.1 32,721.7 29,688.2 May 172.6 176.4 173.9 35,481.9 32,212.5 June 180.8 183.3 181.1 37,061.7 32,502.5 July 192.6 196.7 1943 39,764.9 34,868.8 August 171.4 179.6 177.1 36,188.1 31,850.4 September 136.9 149.2 146.6 29,852.3 26,996.4 October 89.7 1023 100.2 20300.8 19310.7 November 60.0 73.3 71.0 14.262.1 14,056.8 December 46.9 58.2 55.5 11,115.1 11,211.8 Figure 132. Estimated annual production of the designed carport solar array structure at Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 142 7. PROJECT COST ANALYSIS Chapter 7 gives insights into the construction costs involved with various types of PV designs. This chapter discusses the engineering, procurement and construction costs of a PV system. Commercial—scale carport PV system, commercial—scale rooftop PV system, utility—scale ground—mount PV system, residential—scale rooftop PV system are the four categories of PV systems that are discussed in this chapter. A detailed breakdown of the involved costs for each system category are discussed in the following subsections. 7.1. Commercial—Scale Carport PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale carport installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 54. Table 54. EPC costs for a commercial scale carport PV installation Assumptions and Clarifications A building permit allowance has been included in the pricing. An allowance for civil and electrical design has been included in the pricing. SCADA system is not included. Utility interconnect upgrades are not included. Spare parts are not included in the pricing provided. See below spare parts break out $/ea. PV System Size is 406 kWnc with 1.02 DC—to—AC ratio Item Description Product Lnformation Quantity Itemized Cost ($) Comments Solar PV Modules 345 W 1176 $291,295 Supply/Install Transportation/Delivery 1 LS NA $14,888 NA Mounting Hardware Carport NA $293,841 Supply/Install Installation Labor Boyd Jones Construction NA Inverters 100 kW 4 $20,725 Supply/Install (optimizers not included) Site Survey & Preparation Permit/Design NA $2,206 NA 143 Balance of Facility / Electrical Collection System AC/DC Electrical and components NA $130,677 NA Maintenance Building NA NA NA NA Access Roads NA NA NA NA Spare Parts 1/EA 1/EA PV Panel — $240 — $250/EA Pricing will vary upon quantity Inverter — $5181/EA Commissioning 1 LS NA $506 NA Substation NA NA NA NA Transformer NA NA NA NA Metering NA NA NA NA Utility System Improvements NA NA NA NA TOTAL COST 51.857/ Watt DC $ 754,138 7.2. Commercial—Scale Rooftop PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale rooftop installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 55. Table 55. EPC costs for a commercial scale Rooftop PV installation Assumptions and Clarifications A building permit allowance has been included in the pricing. Roof upgrade cost has not been included in the pricing An allowance for electrical and structural design has been included in the pricing. SCADA system is not included. Utility interconnect upgrades are not included. Spare parts are not included in the pricing provided. See below spare parts break out $/ea. PV System Size is 406 kWnc with 1.02 DC—to—AC ratio 144 7.3. Utility—Scale Ground—Mount PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale carport installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 56. 145 Product Itemized Item Description Quantity Comments Lnformation Cost ($) Solar PV Modules 345 W 1176 $291,295 Supply/Install Transportation/Delivery 1 LS NA $14,888 NA Fixed Roof Mounting Hardware NA $219,703 Supply/Install Mount Boyd Jones Installation Labor Construction Supply/Install Inverters 100 kW 4 $20,725 (optimizers not included) Site Survey & Preparation NA NA $0 NA Balance of Facility / AC/DC Electrical NA $130,677 NA Electrical Collection System and components Maintenance Building NA NA NA NA Access Roads NA NA NA NA PV Panel — $240 — Pricing will vary Spare Parts 1/EA 1/EA $250/EA upon quantity Inverter — $5181/EA Commissioning 1 LS NA $521 NA Substation NA NA NA NA Transformer NA NA NA NA Metering NA NA NA NA Utility System Improvements NA NA NA NA TOTAL COST 51.674/ Watt DC S680,000 7.3. Utility—Scale Ground—Mount PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale carport installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 56. 145 Table 56. EPC costs for a utility scale ground—mount PV installation Assumptions and Clarifications A building permit allowance has been included in the pricing. An allowance for civil and electrical design has been included in the pricing. Scada system is included. An allowance for FAA permits or fees is included in the pricing. Spare parts are not included in the pricing provided. See below spare parts break out $/ea. Utility interconnect upgrades are not included. PV System Size is 9,989 kWnc with 1.25 DC—to—AC ratio Product Item Description Quantity Itemized Cost ($) Comments Information Solar PV Modules 345 W 28,954 $6,099,999 Supply/Install Transportation/Delivery 1 LS NA $139,868 NA Mounting Hardware GFT 1 LS $1,439,423 Supply/Install Boyd Jones Installation Labor Construction Supply/Install Inverters 125 kW 64 $597,766 (optimizers not included) Includes design, Site Survey & Site Survey, permit, 1 LS $113,642 permitting, and Preparation design site surveying Balance of Facility / Electrical Collection 1 LS 1 LS $1,572,899 Balance of facility System Control building Maintenance Building Control Building 1 $20,318 w/ concrete pad Access Roads NA NA $130,287 NA PV Panel — $200 — Pricing will vary Spare Parts 1/EA 1/EA $210/EA upon quantity 146 7.4. Residential—Scale Rooftop PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale carport installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 57. Table 57. EPC costs for a residential—scale ground—mount PV installation Assumptions and Clarifications A building permit allowance has been included in the pricing. An allowance for electrical and structural design has been included in the pricing. Inverter — Utility interconnect upgrades are not included. Spare parts are not included in the pricing provided. See below spare parts break out $/ea. PV System Size is 10.8 kWnc with 1.08 DC—to—AC ratio Item Description $8,872/EA Quantity Commissioning 1 LS NA $5,017 NA Substation Recloser 1 $34,967 NA Transformer 2600 kW 4 $139,868 NA $4,794 Supply/Install Installation Labor Boyd Jones Construction Not included at Metering NA NA NA this time. Utility System NA NA NA NA Improvements TOTAL COST $1.031/ Watt DC $ 10,294,054 7.4. Residential—Scale Rooftop PV Project Cost A typical commercial—scale carport installation will involve the following costs that are described on Table 57. Table 57. EPC costs for a residential—scale ground—mount PV installation Assumptions and Clarifications A building permit allowance has been included in the pricing. An allowance for electrical and structural design has been included in the pricing. SCADA system is not included. Utility interconnect upgrades are not included. Spare parts are not included in the pricing provided. See below spare parts break out $/ea. PV System Size is 10.8 kWnc with 1.08 DC—to—AC ratio Item Description Product Lnformation Quantity Itemized Cost ($) Comments Solar PV Modules 345 W 33 $8,876 Supply/Install Transportation/Delivery 1 LS NA $396 NA Mounting Hardware Fixed Roof Mount NA $4,794 Supply/Install Installation Labor Boyd Jones Construction 147 Inverters 10 kW 4 $2,337 Supply/Install (optimizers not included) Site Survey & Preparation NA NA $0 NA Balance of Facility / Electrical Collection System AC/DC Electrical and components NA $15,435 NA Maintenance Building NA NA NA NA Access Roads NA NA NA NA Spare Parts 1/EA 1/EA PV Panel — $240 — $250/EA Pricing will vary upon quantity Inverter — $2,337/EA Commissioning 1 LS NA $521 NA Substation NA NA NA NA Transformer NA NA NA NA Metering NA NA NA NA Utility System Improvements NA NA NA NA TOTAL COST $2.996/ Watt DC $ 32,359 7.5. Payback Period Evaluation Based on the aforementioned project costs, the payback period for each design strategy is calculated. The following Table 58 enumerates the different design options, the associated capital costs, and realistic payback periods. A compound interest rate (i) of 5% and an energy price inflation rate (e) of 3% is used in this calculation for a period of 20 years. The federal tax incentive of 30%, and the state tax incentive of 15% (up to a maximum of $20,000) are not considered in these payback calculations as the City of Iowa City is a tax—exempt local government body. In a public—private partnership scenario, the payback periods will be lower where the effective project cost will be reduced because of leveraging the tax incentives. Simple Payback = PV system Capital cost PV Savings Compound Payback = PV system Capital cost x (1 + i)N PV Savings x (1 + e)N 148 Table 58. Payback periods for the different PV system designs at all the eight sites Site 1—Pool House (R1= Rooftop design) Site 2 —Mercer Park (R1= Gymnasium Building Rooftop design, P 1= Parking lot design 1, P2= Parking lot design 2, G1= Ground—mount design, M1= Pickleball court design) Site 3 — Iowa City Airport (R1=Main building Rooftop design, R2= North Buildings Rooftop design, R3= South Buildings Rooftop design, P 1= Parking lot design, G1= Ground—mount design on Non—Aviation purpose use land) Site 4 — South Wastewater Treatment Plant (R1= Rooftop design, P1= Parking lot design, G1= Ground—mount design) Site 5 — Streets Facility (R1= Animal Shelter Building Rooftop design, R2= Red Building 1 Rooftop design, R3= Red Building 2 Rooftop design, R4= Gas Station Rooftop design, P 1= Parking lot design 1, P2= Parking lot design 2, G1= Ground—mount design) Site 6 — Parks & Forestry Facility (R1= Main Building Rooftop design 1, R2= Main Building Rooftop design 2, P1= Parking lot design) Site 7 — Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility (R 1= Lodge Building Rooftop design, P1= Parking lot design) Site 8 — Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center (R1= Rec. Center Building Rooftop design, P1= Parking lot design) PV Project Location Site 1 Site 2 Site 2 Site 2 Site 2 (RI) (Rl) (Pi) (P2) (Gl) PV System DC Rating (kW) 8 177.4 449.7 551.9 39.4 Capacity Factor (%) 15.46 16.07 15.18 15.83 15.44 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 21,573 281,850 750,163 881,637 67,931 PV System Annual Savings (in $) 1,004 12,137 29,184 37,368 2,580 Simple Payback Period (years) 21.5 23.2 25.7 23.6 26.3 Capital Cost compounded 57,240 747,833 1,990,406 2,339,245 180,241 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period 31.6 34.1 37.8 34.7 38.7 (years) 149 PV Project Location Site 2 Site 3 Site 3 Site 3 Site 3 (Ml) (RI) (R2) (R3) (Pl) PV System DC Rating (kV) 17.5 11 60 50 47 Capacity Factor (%) 14.48 13.69 13.46 13.09 14.01 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 39,562 32,360 88,696 69,106 74,450 PV System Annual Savings (in $) 1,094 986 5,056 4,205 4,237 Simple Payback Period (years) 36.1 32.8 17.5 16.4 17.6 Capital Cost compounded 104,970 85,861 235,336 183,358 197,537 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period 53.1 48.2 25.8 24.1 25.8 (years) PV Project Location Site 3 Site 4 Site 4 Site 4 Site 5 (Gl) (Rl) (Pl) (Gl) (RI) PV System DC Rating (kV) 9070 698.9 111 1040 29.6 Capacity Factor (%) 15.94 15.36 14.96 15.40 15.17 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 9,413,782 965,959 170,110 1,174,105 49,794 PV System Annual Savings (in $) N/A 36,279 8,238 50,842 2,290 Simple Payback Period (years) N/A 26.6 20.6 23.1 21.8 Capital Cost compounded 24,977,567 2,562,978 451,352 3,115,251 132,119 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period N/A 39.1 30.3 33.9 31.9 (years) 150 PV Project Location Site 5 Site 5 Site 5 Site 5 Site 5 (R2) (R3) (R4) (PI) (P2) PV System DC Rating (kV) 36 36 33 36 36 Capacity Factor (%) 13.38 13.39 14.34 13.46 15.5 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 53,554 55,636 56,100 58,500 56,083 PV System Annual Savings (in $) 2,462 2,464 2,428 2,447 2,490 Simple Payback Period (years) 21.8 22.6 23.1 23.9 22.5 Capital Cost compounded 142,094 147,620 148,850 155,218 148,804 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period 31.9 33.1 33.9 35.1 33.1 (years) PV Project Location Site 5 Site 6 Site 6 Site 6 Site 7 (Gl) (Rl) (R2) (Pl) (Rl) PV System DC Rating (kV) 31.5 40.1 31.8 29.2 35 Capacity Factor (%) 15.46 13.48 16.13 15.40 14.61 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 49,128 68,153 49,774 49,915 50,424 PV System Annual Savings (in $) 2,485 2,408 2,091 1,872 4,390 Simple Payback Period (years) 19.8 22.65 19 21.3 11.5 Capital Cost compounded 130,352 180,831 132,065 132,438 133,789 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period 29 33.27 28 31.3 16.9 (years) 151 PV Project Location Site 7 Site 8 Site 8 (PI) (Rl) (Pl) PV System DC Rating (kV) 35 147.5 214.6 Capacity Factor (%) 14.76 15.94 15.07 PV System Capital Cost (in $) 54,979 234,346 425,333 PV System Annual Savings (in $) 4,528 13,259 28,833 Simple Payback Period (years) 12.1 17.7 14.8 Capital Cost compounded 145,876 621,789 1,128,536 over 20 years (in $) Compounded Payback Period 17.8 26.0 21.7 (years) 152 8. INNOVATIVE FINANCING OPTIONS Chapter 8 is a discussion on the various ownership structures that the City can consider. The following are some of the commonly used financing options that are currently in place at most solar projects throughout the country. 8.1. Power Purchase Agreement This is a financial structure in which there is a long—term agreement called a `power purchase agreement' between the developer and the power off—taker (City of Iowa City). A typical duration is between 15 to 25 years. As a part of the agreement, the developer undergoes a design and development phase, secures permits, finances, and installs the power project. In most cases, the developer also owns, operates and maintains the project while selling the generated power to the off—taker at a price ($/kWh) increasing at a fixed rate. Solar PPA prices vary anywhere between 9-12 0/kWh for commercial projects (<500 kW) and will reduce further as the size increases in case of utility scale projects (>1 MW). A lot of power purchase agreements also avail for an option to buy the PV system at the end of 15—year cycle of the PPA. This is usually a preferable financial structure for non—profit organizations (such as municipalities, electric cooperatives, public power districts, school districts etc.) because it can take advantage of federal and state tax credits that are not otherwise available to non—profits. Another major advantage of this model is that there is no upfront capital cost for the off—taker, and there are no operation and maintenance costs as well. 8.2. Lease Agreement This is a financial structure in which the developer leases a solar PV system to the off—taker (City of Iowa City) for a fixed monthly payment which may vary at a constant rate annually. The system's monthly power generation is guaranteed by the developer within a minimum and maximum range based on the technical analysis. 8.3. Own and Operate This is a financial structure in which the energy user chooses to own and operate a PV system. This structure is not recommended for the City of Iowa City as the administration will not be able to take advantage of the tax incentives owing to fact of being a non—profit, non—taxable entity. In the case of Iowa City Airport, several federal grant assurances that relate to non—aeronautical uses of the airport are available. The most applicable one in this scenario is that any non—aeronautical use of the airport should provide the airport with fair market value for that use. 153 8.4. Community Solar There are various municipalities and electric cooperatives around the nation that are showing interest in pursuing the community solar financial structure. Table 59. Some Existing Community Solar Projects and their Financial Structures Program Name Subscription Method &Cost Subscriber Compensation Solar SystemProject Ownership Structures Size Notes Due to immediate bill savings and no $.146/kWh system size paid by utility Developer— cap, MN's "Xcel" to owned with a statewide customers $.133/kWh PPA to Xcel. program is the lease payment meaning Customers do 100 MW most popular Minnesota immediate bill to 3rd—party not own their statewide, in the country. Community savings (10% developer. No shares (leased) 400 MW in The program Solar [33] in year 1). As upfront and are the queue. was created Xcel's rates payment. credited for out of state increase, bill generation by legislation, but savings Xcel. the attributes increase of MN's further. program can be applied elsewhere. $180 per panel City utility Customers paid by owned in who purchase Fremont, NE subscribers event of 1.55 MW panels can $.0544/kWh ("Community upfront and/or "block (expanding receive the bill credit Solar") [34] "block" purchase", or to 5 MW) 30% purchases of customer investment tax 150 kWh's per owned in credit (ITC). 154 155 month for event of panel Those savings $.06/kWh (one purchase. along with cent higher than locked—in and current city competitive rates). The compensation panel purchase rates has option includes customers a $.0277/kWh seeing a maintenance roughly 7 year fee. payback. The "block purchase" option means customers pay a small premium, but benefit from long term locked—in rates. Currently 54% subscribed. $.06/kWh bill Project will credit begin $350 per (amounts to construction at Ames, IA "Power Pack." $1-2 each Developer— 80%. Power ("SunSmart Can be broken month per owned with a 2 MW Packs can be Ames") [35] into 12 Power Pack). PPA to city. donated, sold payments. Not likely to to someone pay back over else or back to 20 years. the utility. One Power Pack produces 155 156 2.5% of an average family's electricity needs. Monthly production credit tied to utility rates, Assignable to $898 per panel providing a Western Iowa other and $450 for a rate hedge. If Power individuals half panel. Can rates go up, Cooperative Utility owned 750 kW within be paid in 12 or solar credits go ("Community WIl'CO's 24—month up. Credited at Solar") [36] service increments. a flat rate that territory. is comparable to standard residential kWh rate. $.12 Owned by Jo— credit/kWh, Carroll Jo—Carroll averaging to affiliate "Four Energy, $757 per panel $48-50 per Designed to County Elizabeth, IL (275 watts), panel per year. provide Renewable 100 kW ("South View paid entirely Leads to a payback in 20 Energy LLC" Solar Farm") upfront. break—even years. and sold to Jo— [37] payback over Carroll via the life of the PPA. project. 156 9. ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Chapter 9 features discussion on the environmental impact of solar PV systems. According to the World Bank Group data, 46% of the CO2 emissions in the United States are due to electricity and heat production. Electric generation alone results in 28% of the CO2 emissions. 11 -of -the -28 percentage points are due to residential, commercial and public buildings [38]. Any improvement to building energy usage will create a great environmental impact. Distributed energy generation through photovoltaics is a step in that direction. Whether it is residential, commercial, or utility scale PV installation, they all contribute towards mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions by directly replacing the electrical energy generated from conventional fossil fuels. 9.1. Environmental Benefits of Solar Energy All nations of the world depend on fossil fuels for their energy needs. However, the obligation to reduce CO2 and other gaseous emissions is the reason behind which countries turn to non—polluting renewable energy sources. By using solar energy, considerable amounts of greenhouse gas emissions are avoided. In the case of a solar domestic water heating system, the savings, compared to a conventional system, are about 80% with electricity or Diesel backup and is about 75% with both electricity and Diesel backup. In the case of space heating and hot water system, the saving is about 40%. It should be noted, however, that in the latter, much greater quantities of gaseous pollutants are avoided. With respect to life cycle assessment of the PV systems, the energy spent for manufacture and installation of the solar systems is recouped in about 1.2 years, whereas the payback time with respect to emissions produced from the embodied energy required for the manufacture and installation of the systems varies from a few months to 9.5 years according to the fuel and the pollutant considered. Moreover, due to the higher solar contribution, solar water heating systems have much shorter payback times than solar space heating systems. It can, therefore, be concluded that solar energy systems offer significant protection to the environment and should be employed whenever possible to achieve a sustainable future. In a case study conducted by Black & Veatch, they looked at a comparison and the effects that solar power had on local fossil fuel energy power generation facilities in Southern California. They found that a key benefit of the use of CSP (concentrated solar technology) plants in California is the potential to reduce the number of criteria and greenhouse gas emissions. The installation of CSP reduces air emissions if generating power from CSP plants offsets generation from fossil fueled plants. For this calculation of emissions reductions, it was assumed that the CSP plants will displace generation by combined cycle plants with an average heat rate of 7,000 Btu/kWh. Typical permitted emissions requirements for a new plant in southern California were obtained from the California Air Resources Board and are shown in Table 60. 157 Based on these emission rates, the figure also shows the amount of emissions displaced by annual generation from a single 100 MW trough plant with six hours of storage, as well as for the low deployment and high deployment scenarios of 2,100 MW and 4,000 MW of CSP generation capacities, respectively. The estimates in Table 60 are conservative because of the assumption that CSP would displace emissions from new plants. CSP plants could offset generation from older thermal natural gas or oil fueled generation with average heat rates equal to or exceeding 10,000 Btu per kWh, which would increase the emissions offset by about 30 percent. Furthermore, the older plants are unlikely to have modern air emissions control technology that would be required on new plants. Thus, the increase in emissions offset by assuming displacement of older generation would likely exceed 30% [39]. Table 60. Amount of emissions displaced by annual generation from a single 100 MW trough plant with six hours of storage from a case study conducted by Black & Veatch [391. Emission Reduction by CSP Plants Proxy Fossil Plant Emissions Rate CSP Plant Capacity Parts per 100 MW 2,100 MW 4,000 MW Pollutant lb/MMBtu million (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) NO, 0.006 2 7.4 156 297 CO 0.004 4 4.5 95 181 V OC 0.002 1.4 2.6 54 103 CO2 154 191,000 4,000,000 7,600,000 Notes: 1. Proxy Fossil Plant assumed to be a combined cycle combustion turbine with a heat rate of 7,000 Btu/kWh. 2. CSP plants assumed to operate at 40 percent capacity factor. 158 According to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), solar energy technologies are reducing more than 70 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions in the United States every year [40]. 9.2. Summary of Environmental Benefits of Solar Energy 9.2.1. Reduction of air pollution Harmful unburnt hydrocarbons, Carbon dioxide, Sulphur dioxide, and nitrous oxide emissions from fossil fuels, our traditional primary energy sources, are the leading contributors to global warming and degraded air quality. On the other hand, generating electricity with solar photovoltaics produces no greenhouse gases whatsoever. In fact, the solar capacity currently installed across the United States is expected to offset as much as 16.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually [41]. 9.2.2. Reduction of water pollution While all thereto—electric power production processes require large amounts of water, solar photovoltaic cells don't need water to generate electricity. This is one of the biggest, yet least talked about environmental benefits of solar PV. With solar energy generation, there is no pollution of local water resources, nor does their operation strain local water reserves unlike other human activities such as irrigation, industrial processes etc. [41]. This is especially an important consideration in the and regions of the world where water conservation is even more vital. 9,2,3, Reduces the need for finite resources The sun is the world's most abundant energy resource producing an enormous amount of power which is approximately equal to 173,000 terawatts. That's more than 10,000 times the world's total combined energy use. Moreover, solar energy is renewable. In contrast, fossil fuels are non—renewable and while they may seem in abundance today, there will come a time when the world will run out of these resources. Or, the cost of finding and extracting these resources will become too expensive [41]. 159 10. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND MARKETING Chapter 10 enumerates various public education and marketing aspects to be considered regarding the solar PV projects. The City of Iowa City envisions this solar PV project as an opportunity for education about solar power at Iowa City. This opportunity is exponentially larger than previously thought. This chapter explores the various public education and marketing ideas to increase awareness on this green technology. Iowa City is the fifth most populated city in Iowa, and is home to the University of Iowa, many tourism attractions such as art and history museums including The University of Iowa Art Museum and Plum Grove and many state historic landmark sites such as The Old Capital Building and many more [42] . High visitor counts, a broad variety of visitor types (homeowners, business owners, etc.), and the diverse geographic origins of those visitors (state, regional, national and international) make Iowa City one of the most visible and desirable locations for solar marketing and education in the state. This new vision has guided the development of this plan to capitalize on this opportunity and make the most of it to push solar energy to the forefront in Iowa and give the state a much—needed boost in support of solar energy initiatives. 10.1. Audiences Developing the plan and determining the key audiences' needs and barriers to action, was to develop specific and measurable goals for each audience. The following were determined to be reasonable "stretches" for the marketing and educational campaigns. All these goals and the proposed projects were developed with the plan's overarching objectives in mind: • Showcase Iowa City as a progressive city and innovative organization in a post—carbon world • Support exponential and immediate growth of solar in Iowa • Develop Iowa City solar project as a solar learning destination • Find options that are interactive, engaging and creative for each site of the project 10,1,1, Demographics The city of Iowa City, IA has a population of 72,385 and is the 502nd largest city in the United States. The population density is 2,796 per sq. mile which is 5018% higher than the Iowa average and 2986% higher than the national average. The median age in Iowa City is 26 which is approximately 31% lower than the Iowa average of 38 [43]. The Iowa City solar project will become a destination that informs and educates the next generation of Iowans on the potential and promise of solar energy as part of a sustainable future. 160 10.1,2, Homeowners Goal 1: Convince 2% of the homeowners who visit Iowa City solar project sites each year to install a solar PV system in their home. • Tell every visitor to Iowa City solar project sites the story of successful home solar installations using clear, vivid and personal storytelling techniques. Educate every homeowner about the latest technologies available for residential solar photovoltaic installations. • Allow every visitor to Iowa City solar project sites to calculate their potential energy cost savings and simple payback period for a solar photovoltaic installation. • Provide every interested homeowner with knowledge literature, and a customized list with reviews of local solar photovoltaic installers in their area. Goal 2: Get 25, 000 signatures a year for a public commitment to solar initiatives. • Ask every Iowa homeowner who visits the Iowa City solar project sites to make a commitment to vote to support solar energy initiatives in Iowa. Compare it with the success story of wind energy. • Online or on—site electronic petitions can be signed by the homeowners to show support towards City's efforts in energy sustainability. 10.1,3. Educators and Students The University of Iowa (UI) is one of the nation's premier public research universities with 33,334 students from 114 countries and all 50 states. Founded in 1847, it is the state's oldest institution of higher education. A member of the Association of American Universities since 1909 and the Big Ten Conference since 1899, UI is home to one of the largest and most acclaimed medical centers in the country, as well as the famous Iowa Writers' Workshop [44]. Goal 1: Attract 5, 000 Iowa students a year to visit the Iowa City solar project sites. • Develop a standardized tour for student groups with a route, quiz and completion certificates. • Create a group of volunteer solar ambassadors to act as hosts for the student groups. Partnering with local green groups will also assist with recruiting volunteer solar ambassadors. • Have students who visit take a quiz on what they learned on site and achieve 75% passing scores. Goal 2: Develop a week's worth of engaging material that all Iowa City schools can use in their science curricula. 161 • Create a website where students can learn about solar and monitor the energy production at Iowa City solar project sites. This can be implemented through an efficient SCADA system at each site. • Develop components in every proposed project that serve K-12 students to further their knowledge of and commitment to solar energy production. MIA Workforce There are approximately 9,000 U.S. companies engaged in the solar industry that employ more than 250,000 American workers. Over 1.5 million households in the United States have done solar (Solar, 2017). This growing market will be seeing an increase in job opportunities for the workforce. In 2015, the solar workforce grew at a rate 12 times faster than the overall economy. Since 2010, the U.S. solar workforce has increased 123 percent. Veterans make up 8.1 percent of the solar workforce (US Department of Labor, 2016). Goal 1: Create a clearinghouse of job information for solar in Iowa that addresses all levels of worker skills and education and contains at least 100 employers and 1, 000 current and open jobs. • Create a website where employers and employees can meet virtually and find out about new solar opportunities in Iowa. Enable interested visitors to search for current openings and e—mail themselves the results. • Display information about the variety of jobs available in the industry and growth projections for solar in Iowa. Goal 2: Develop a green collar training program that capitalizes on Iowa City solar project site locations and nearby amenities and serves at least 1, 000 participants annually after the first year. • Hold several half—day and full—day training programs at Iowa City solar project sites, growing the program incrementally. 10,1,5, Construction Industry Goal 1: Reach 1, 000 Iowa building professionals a year with activities at the Iowa City solar project sites that demonstrate the building integration potential of solar PV. • Hold an annual green building exposition featuring solar photovoltaics, solar water heating, and other relevant technologies. • Devote some rotating exhibition space inside the facilities to showcasing innovative solar products and technologies. 162 10.1,6, Entrepreneurs Goal 1: Reach 1,000 current and potential entrepreneurs a year with activities at Iowa City Solar project sites that demonstrate the business potential of solar in Iowa. • Hold an annual small business exposition featuring solar technologies, business networking events, and a job fair. • Devote some rotating exhibition space inside the facilities to showcase Iowa's business climate and current opportunities in solar for business owners. 10,1,7, Solar Manufacturers Goal 1: Bring representatives of major international solar manufacturing companies to the Iowa City solar project sites on formal visits with state decision makers within 2 years of opening the project. • Develop a standardized visit for major manufacturers with a meeting schedule with key decision makers and a tour around Eastern Iowa highlighting available land, workforce, policies, and more. • With the new 2018 PV tariffs imposed on imported PV modules, module assembly plants for major non—US PV manufacturers can see a rise. Remember the tariffs exempt 2.5 GW of imported cells every year on a first—come first—serve basis. 10.2. Solar Architecture — Aesthetic options for Solar PV A key feature of these architectures is to bring solar PV into the public view in a compelling way, to make a statement of clean energy advocacy. This does two important things — it promotes a greater adoption of solar technologies, and it brings new value to the return on solar investment — the value of visibility. Visibility helps to accelerate the adoption of solar energy. It's been shown that any new technology goes through phases of adoption, and that one of the keys to moving from early adoption to the mainstream is for that new technology to be visible. Solar brings value to clients in the form of cost savings, there is an environmental benefit that has been under—leveraged. Cost savings have been very well packaged and put into financial instruments, etc. People ascribe positive attributes to organizations that are leading and investing in clean energy. People prefer to do business with organizations that are good stewards of the environment and their communities. When people know that a certain company/organization is helping the environment, they will prefer to do business with that company, bringing it more resources to keep doing the good you're doing [45]. Many studies have established a strong connection between corporate responsibility and customer or employee affinity. For example, the 2015 Cone Communications Ebiquity Global CSR Study found that when companies support social or environmental issues, US consumer preference surges [46]: 163 • 91% will have a more positive image of the company • 71% are willing to pay more for an environmentally and socially responsible product Further, the vast majority consider corporate social responsibility when deciding: • where to work (79%) • what to buy or where to shop (80%) There are many designs and structures that can be used for attractions, many of these designs can utilize thin—film panels to be integrated into skyshades covered walkways, and skyshade umbrellas, for example. Solar panels can be utilized in any number of ways and combination of photovoltaic technologies, for example can be designed by artists selected through local, regional or national competition. Tools A final plan for the development of the solar project is to choose specific delivery methods that will address each of the target audiences identified above. Some options to target the marketing and educational aspect of this project include, but not limited to the following: Virtual Display on the Web A virtual zone which consists of an informational and interactive website that can serve all of the targeted audiences as a first step in building the marking and educational campaign. The social marketing campaign can easily be expanded within eight months of launch into a project website with components for all of the target audiences. The benefit of launching a website before moving on to physical installation of marketing and educational displays on the project is that data collected about traffic to the site and demographics of users could be used to inform phasing decisions for future projects. Such a website could also be developed and used by the target audiences during the planning phase of the solar project and renovation of the existing project buildings. The potential for partnerships to develop content is very high and would provide an excellent basis for ongoing relationships in later phases of the marketing and educational campaign. Another tool to implement is a social marketing campaign using established tools like Facebook, Twitter, Linkedln and blogging to rapidly establish a public presence for the project. This will enable the Iowa City Solar Project to reach out to all of the targeted audiences and provide a place for regularly updating the public on progress at the project site. The cost of such a campaign is relatively low and requires only the time of a staff communications person or part—time consultant to complete. It is also an easy way for early collaboration efforts with potential project partners, since a number of useful websites on solar already exist in the state but are not connected in any single place. 164 Exhibition Space Directly next to the display panels would be the best location for the next project, a set of educational kiosks that make the existing website components available to visitors at the project site. Developing the website early in the project allows the Iowa City Solar Project to begin collecting data immediately about the effectiveness of the content and the number of visitors using each section. This data will be supplemented by usage statistics gathered at these on—site kiosks to use in developing the next project, a rotating exhibition space. Kiosks generally cost approximately $2,000 to $4,000 per unit and be configured with built—in printers, for example for installer information or job listings, making the total cost for this project $10,000 to $20,000 for five kiosks. A rotating exhibition space of 400 sq. ft or about 20x20, more if possible. The final project inside the Iowa City Solar Project building is a rotating exhibition space near or surrounding the educational kiosks. This space should be a minimum of 400 square feet (or approximately 20 by 20 feet) to maximize the circulation of visitors and compatibility with existing trade show booth layouts. The space can address the interests of one or more audience groups at the same time and should be programmed based on the data collected by the website and educational kiosks regarding visitor demographics and tool effectiveness. A few examples of potential exhibits for this space, which is really limited only by imagination and effectiveness for reaching the target audiences, include: • Innovative technologies for the home, office, school, etc. • Solar—powered gadgets display area and store • Solar—powered personal electronics and store • Solar sales center for homeowners • Manufacturers exhibition space • Solar car exhibit The costs here are highly variable due to the following factors: • Number of exhibitions planned per year • Use of Iowa City Solar Project staff or an outside consultant to program the space and arrange for rotating exhibitions 165 • Creation of unique displays just for Iowa City Solar Project or repurposing existing booth displays created by companies for other trade shows • Ability to attract partner organizations and corporate sponsors for the scheduled exhibitions Overall, the rotating exhibition space could be constructed, programmed and managed for less than $50,000 annually. This project, like many of the projects preceding it, was developed specifically with the idea of maximizing advertising revenue for the Iowa City Solar Project. It is the project team's opinion that this project could go beyond breaking even and actually provide a steady revenue stream for Iowa City Solar Project. Revenue Potential There are several ways for the Iowa City Solar Project can generate revenue from the projects listed above. The most direct method would be to obtain corporate sponsorship for each of the projects that would pay for the project itself and include additional funds for advertising exclusivity at the project site or within the individual project. Good examples of projects that lend themselves to this model are the Solar Science Walk and the Solar Trucking Demo Project. In addition to solar manufacturers, other companies that might be interested in sponsoring part or all the projects (The University of Iowa, Walmart Super Center, etc.). In addition to sponsorship, most of the projects can be designed to allow for a variety of advertising opportunities within them. Good examples of this are the Project Website with Audience Components and the Rotating Exhibition Space. The advertising potential for each project depends heavily on the final design of each project and therefore could not be determined for this report. The project team strongly recommends hiring a consulting firm that specializes in green advertising and public relations to be involved in the design and construction phases of the project to assist with maximizing revenue generation from the site. Immediate Next Steps In order to get these projects started, there are a number of simple first steps the Iowa City Solar Project should take immediately: • Incorporate spatial requirements for educational kiosks and temporary exhibits at City owned public plazas. • Pick someone to be responsible for continuing forward with the marketing and educational campaign. This could be an internal staff member or a consultant, but the person should have •: experience with building social media campaigns using standard tools like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and others. • Pick liaison between Iowa City Solar Project and potential corporate sponsors to continue framing conversations. This person should be fairly high up in the organization to indicate the seriousness of the Iowa City Solar Project in pursuing this project. • Determine piloting and evaluation programs for all projects chosen. Evaluation in particular was left out of this conceptual report, but it is a critical step since each phase of the marketing and educational campaign depends on evaluation of data collected in the previous phase. 167 11. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Chapter 11 is conclusions from the solar feasibility research work, and it summarizes the whole report. The solar PV feasibility study was carried out at eight different City of Iowa City owned sites. Initially, various PV design opportunities are realized at each site. Finally, all the solar PV design solutions have under gone three filters, each of which fine—tuned the array size further to an optimum value. The three governing filters are: 1. Available area for PV installation 2. Facility energy demand + Utility interconnection limit 3. Based on MidAmerican Energy's net metering policy, zero annual true up approach is used to optimize the final PV system size. Mid -American Energy's net metering policy allows excess energy generation in one month to be carried over to the following months for a period of up to 12 months after which it resets to zero. The solar generation facility owner will need to choose either end of January or end of April as true -up date before commercial operation date. This banking of excess generation helps offset energy bills in lower generation months using energy credits from higher generation months. The Bluestein recommended design sizes take this policy into consideration. 11.1. Summary of all the PV Designs at eight sites Initially, there are 28 PV designs modeled at the eight City of Iowa City facility sites. On each site design's maximum solar PV opportunity is presented under third column, and then Bluestem's recommendation resulted by the optimization exercise is presented under fifth column. Table 61. Summary of PV designs for the eight Iowa City sites 168 Max Bluestein Annual kWh Annual kWh Site Name Design Type Potential Recommendation (in Generation Generation (in kW) kW) City Park Rooftop PV Pool House 12 16,250 8 10,796 (RI) Property Mercer Park Rooftop PV 177.4 249,660 177.4 249,660 Property (RI) 168 169 Parking Structure PV 449.4 597,953 449.4 597,953 Design 1 (P1) Max Bluestem Annual kWh Annual kWh Site Name Design Type Potential Recommendation (in Generation Generation (in kW) kW) Parking Structure PV 552 765,411 552 765,411 Design 2 (P2) Mercer Park Pickleball Property Court Design 17.52 22,200 17.52 22,175 (M 1) Ground—mount 39.4 53,284 39.4 53,284 PV (G1) Rooftop PV Main Building 10.96 14,197 10.96 14,197 (RI) Rooftop PV North 207.8 244,908 60 70,749 Buildings (R2) Iowa City Rooftop PV Airport South 590.87 677,728 50 57,199 Property Buildings (R3) Parking lot Structure PV 121.3 148,765 47 57,642 (P1) South field ground—mount 9,060 12,662,500 9,060 12,662,500 PV (G1) 169 170 Max Bluestem Annual kWh Annual kWh Site Name Design Type Potential Recommendation Generation Generation (in kW) (in kW) Rooftop PV 698.98 940,450 698.98 940,450 (RI) Parking lot Wastewater Structure PV 111 145,022 111 145,022 Treatment Plant (P1) Property North—field Ground - 1040 1,402,830 1040 1,402,830 mount PV (GI) Animal Shelter Building 29.6 39,326 29.6 39,326 Rooftop PV (RI) Red Building 66.8 78,278 36 42,186 1 (R2) Red Building 90.9 106,643 36 42,235 2 (R3) Fuel Streets Facility Pumping 48.2 60,560 33 41462 Property Station (R4) Land behind the lift 47.2 63,911 31.5 42,652 station (GI) Parking lot PV Design 1 417.9 492,782 35.5 41,851 (P1) Parking lot PV Design 2 200.2 271,828 31.5 42,770 (P2) 170 171 Max Bluestein Annual kWh Annual kWh Site Name Design Type Potential Recommendation Generation Generation (in kW) (in kW) Admin Building 83.2 98,273 44.5 52,562 Rooftop PV (RI) Parks and Admin Forestry Building Property 31.8 44,565 31.8 44,565 Rooftop PV (R2) Parking lot 29.2 39,383 29.2 39,383 (P1) Lodge Building 79.9 102,263 35 44,796 Rooftop PV Terry (RI) Trueblood Lodge Recreation Area Parking lot 198.2 256,352 35.5 45,916 PV Structure (P1) Facility Building Robert A. Lee 147.5 206,021 147.5 206,021 Rooftop PV Community (RI) Recreation Parking lot Center PV Structure 214.6 283,326 214.6 283,326 (P1) NOTE: The kWh generation numbers are representative of first year of operation. There will be annual degradation of 1% every year. That is the reason why, typical lifespan of PV projects is 20 years, since the manufacturer warranties 80% of energy generation capacity at the end of 20r' year. 171 11.2. Bluestem's Final Recommendations The following is a breakdown of Bluestem's project recommendations by each site. A summary of all the results is added at the end of the sub -section as Table 59. SITE 1. At the pool house, 8 kWDc PV system on the South—facing roof. This site also can accommodate some aesthetic design options shown on Appendix—E for public education and increased visibility purposes. SITE 2. At the Mercer Park, a combination of rooftop and parking lot PV. The total PV installation of this combination shouldn't exceed 750 kWDc at which point it will exceed the interconnect annual total limit of 1,052,982 kWh. SITE 3. At the City Airport, parking lot PV seems to be beneficial to serve the loads at main building compared to the North and South building rooftops which are farther away from loads. Also, the main building rooftop can accommodate a tracker mount PV array. A combination of these PV design capacities should not exceed 47-60 kWDc depending on the permutation of designs. SITE 4. At the wastewater treatment plant, the PV generation will mostly be behind the meter as the Eastern Iowa Power and Light Cooperative's net metering agreement is not very favorable for renewable constraining the net—metered capacity to 20 kW. All the options: ground—mount PV, parking lot PV, and rooftop PV are deemed feasible to connect to the facilities operations directly. Due to the lower price of energy and higher price of demand at this facility, and the availability of hourly demand information, both the energy savings and demands savings by PV installation are considered in calculating the PV project payback. In combination, the maximum amount of PV installations possible is around 1.85 MWDc by taking into all the space availability constraints. SITE 5. At the Streets facility property, there were four rooftops that were explored. And among all, the unshaded parts of the animal shelter building rooftop receive the most solar irradiation comparatively. The roof pitch of the animal shelter building also allows for south orientation at about 35°—tilt. Hence, a rooftop PV on the south—facing roof of the animal shelter is closer to the major electrical loads. 172 Ground—mount PV installation behind the water lift station is another alternative and so is the parking lot installation. The optimum PV capacity for this site is between 31-36 kWDc. Any combination of the above—mentioned alternatives should not exceed this optimum limit. SITE 6. At the Parks & Forestry facility, rooftop design 2 yielded better payback than rooftop design 1 on the main building. The parking lot solar also yielded good payback. A combination of both rooftop and parking shade structure would be beneficial at this location. However, the combination design should not exceed a maximum of 44.5 kWDc. It should also be noted that the storage building rooftop appears to be shaded by trees along the western site boundary for long periods during the day and, hence, it is rejected for PV installation. SITE 7. At the Terry Trueblood Community Center Lodge facility, a combination of rooftop PV and parking PV is possible within the optimum value of 35.5 kWDc. South—facing PV design on parts of the parking lot are preferable because of the comparatively higher capacity factors. Also, rooftop being a relatively new structure can easily take the additional weight levied by the solar PV system. Also, since it is a public events facility, aesthetic solar options shown on Appendix—E are also recommended to increase public awareness on solar energy and create an economic return due to visibility. SITE 8. At the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center, rooftop PV yielded slightly better energy output given the directional orientation of the rooftop PV compared to the carport PV design. Thus, the capacity factor is higher for the rooftop design (15.94%) compared to the carport PV design (15.07%). A combination of both the designs can be opted at this site not exceeding the optimum design size of around 338 kWDc. Bluestein Energy Solutions has analyzed the technical, contractual, and political opportunities of installing solar PV arrays at all eight sites. After initial analysis, Bluestein was able to eliminate the uneconomical sites (Pool House and Streets Facility) and looked at aggregating the remaining sights. Given our financial analysis, the City of Iowa City needs to determine political and intrinsic value of these projects along with their economics. For Iowa City to improve the NPVs or savings there will need to be an increased economy of scale. Based on the financial analysis at the City's current price and projected rate increases, the parameters in this report highlights the need for the City of Iowa City to expand the project to increase 173 the economies of scale, to lead to more favorable economics. Bluestem suggests there may be opportunities to partner with the University of Iowa and or finding opportunities to partner with Eastern Iowa Power and Light and create a larger (kW) project within Eastern Iowa's territory. Bluestems recommends, if the City of Iowa City was to move forward with the current or future project, to move forward by utilizing a third parry public private partnership. Given the current project, the City would see significant cost reduction versus ownership. Through our analysis if the City of Iowa City was to move forward with the above recommended projects, we anticipate your electric cost would increase $4,500 to $7,000 a month. Table 62. A Summary fable of all PV projects analyzed Site 1- Pool House (R1= Rooftop = 8 kWDc) Site 2 - Mercer Park (R1= Rooftop design = 177 kWDc, P 1= Parking lot design = 552 kWDc, M1= Pickleball court design= 17.5 kWDc) Site 3 - Iowa City Airport (P 1= Parking lot = 47 kWDc) Site 4 - South Wastewater Treatment Plant (R1= Rooftop = 699 kWDc, P 1= Parking lot = 111 kWDc, G1= Ground -mount = 1040 kWDc) Site 5 - Streets Facility (R1= Rooftop = 29.6 kWDc) Site 6 -Parks & Forestry Facility (R2= Rooftop = 15.3 kWDc, P 1= Parking lot = 29.2 kWDc) Site 7 - Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge Facility (P 1= Parking lot = 35.5 kWDc) Site 8 - Robert A. Lee Community Rec. Center (R1= Rooftop = 123.4 kWDc, P1= Parking lot = 214.6 kWDc) Compound Annual Annual Compound Payback PV GHG Public Annual Period Emission Project Project Payback generation Visibility Utility Bill with Mitigation Design EPC Cost Period to facility Score Avoidance* estimated (Metric (years) ITCs load ratio (1-5) tons (years) (%) COz eq.) Site 1 -R1 $21,573 $1,004 31.6 17.4 84.2% 8.0 3.5 Site 2 - R1 $281,850 $12,137 34.1 21.5 23.7% 185.7 1 Site 2 - P1 $881,637 $37,368 34.7 23.5 72.7% 569.5 4 Site 2 -M1 $39,562 $1,094 53.1 29.2 2.1% 16.5 4 Site 3 - P1 $74,450 $4,237 25.8 14.2 45.5% 42.9 3.5 Site 4 - R1 $965,959 $36,279 39.1 26.6 10.5% 1043.7 1 174 Site 4 - PI $170,110 $7,934 31.5 18.3 1.6% 107.9 3 Site 4 - G1 $1,174,105 $51,495 33.5 22.9 15.7% 699.7 3 Site 5 - R1 $49,794 $2,290 31.9 17.6 77.8% 31.4 2.5 Compound Annual Annual Compound Payback PV GHG Public Annual Period Emission Project Project Payback generation Visibility Utility Bill with Mitigation Design EPC Cost Period to facility Score Avoidance* estimated (Metric (years) ITCs load ratio (1-5) tons (years) (%) COz eq.) Site 6 - R2 $49,774 $2,091 28 15.4 32.6% 16.0 2 Site 6 - PI $49,915 $1,872 31.3 17.2 59.8% 29.3 3 Site 7 - PI $54,979 $4,528 17.8 9.8 84.2% 34.2 4 Site 8-R1 $196,056 $11,092 26 15.5 31.8% 128.2 1 Site 8 - PI $364,433 $18,390 29.1 18.8 52.3% 210.8 4 TOTAL N/A N/A 3,124 N/A Notes: 1. Cost calculations do not consider structural modifications, if any, necessary to install rooftop PV on existing structures, or structural engineering fees to modify or design the systems *The utility bill avoidance in most cases is calculated based on energy arbitrage during each billing period. Only in the case of wastewater treatment plant, the demand costs are taken into consideration as well. 175 REFERENCES [1] "Alternative Energy Law (AEL)." [Online]. Available: http://programs.dsircusa.org/system/program/detail/265. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018]. [2] Solar Power Rock Group, "2018 Guide to Iowa Home Solar Incentives, Rebates, and Tax Credits," https://solarpowerrocks.com/iowa/, 31 -May -2018. [3] "National Agriculture in the Classroom." [Online]. Available: https://www.agclassroom.org/teacher/ag_facts.cfm. [Accessed: 11 -May -2018]. [4] "Ethanol Production Capacity by State." [Online]. Available: http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/121.htm. [Accessed: 11 -May -2018]. [5] "The Open PV Project - Search." [Online]. Available: https:Hopenpv.nrel.gov/search. [Accessed: 10 -Jun -2018] . [6] "Dashboard - Solar" [Online]. Available: https://programs- taxcredit.iowa.gov/Solar/Dashboard/Extemal. [Accessed: 10 -Jun -2018]. [7] "Tax Reform in Iowa Puts Solar Tax Credit in Jeopardy." [Online]. Available: https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2018/03/tax-reform-in-iowa-puts-solar-tax-credit-in- jeopardy.html. [Accessed: 10 -Jun -20181. [8] "Infrastructure I PV Rooftop I Estimated National Small Building Suitability <https://maps.nrel.gov/nsrdb-viewer/>." [9] Solar Energy Technologies Office, "Solar Energy Glossary I Department of Energy." [Online]. Available: https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-energy-glossary#. [Accessed: 04 -May -2018]. [ 10] Florida Solar Energy Center, "Cells, Modules, and Arrays." [Online]. Available: http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/consumer/solar clectricitylbasics/cells modules_arrays.htm. [Accessed: 09 - May -2018]. [11] "Solar in 2018: Better Technology, Record -Breaking Installations." [Online]. Available: https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/print/volume-21/issue-1 /feature s/solar/solar-in-2018- better-technology-record-breaking-installations.html. [Accessed: 10 -May -2018]. [12] National Renewable Energy Laboratory, "Best Research -Cell Efficiencies (NREL)." [Online]. Available: https://www.nrel.gov/pv/assets/images/efficiency-chart.png. [Accessed: 04 -May -2018]. 176 [13] "Latest Tier -1 solar panels list 2018: 8 Points of critical failure.," Perth Solar Warehouse, 01 - May -2018. . [ 14] "Solar Energy and Solar Power in Iowa City, IA," Solar Energy Local. [Online]. Available: https:Hsolarenergylocal.com/states/iowa/iowa-city/. [Accessed: 04 -May -2018]. [15] "Daily Summaries Station Details: IOWA CITY, IA US, GHCND:US000134101 I Climate Data Online (CDO) I National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)." [Online]. Available: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datasets/GHCND/stations/GHCND: USC00134101 /detail. [Accessed: 18 -May -2018] . [ 16] C. J. Anderson, J. Gooden, P. E. Guinan, M. Knapp, G. McManus, and M. D. Shulski, "Climate in the Heartland: Historical Data and Future Projections for the Heartland Regional Network," p. 68. [17] "CHAPTER 12 ENERGY SYSTEMS 12018 International Fire Code I ICC publicACCESS." [Online]. Available: https://codes.iccsafe.org/public/document/IFC2018/CHAPTER-I2-ENERGY- SYSTEMS. [Accessed: 14 -May -2018]. [18] "Solar Investment Tax Credit (ITC) I SEIA." [Online]. Available: https://www.scia.org/initiatives/solar-investment-tax-credit-itc. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018]. [19] "DSIRE." [Online]. Available: http://programs.dsircusa.org/system/program/detail/658. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018]. [20] "DSIRE." [Online]. Available: http://programs.dsircusa.org/system/program/detail/734. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018] . [21] "Iowa Tax Credits Available for Individual Income, Corporation Income, and Franchise Tax." Iowa Department of Revenue. [22] "CHAPTER 476C RENEWABLE ENERGY TAX CREDIT." Iowa Code 2018, Chapter 476C (16, 0). [23] "Renewable Energy Tax Credits I Iowa Utilities Board." [Online]. Available: https://iub.iowa.gov/renewable-energy-tax-credits. [Accessed: 14 -Jun -2018]. [24] "Trump issues 30% tariff on solar panel imports I Utility Dive." [Online]. Available: https://www.utilitydive.cominews/trump-issues-30-tariff-on-solar-panel-imports/515265/. [Accessed: 25 - May -2018]. 177 [25] "President Trump Approves Relief for U.S. Washing Machine and Solar Cell Manufacturers." [Online]. Available: https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press- releases/2018/january/president-trump-approves-relief-us. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018]. [26] "How the New U.S. Solar Tariff Will Impact Prices in 2018 1 EnergySage." [Online]. Available: https://news.energysage.com/2018-us-solar-tariff-impact-prices/. [Accessed: 25 -May -2018]. [27] "Vehicle Charging I Department of Energy." [Online]. Available: https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/vehicle-charging. [Accessed: 29 -Aug -2018]. [28] "Products <http://miasole.com/products/>," MiaSole, A Hanergy Company. [29] Federal Aviation Administration Office of Airports, "Technical Guidance for Evaluating Selected Solar Technologies on Airports," Office of Airport Planning and Programming Airport Planning and Environmental Division (APP -400) 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591, FAA -ARP - TR -10-1. [30] "Obstruction Evaluation / Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA)." [Online]. Available: https:Hocaaa.faa.gov/ocaaa/extemal/portaljsp. [Accessed: 30 -Aug -2018]. [31] "Solar Panels at UTSA I TSERI." [Online]. Available: http://texasenergy.utsa.edu/gallery/solar- panels-at-utsa/. [Accessed: 01 -Jun -2018]. [32] "Solar Carports," Carport Structures Corp. [Online]. Available: https://www.carportstructures.com/solar-carport-designs/. [Accessed: 05 -Jun -2018]. [33] "Minnesota Community Solar - How It Works." [Online]. Available: http://mncommunitysolar.com/how-it-works. [Accessed: 31 -Aug -2018]. [34] City of Fremont, "Fremont's Community Solar Farm <http://www.fremontne.gov/Do cumentCenterNiew/453 5/Solar-Parti cipation-Options-and-Pricing- Examples?bidld=>," 31 -Aug -2018. [35] "Solar Energy I City of Ames, IA." [Online]. Available: https://www.cityofames.org/government/departments-divisions-a-h/electric/smart-energy/solar-energy. [Accessed: 31 -Aug -2018] . [36] W.1. P. C. 809 H. 39 N. Denison and 1. 51442 7:30 a m-4 p.m, "WIPCO Community Solar," Western Iowa Power Cooperative. [Online]. Available: https://www.wipco.com/renewable- energy/community-solar. [Accessed: 31 -Aug -2018]. 178 [37] "South View Solar Farm I Jo -Carroll Energy." [Online]. Available: https://jocarroll.com/content/solar-farm-construction. [Accessed: 31 -Aug -2018]. [38] "CO2 emissions from residential buildings and commercial and public services (% of total fuel combustion) I Data." [Online]. Available: https:Hdata.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.0O2.BLDG.ZS?locations=US&name_desc=true. [Accessed: 22 - Jul -2018] . [39] L. Stoddard, J. Abiecunas, and R. O'Connell, "Economic, Energy, and Environmental Benefits of Concentrating Solar Power in California," NREL/SR-550-39291, 881924, Apr. 2006. [40] "Climate Change," SEIA. [Online]. Available: /initiatives/climate-change. [Accessed: 22 -Jul - 2018]. [41] K. Ritland, "3 Environmental Benefits of Solar Energy." [Online]. Available: https://www.syssolutions.com/blog/three-environmental-benefits-solar-energy. [Accessed: 30 -May -2018]. [42] U. S. C. Bureau, "American FactFinder - Results." [Online]. Available: https:Hfactfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk. [Accessed: 30 - May -2018]. [43] "Iowa City, IA Population & Demographics." [Online]. Available: https://www.areavibes.com/iowa+city-ia/demographics/. [Accessed: 30 -May -2018]. [44] "The University of Iowa." [Online]. Available: https://uiowa.edu/. [Accessed: 30 -May -2018]. [45] C. Roselund, "`Return on visibility': Spotlight Solar on bringing solar into the public view,"pv magazine USA, 18 -Oct -2017. [Online]. Available: https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2017/10/18/return-on- visibility-spotlight-solar-on-bringing-solar-into-the-public-view/. [Accessed: 30 -May -2018]. [46] C. Merrigan, "New solar investment metric: Return On Visibility," Solar Trees I Spotlight Solar. [Online]. Available: https:Hspotlightsolar.com/whatsnew/2018/3/19/new-solar-investment-metric-retum- on-visibility. [Accessed: 30 -May -2018]. [47] "Solar Power Trees I Spotlight Solar Products," Solar Trees I Spotlight Solar. [Online]. Available: https:Hspotlightsolar.com/products/. [Accessed: 02 -Jun -2018]. 179 ABBREVIATIONS BES Bluestem Energy Solutions GHI Global Horizontal Irradiance IFC International Fire Code IOU Investor—Owned Utility IPP Independent Power Producer ITC Investment Tax Credits NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory POA Plane of Array PTC Production Tax Credits PV Photovoltaics 180 iC APPENDIX -A: NREL SOLAR RESOURCE MAPS 181 211 "PII qou SII P'II SII 21 ?. uio�no�noui m �6V1 u1 V -�fY1 `�V � 229 2 2 2 2 z�1 ^ .d0LnoLro nom � o~ L ° v po A �O vi ui V M M V° °� o m CD q o 16 EL U1 � a 7 0 ~ J a 181 211 "PII qou SII P'II SII QIP `�V z�1 Z LW Z J U1 � a 7 0 ~ J a J_ � r x 4 Y O � Y �Z N 4 Y � f t 181 211 "PII qou SII P'II SII 182 �9 \jf\ . Lu} ])\ o �} }) \\ }/fS §/\J [ /f��■��[ )� �■�: \ ƒ));§2]}�7 0 (3) C)—\ f°~ 22 R\[®\}� /® -T~ƒ } $)\«kf)��))4 a »2 E \ � -� \j� m� \{ �® <.\£\(7}))}�\( w 182 \jf\ . Lu} ])\ o �} }) \\ }/fS §/\J [ /f��■��[ )� �■�: 182 a T UT 'p N U1 X 'p U1 T v~ N O m O 1• c Oc O O V1 n v G Gc c y c !p C Ql fi Ol I\ C t o c c ti o E_ r o a p ro V �� o a �R,cu=�� ' o pE _n �awN a 'O. L E L y n .� T N - -O T O E'h W y Z a� c� m �Q`��a�o�N a e`i� w J .., O i o O _ o o v v a C: Ln m Z 113 O N rC v p d - cr p >_ o v E v n Q In u o o vo a u E o �o 'o u EE a Z ytl0 ° a 3 R aEvar'o Z �� z a ¢ Il 'v M iw O cr ON ID d- C eY tiF a r o I I o � ro d � c n m iG' N e u — M e O I C O 10 I r {{ �r R e � r � ° a - rn ,� ;I � Z a� 183 APPENDIX- B: FEMA FLOODPLAIN MAPS OF THE EIGHT SITES Figure 133. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 1: City park pool house 184 Figure 134. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 2: Mercer Park Site 185 E _ m n 2°°� mqo,� — ri ��LS ✓+ `° �' Adm � � ID 3 � � ` r II!!» �G e3 — 2 :J as � ,g� b�Q� �m � y� 1 I s _ J�j0013 ��EE LL E c:`e m RE E i E m m°$gig P E rm a w a m g$ a$E E E=A m5 E g dmQ J �x p •. o� 91'2929.64'W W •1-+ u Q O Cfl LL p O O U- 4o ... -JOT /r /� O N a Figure 134. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 2: Mercer Park Site 185 Figure 135. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (North) 186 v° coma ens moM�� s �7 eEn' �zp�J pSEH �j8�i8 W 4i rW7 NG LL L. W1 M 5.... N m r 0 0 LLL fYS 0 �rt !YS z Figure 136. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (South) 187 O i� a m m t8' l I I : ��I � f S as a w a a & 5 i a E a z � 0 0 v° coma ens moM�� s �7 eEn' �zp�J pSEH �j8�i8 W 4i rW7 NG LL L. W1 M 5.... N m r 0 0 LLL fYS 0 �rt !YS z Figure 136. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (South) 187 O i� a m m l I I ❑❑® ��I � f S as � a E v° coma ens moM�� s �7 eEn' �zp�J pSEH �j8�i8 W 4i rW7 NG LL L. W1 M 5.... N m r 0 0 LLL fYS 0 �rt !YS z Figure 136. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 3: Iowa City Airport Site (South) 187 O Figure 137. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant 188 A, Ee ¢ 2 Ti •S `n w � A m w d a m� I c wU5 # e O � n E � � m � a c 'm0 E ._ $ u 22 e dR P B ✓«°i y a Et gi g S ID yy� E� {{ C }�, m 42 ¢¢ 8 1.� E f n s d o g r6m5m�rt ' f a rn a m i o g E vEn3 n e �Qi�'a Hwa ee g� a¢ a .1 A a8E r � a�Qm a y o c � Lxl c~i �a a E�a°� 8 $G E Eg s C37 GJ c 5a 5 as W "� s ¢ �p�3 �'a # a d d �rta'n �� _� 3 J x 0 � 91'29,54 59-W rn - O M W J It � C) C=) 0 N �f N Lj_ p N LL a 0 L r�,'. � M �+ a J {� 7. N '� r=.. M O L O O � � z Lei r.. 0 � Q Z Figure 137. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 4: Wastewater Treatment Plant 188 Em� BaT n.�Ea a RE N a n �OE� Ar�yB -m' 8 iE cu a� LL q� W J N 0 0 LL C 0 LV Z Figure 138. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 5: Streets Facility Property 189 A milt c 4 yz I j � I ❑o® ��bi iy o�Sn 'S3S8 8�+ 2 8� �a a f xx � 0 0 Em� BaT n.�Ea a RE N a n �OE� Ar�yB -m' 8 iE cu a� LL q� W J N 0 0 LL C 0 LV Z Figure 138. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 5: Streets Facility Property 189 A sm n 0 C m 4 I j � I ❑o® ��bi iy W W W �a a f Em� BaT n.�Ea a RE N a n �OE� Ar�yB -m' 8 iE cu a� LL q� W J N 0 0 LL C 0 LV Z Figure 138. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 5: Streets Facility Property 189 Figure 139. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 6: Parks and Forestry 190 �,t E ."E i8 PAVn`e �$�$ A 4 W ei5a 2 W $ B $EjE. m E c ' 1 E o z 2 ¢SEE` m° E d 91'31'39.57W M W P Q z z: LL Q (u (D 7 it pU � O 't Z r •d iw N f + w w r a Figure 139. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 6: Parks and Forestry 190 Figure 140. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge 191 Figure 141. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 192 a a of tin ,� �_ 'a 1 ',�, °• ?' � � V rA� c J Ai � °si —ggC] L CqQ 9i c y y m ❑ y '� v li _�' G] � ¢' v b tai u3i S � — 6 100 K '^ — Si 4 _ TU V 3 MU, #�, Z ❑tl� 4 p 1 �h y N E -c`� =c bA� W SW w 11 �E.� O O II • i W� LU " ""+. 1. " 4 Ak AIL LL AL N S W O OF y r.G w. 9 } Now n. •�; - - Figure 141. FEMA Floodplain Map of Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center 192 APPENDIX -C: TRANSMISSION GRID INTERCONNECTIVITY MAP 111 F -I Cilv Transmission Line - Existi fl I L L. r '_- 7 t I-, al -I J I .- I " I I 115kV - 16ilV 345kV - 450W 193 APPENDIX -D: GOOGLE SUNROOF IMAGERY Site 1: City Park Pool House (200 E. Park Road, Iowa City, IA 52246) No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in hours) 1,475 Maximum available roof Area for PV (in ft') 14,288 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 11.25 Typical Payback period with incentives (in years) 14 Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric tons) 8.4 194 Site 2: Mercer Park (2701 Bradford Dr., Iowa City, IA 52240) 195 Main Storage Bldg. Bldg. No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in 1,463 1,405 hours) Maximum available roof Area for PV (in ft') 26,198 1,374 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 60 15.25 Typical Payback period with incentives (in 19 16 years) Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric tons) 43.1 10.6 195 Site 3: Iowa City Airport (1801 S Riverside Dr., Iowa City, IA 52246) Figure 142. Airport main building and North buildings •, Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. A B C D E No. of Annual usable 1,414 1,415 1,412 1,401 1,481 Sunlight hours (in hours) Maximum available roof 2 748 4,457 4,299 4,986 581 Area for PV (in ft2)) ' Recommended PV Size (in 39 kW) Typical Payback period with 20 incentives (in years) Carbon dioxide mitigation 42.9 (in metric tons) •, Figure 143. Airport South buildings 197 Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. Bldg. F G H I J K L M No. of Annual usable Sunlight 1,395 1,393 1,428 1,413 1,406 1,417 1,410 1,408 hours (in hours) Maximum available roof Area 7,505 4,105 2,238 2,044 6,237 2,026 2,467 2,185 for PV (in ft2) Recommended PV Size (in 61.25 kW) Typical Payback period with 20 incentives (in years) Carbon dioxide mitigation (in 43 metric tons) 197 Site 5: Street Facility (3800 Napoleon Ln., Iowa City, IA 52240) 198 Lift Station Bldg. No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in 1,424 hours) Maximum available roof Area for PV (in 1,163 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 16.5 Typical Payback period with incentives 19 (in years) Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric 11.5 tons) 198 Site 6: Parks & Forestry (2275 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) ,.j. 1 199 Main Storage Bldg. Bldg. No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in 1,421 1,431 hours) Maximum available roof Area for PV (in ft2) 7,770 1,128 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 53.75 7 Typical Payback period with incentives (in 19 14 years) Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric tons) 38.3 4.9 199 Site 7: Terry Trueblood Recreation Area Lodge (579 McCollister Blvd., Iowa City, IA 52240) No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in hours) 1,514 Maximum available roof Area for PV (in ft') 4,457 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 57 Typical Payback period with incentives (in years) 18 Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric tons) 43 200 Site 8: Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center (220 S Gilbert St., Iowa City, IA 52240) No. of Annual usable Sunlight hours (in hours) 1,438 Maximum available roof Area for PV (in ft2) 19,803 Recommended PV Size (in kW) 60.5 Typical Payback period with incentives (in years) 19 Carbon dioxide mitigation (in metric tons) 42.9 201 APPENDIX -E: INNOVATIVE SOLAR PV INSTALLATIONS 202 Figure 144. Aesthetic Solar Structures [4 71 203 Figure 145. Solar Flotovoltaics (SF—Floating PV System, 0°-20° module tilt) 204 Figure 146. Solar PV quick mounting system filled with dirt or pebbles 205 ADDENDUM TO PROJECT REPORT Please note that the Bluestem PV software simulation reports and Permits and Approvals Documents are delivered electronically as addendum items to the project report. I Item Number: 6. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Memorandum from City Manager: 12 Court Street Bonus Height Work Session ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from City Manager - 12 Court Street Bonus Height Work Session r CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: November 29, 2018 To: Mayor and City Council From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Re: 12 Court Street Bonus Height Work Session On November 6th, 2018 the City Council held a work session to discuss views on the anticipated request for height bonus at 12 E. Court (aka Pentacrest Garden Apartments). While many individual views were expressed, there was a collective desire to continue the discussion after receiving some additional information from the development team. In response, the development team has prepared a pre -application packet to help bring more clarity to their intent with the future redevelopment of this site. It is their hope that they can identify aspects of their development plans that need additional refinement in order to gain a majority of Council Members' support for their future height bonus application. This request is being made with the understanding that the final height bonus application will take several months to prepare and likely cost well -beyond six figures in project design fees. The Height Bonus Application City Code sets forth the criteria on which height bonus applications shall be considered. The awarding of a height bonus takes place in the design review phase of the development process. In this phase, design of the project is considerably advanced with a working site plan, building renderings, floor plans, details on building materials and other particulars demonstrating compliance with the form -based code. Staff reviews the designs for compliance with the code and in this particular case because of the Conditional Zoning Agreement, the height bonus approval will go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a recommendation before heading to the full City Council for a final decision. The level of detail needed requires a significant investment in design work and thus the development team would like a strong indication that their intent for the project is acceptable to a majority of Council Members. Without that level of comfort, the team will be reluctant to invest the money needed to advance designs to the City Code specified requirements. While it is noted that three other large-scale developments have gained previous City Council support for height bonuses, each of those had unique aspects to the projects that gave the respective development teams comfort in advancing designs without the need for a pre - application discussion such as what is being requested in the 12 E. Court case. Those previous projects had either development agreements for financial assistance (Hilton Garden Inn and 316 Madison) or had already advanced designs in order to participate in the City's Request for Proposal process for the acquisition of public property (Rise). Thus the 12 E. Court project is unique in that the development team does not have any level of assurance outside of the height bonus process that the City Council will act favorably on their application. The Development Team's Pre -Application Submittal Included in your Information Packet is a pre -application submittal from the development team that provides more information on their intent with the redevelopment project. Staff has not fully reviewed the information and thus some aspects of the submittal may need to be refined or altered to comply with City Code as they progress with project designs in the future. In general, the pre -application submittal can be summarized as follows: November 29, 2018 Page 2 • The development team has engaged Iowa City based Neumann -Monson Architects. I have previously communicated to the team that this selection meets the related condition in the Conditional Zoning Agreement. • Construction is anticipated to begin in 2020 and completed in 2023. The project aims to include 1,000 residential units and approximately 20,000 square feet in commercial retail/office space. • The massing images show four 15 -story buildings on the site and the development team has provided information on how that height compares to other buildings in the immediate area taking into account the topography of the site. The submittal also includes a preliminary layout of the buildings relative to the conceptual master plan layouts that are included in the Conditional Zoning Agreement. The submittal also includes perspective renderings from different points in the downtown and Riverfront Crossings Area. • While project designs have not commenced, the team has provided information on their intent with respect to building materials, amenities, the student experience, and security and maintenance. All of these aspects will need to be further fleshed out before staff can determine if they meet the code requirements during the design review process. Of particular interest to the City Council, the security and management plan will need to be refined with greater specificity so that it can be `enforceable' as required by code. • Comments are provided on the financial impact and integrations with various city plans. The submittal also includes commentary on local benefits such as the use of local contractors. • At the Council's request the development team has indicated their intent with respect to meeting the Riverfront Crossing affordable housing requirement. This includes a combination of fee -in -lieu, off-site housing with longer term affordability periods and off-site new construction for affordable housing. Similar to many other aspects of the submittal this topic will require further discussions and refinements as it does not meet code requirements as presented. However, it does give the City Council a clear indication of their intent in meeting this code requirement. • Finally, the submittal details that they are seeking the 7 floors of height bonus through the dedication of the Capitol Street right-of-way (5 floors), provision of student housing in a desired location (1.5 floors) and a historic preservation transfer of density rights (.5 floors). Summary The development team has provided the City Council more information on the direction they intend to go with their redevelopment project. While the information falls short of meeting the design review requirements in the City Code, it does give the City Council a clearer picture of their plans. City staff and the development team are requesting that the City Council provide a general indication of your views on the request for 15 stories. If the development team feels that a majority of Council supports their project vision, they will presumably be inclined to commence a lengthy design development phase with their architect. Item Number: 7. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Report from Axiom Consultants: Pre -Application for Height Bonus and Statement of Intent -12 E. Court Street ATTACHMENTS: Description Report from Axiom Consultants: Pre -Application for Height Bonus and Statement of I ntent -12 E. Court Street 12 East Court Street (Pentacrest Garden Apartments) PRE -APPLICATION for HEIGHTBONUS and STATEMENT of INTENT DEVELOPER: 100-500 LLC Iowa City, IA SUBMITTED TO: THE CITY of IOWA CITY Planning & Zoning and City Council Axiom December 4th, 2018 NEUMANN MONSON FIRST THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING US We understand that all large scale projects within the City of Iowa City should be considered significant additions to the fabric which makes Iowa City what it is. Whether public or private, all projects will affect a City in profound ways that have impacts for nearly everyone who lives there. We understand that this project, which we have been discussing with you since April of 2018, is just such an effort. We know that the scope and scale of this project mean that it is being scrutinized from all angles - by business owners, residents, local officials, and the media. Rightly so. We are enjoying this process, and come to the table with an attitude of cooperation, teamwork, and open dialog. We are trying to be transparent about exactly what our intentions are, and about what we know will be an incredible improvement for the City of Iowa City and many of those who live here. Whether it's the media, the public, or public officials such as yourselves - who answer to many - we look forward to describing this project and providing information about it as we push further down the road. We encourage anyone to reach out to us as they are able. We hope that this pre -application for height bonus and statement of intent will be a critical piece of a process that will continue this dialog and move our team into the design phase. It is our hope that this document will provide much-needed (and requested) information to you about additional details for the upcoming effort. ROB DECKER Project Lead Table of CONTENTS 00 HEIGHT BONUS................................................................ 52 00 .... 0o O 6 SECTION 7 Justification.......................................................................................... 53 Right -of -Way Transfer............................................................................. 54 StudentHousing................................................................................... 55 HistoricPreservation.............................................................................. 56 Synopsis.............................................................................................. 57 ADDENDA............................................................................ 58 SECTION 8 FollowUp Information............................................................................. 59 AXIOMCONSULTANTS SUMMARY......................................................... 5 7 SECTIONVE QoHISTORY .............................................................................. 6 SECTION 2 00 HEIGHT BONUS................................................................ 52 00 .... 0o O 6 SECTION 7 Justification.......................................................................................... 53 Right -of -Way Transfer............................................................................. 54 StudentHousing................................................................................... 55 HistoricPreservation.............................................................................. 56 Synopsis.............................................................................................. 57 ADDENDA............................................................................ 58 SECTION 8 FollowUp Information............................................................................. 59 AXIOMCONSULTANTS SiteHistory......................................................................................... 7 CurrentViews..................................................................................... 8 Re -Zoning History................................................................................ 9 CZA................................................................................................... 10 ARCHITECT......................................................................... 17 SECTION 3 NeumannMonson................................................................................. 18 IldSNAPSHOT .......................................................................... 25 SECTION 4 Comparison: Existing vs. Proposed.......................................................... 26 ProjectProcess.................................................................................... 27 ProjectFootprint................................................................................... 28 Scale of Buildings................................................................................. 29 Quality Construction.............................................................................. 31 High Quality Amenities........................................................................... 32 The Student Experience......................................................................... 33 Security and Maintenance...................................................................... 34 SCALE...................................................................... 35 III SECTION 5 Master Plan Comparison......................................................................... 36 Project Massing Aerial and Street Views .................................................... 38 = 1711 -5 I M PACTS.............................................................................. 43 o SECTION 6 MasterPlan Integration........................................................................... 44 A Studied Need for Student Housing......................................................... 46 FinancialBoost..................................................................................... 48 City Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Integration ...................................... 49 LocalBenefits....................................................................................... 50 Affordable Housing................................................................................ 51 00 HEIGHT BONUS................................................................ 52 00 .... 0o O 6 SECTION 7 Justification.......................................................................................... 53 Right -of -Way Transfer............................................................................. 54 StudentHousing................................................................................... 55 HistoricPreservation.............................................................................. 56 Synopsis.............................................................................................. 57 ADDENDA............................................................................ 58 SECTION 8 FollowUp Information............................................................................. 59 AXIOMCONSULTANTS T m EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:1*I Executive SUMMARY STATEMENT OF INTENT Dear Mr. Fruin and Iowa City Councilmembers, Many thanks to all of the Iowa City council -members and city staff who have helped get this project off to a solid start. The rezoning process has provided all parties and stakeholders a chance to better understand what this project can be, and to learn what some of the most important factors will be to both city -staff and constituents of the councilmembers moving forward. Internally, our team is referring to this project in four (4) distinct phases with a number of integral and complex steps to be performed within each phase. These phases, in order, are: Rezoning, Height Bonus Discussions, Design, and Construction. This pre -application for height bonus represents the culmination of Step Two to be discussed at the December 4th, 2018 work -session with Council. It is the hope of our development team that you will find this document to be highly informative in regards to more specific details for the intent of our overall project. We have developed this document based on our own goals and expertise in these areas, with supplemental ideas gathered from similar efforts. It is our goal to provide a more comprehensive path forward and state our intent to you in terms of the scope, scale, and quality of this project. Our team is ready to move into the design stage which means significant financial costs. The first stage of design will be schematic in nature - and these designs will move us to the formal application for fifteen -stories with P&Z and Council. The intent of this document is to provide a high level lead-in to that application (and those discussions) in the hope that our path forward can be as clear as possible. We are looking for some degree of "buy -in" from members of the Council. We hope you will agree that this process is a sensible one for all involved. This pre -application provides a linear progression of the past -present -and future of this project. From historical details about the project through what will be our final requests for height bonus, we hope that this document will answer many of the questions you may have, and lead into a fruitful dialog. Should additional clarifications be necessary - a section for memorandums and addenda has been placed at the end of submittal so that it may become a living document for the City. We most certainly look at this project as a partnership and are looking forward to working with the City and it's officers to provide a wonderful and exciting new addition to the overall fabric of Iowa City! Thanks for your consideration, Rob Decker, MSE, CPG, CPII Axiom Consultants, LLC Project Lead AXIOMCONSULTANTS CSI m HISTORY W*F-1»IMINE Site HISTORY THE PAST SEVENTY -YEARS i Aerial view of the overall project location. ^s, NARRATIVE: The existing Pentacrest Gardens apartments were built in 1978 as part of Urban Renewal in downtown Iowa City. They are uniquely situated - straddling a critical connection point of Capitol Street between Burlington and Court Streets. In the 1950s, 60s, and 70s the block included a connection point of Capitol Street running North-South through the property and early aerial images show rough details of this paved right-of- way connecting what is now the heart of Riverfront Crossings to the central part of campus and downtown. When the apartments were built in the late 1970s, this critical connection point of the City's infrastructure was pinched off into it's current orientation. The apartment complex is currently comprised of five (5) three-story buildings and houses just under 100 apartment units located at the South edge of campus and downtown. The central portion of the site is open along the general Capitol Street orientation as can be seen in the photograph above. Current surface parking for the site consists of 150 total stalls located in parking lots to the North, South and West sides of the site. All parking areas empty into two North-South oriented alleys which also span the block between Court and Burlington streets. Current parking utilizes about 1.2 ACRES of OVERALL SPACE creating a large area of impermeable infrastructure, or a little bit more than 1/3 of the OVERALL site. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 7 I1101atT .1:1NJ:19-id.DM Current VIEWS ROOFTOP VIEWS FROM THE VIEW AT 316 MADISON STREET ii PA:F_1,-191«Zd1131&110:1*I Current views of the project site looking across from the West to the East AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 2: History 1 1 8 IW-A1[datTia:1[r]: 19-101.DM Rezoning HISTORY A SYNOPSIS OF THE REZONING PROCESS TO DATE Survey and Existing Utilities on the Parcel. RE -ZONING PROCESS and BEYOND: i PA:F_-V'1 91401113 1MIN:1*I a YU The rezoning process between 100-50OLLC and the City of Iowa City began in March of 2018 and progressed through Early September of 2018 when the Council formally accepted the rezoning with an amended conditional zoning agreement (included on the following pages.) The process involved a constructive ongoing dialog between Planning and Zoning, the Council, and the Developer including a number of informal and formal sessions and resulted in a clearer path forward for all involved. The following is a line -by line listing of the processes to date: March 2018: Submittal of Rezoning information to P&Z April 19th, 2018: Planning and Zoning meeting and acceptance of rezoning May 29th, 2018: Presentation of Revised Rezoning to Council July 2nd, 2018: 100-50OLLC Requested Deferral of Vote from Council to the August 7th Meeting July 3rd, 2018: Presentation of Revised Rezoning to Council August 7th, 2018: Presentation of Revised Rezoning to Council August 16th, 2018: Revised CZA Agreed to and Executed with Owner and City August 21st, 2018: First reading of rezoning by council September 4th, 2018: Second/Third readings of rezoning by Council - formal acceptance November 6th, 2018: First Work Session Discussion by Council December 4th, 2018: Presentation of Height Bonus Pre Application to Council Late 2018 -Early 2019: Schematic Design Early 2019: Formal Application for Height Bonus to 15 -Stories AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 2: History 9 liPA:F_F't91«Zfl1131&11 N:1*I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT Prepared by: Sylvia Bochner, Planning Intern, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, [A 52240; 319-356-5240 (REZ18-00014) Ordinance No. 18-4765 An ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 3.41 acres from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) zone to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD) zone located at 12 E. Court Street. (REZ18-00014) Whereas, the applicant, 100-500 LLC, has requested a rezoning of property located at 12 E. Court Street from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD); and Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan indicates that this property is appropriate for redevelopment of high density multifamily housing that contributes to a pedestrian friendly streetscape; and Whereas, the requested rezoning will result in a significant increase in residential density, necessitating street improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and Whereas, the large scale of the development (equivalent to a square block) necessitates careful consideration of design, and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has the reviewed the proposed rezoning and determined that it complies with the Comprehensive Plan provided that it meets conditions addressing the need for compliance with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan including dedication of right of way and construction of Capitol Street; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the owner and applicant has agreed that the property shall be developed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto to ensure appropriate development in this area of the city. Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa: Section I Approval. Subject to the Conditional Zoning Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein, property described below is hereby reclassified from its current zoning designation of High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC -SD): ALL OF LOT 5, ALL OF LOT 6, LOT 7 EXCEPT THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, LOT 8 EXCEPT THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, 1N BLOCK 101, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING THE CAPITOL STREET RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN BLOCK 93 AND BLOCK 101 FROM THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COURT STREET, IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 BLOCK 93, IOWA CITY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. Section II. Zoning Map. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment upon the final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as approved by law. Section III. Conditional Zoninq Agreement. The mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the property owner(s) and the City, following passage and approval of this Ordinance. Section IV. Certification And Recording. Upon passage and approval of the Ordinance, the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. Section V. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 10 W*F- 00 I W -A VQILI r.m. N MI.ka-id.DM ii PA:F_F't91«Zd1131&110:1*I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT PAGE 2 Ordinance No. 18-4765 Page 2 Section A. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section VII. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this 4th day of September 2018. MAVOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK t2ved b City Attorney's Office AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 2. History PAGE 1 11 W*U- 00 I W -A VQILI -M.N MI.ka-id.DM ii PA:F_F't91«Zd1131&110:1*I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT PAGE 3 Ordinance No. 18-4765 Page 3 It was moved by Mims and seconded by _ Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: Thomas that the AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: x Vacant — Botchway seat x Cole x Mims x Salih x Taylor x Thomas x Throgmorton First Consideration 08/21/2018 Vote for passage: AYES: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vacant-Botchway seat. Second Consideration -------------------------------- Vote for passage: Date published 09/13/2018 Moved by Mims, seconded by Salih, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 2. History 12 10*F-300IW-AVQILSm. IM:11a-id.DM liPA:F_F't91«Zfl1131&11 N:1*I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT PAGE 4 Prepared by: Sylvia Bochner, Planning Intem, 410 E. Washington, Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5240 (REZ18-00014) Conditional Zoning Agreement This agreement is made between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and 100-500, L.L.C. (hereinafter "Owner"). Whereas, Owner is the legal title holder of approximately 3.41 acres of property located at 12 E. Court Street; and Whereas, the Owner has requested the rezoning of said property from High Density Multifamily Residential (RM -44) to Riverfront Crossings—South Downtown Subdistrict (RFC - SD); and Whereas, the requested rezoning will result in a significant increase in residential density, necessitating street improvements for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, and Whereas, the large scale of the development (equivalent to a square block) necessitates careful consideration of design, and Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that, with appropriate conditions regarding compliance with the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, including dedication of right of way and the construction of Capitol Street and streetscape enhancements on Burlington Street, the requested zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change; and Whereas, the Owner acknowledges that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to ensure the development of the property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the need for dedication of right of way and construction of Capitol Street and streetscape improvements on Burlington Street; and Whereas, the Owner agrees to develop this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. 100-500 LLC is the legal title holder of the property legally described as ALL OF LOT 5, ALL OF LOT 6, LOT 7 EXCEPT THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, LOT 8 EXCEPT THE EAST 25 FEET OF SAID LOT, IN BLOCK 101, IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING THE CAPITOL STREET RIGHT OF WAY BETWEEN BLOCK 93 AND BLOCK 101 FROM THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON STREET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COURT STREET, IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT AXIOMCONSULTANTS 13 W*F- 00 I W -A VQILI Sm. NMI. 11a-id.DM fi PA :F_ -V'1 914011131 &11 N :1 * I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT THEREOF. ALSO INCLUDING LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 BLOCK 93, IOWA CITY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF. 2. The Owner acknowledges that the City wishes to ensure conformance to the principles of the Comprehensive Plan and the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. Further, the parties acknowledge that Iowa Code §414.5 (2017) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions on granting a rezoning request, over and above the existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs caused by the requested change. 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property, Owner agrees that development of the subject property will conform to all other requirements of the zoning chapter, as well as the following conditions: a. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any new development of the subject property, Owner shall; i. Submit and obtain the City's Manager's written approval of a phasing plan for the development. The plan shall include dates by which Owner shall dedicate right of way to the City of sufficient width, as determined by the City, to facilitate the reestablishment of Capitol Street. In no event shall dedication of the Capitol Street Right of Way occur more than 36 months after issuance of the initial building permit, and in no event shall completion of the Capitol Street improvements occur more than 24 months after dedication of the right of way. ii. Obtain approval of the exterior design elevations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. If Level II design review is required for bonus height, the Planning and Zoning Commission will review the proposed development plan and make a recommendation to the City Council. b. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the City Manager in said phasing plan or an amendment thereto, Owner shall dedicate the Capitol Street Right of Way to the City and build the Capitol Street right-of-way to specifications approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property. c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the subject property, Owner shall install streetscape improvements to enhance the pedestrian environment on Burlington Street and Court Street, as described in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. d. Owner shall satisfy the affordable housing obligations imposed pursuant to Iowa City Code of Ordinances 14-2G-8 through the provision of on-site owner -occupied dwelling units, on-site rental dwelling units, and/or the payment of a fee in lieu of the remaining dwelling units not provided on-site or as otherwise agreed to between Owner and the City in an affordable housing agreement entered into prior to issuance of a building permit for development of any portion of the above-described property. e. Development of the subject property must substantially conform to the building footprints shown in the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan (page 61). Any significant deviation in the building footprint, as reasonably determined by the City, must be approved by the City Council in a Level 11 design review process. f. Development of the subject property must include a landscaped interior courtyard between the two easternmost buildings. Access to the University of Iowa's Voxman Music Building from the interior courtyard may be restricted or limited for safety reasons if deemed appropriate by the City Council in a level II design review process. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 14 W*U- 00 I W -A VQILI Sm. NMI. ka-id.DM fi PA :F_ -V'1 914011131 &11 N :1 * I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT PAGE 6 g. The owner's architect team must have demonstrated experience to the City's reasonable satisfaction with both: 1) high-quality urban design; and, 2) large-scale student housing and/or residence halls (exterior and interior). The owner shall submit the qualifications of the architect team to the City Manager prior to the design review process to ensure this condition is met. The City Manager must confirm compliance with this condition in writing prior to the commencement of the design review process. h. In accordance with the Riverfront Crossing Form -Based Code, any request for bonus height shall "demonstrate excellence in building and site design, use high quality building materials, and be designed in a manner that contributes to the quality and character of the neighborhood". 4. The Owner and City acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land under Iowa Code §414.5 (2017), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are caused by the requested zoning change. 5. The Owner and City acknowledge that in the event the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional zoning Agreement. 6. The parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant with title to the land, unless or until released of record by the City of Iowa City. 7. The parties further acknowledge that this agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives, and assigns of the parties. 8. The Owner acknowledges that nothing in this Conditional zoning Agreement shall be construed to relieve the Owner or Applicant from complying with all other applicable local, state, and federal regulations. 9. The parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement shall be incorporated by reference into the ordinance rezoning the subject property, and that upon adoption and publication of the ordinance, this agreement shall be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office at the Applicant's expense. Dated this 4th day of Se tember , 2018. City of Iowa City G. J0 Throgmorton, Nfayor By: Attest: AxIOMCONSULTANTS PAGE 1 15 W*F- 00 I W -N VQILISm. I.ka-id.DIy fi PA :F_F't 914Z011131 &11 :1 * I Conditional ZONING AGREEMENT PAGE 7 Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk By: Approved by: ) C �-2'Q - I - z///. I/? City Attorney's Office City of Iowa City Acknowledgement: STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss: JOHNSON COUNTY ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on 201 by Jim Throgmorton and Kellie Fruehling as Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City. Notary Public irOnd for the StatLy of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) 4�E=MrmwsSll. r�z8 - Title (and Rank) L.ic-e.KSe "pec" 100-500, L.L.C. Acknowledgment: State of� county of This record was acknowledged before me on / �' (Date) by ameS A.Cla( (Name(s) of indivi uai( ) as (D (A3ne it (type of authority, such as member) of 100-500, L.L.C. Public in and fir the State of Iowa (Stamp or Seal) r zu KELLIE IC coMmmissim Title (and Rank) W.— M My commission expires: AXIOMCONSULTANTS 16 M O U O m ARCHITECT ii PA:F_F-19140111 1&110*I Architect of RECORD NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS NEUMANN MONSON ARCHI1' Our team has selected Neumann Monson Architects from Iowa City as our Architect of Record and design lead for this project. We selected Neumann Monson not only because they are great architects, but because they are incredible stewards of our City. For over forty years they have created new properties and revitalized existing and historic ones, helping to mold and develop the fabric of this town in ways that enhance and improve it for everyone that calls this place home. Their inclusion is a critical component to the dedication of our team towards high-quality design with a local focus. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect i8 Local EXPERTISE NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS ii PA:F_1,-191«0 11131&110:1*I Neumann Monson Architects has proudly called Iowa City home for all our forty -plus years. For the last twenty, we've been fortunate to be part of several major mixed-use projects that have transformed Iowa City. These projects have inspired similar developments in other communities such as Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and Davenport. As these urban infill projects energize Iowa's cities with vibrant prosperity, they are also creating urban markets that are ranked as best places to live, work, and play. Iowa's pragmatic sensibility guides all our work toward lasting solutions that have a clear sense of purpose. We develop design solutions that are rooted in durability, cost efficiency, and client centricity. We synthesize art and science to create designs that are distilled to the simplest, yet most intelligent solution. Our design solutions result from a process that encourages true collaboration with all team members. Together, we imagine, research, and design new ways to solve building challenges by merging innovation and expertise to create enduring architectural solutions. PEOPLE: The strength of our team lies in the talent of our individuals. We take pride in recruiting the best to bring together technical expertise, bold imagination, and proven experience to provide optimal service for our clients. COLLABORATION: Before we imagine, we interact. We draw strength from the connections and commitments formed through genuine collaboration. We merge the input of all stakeholders with our expertise to assure that each project is the best it possibly can be. COMMUNITY: We aim to shape our communities through design. Along with the responsibility to provide for clients, architecture also carries the duty to serve and shape our communities. We weave each project into its surroundings to harmonize with and enhance the site where it is built. ENVIRONMENT: Sustainability is our responsibility and our passion. We seek to design buildings that provide a socially responsible, healthy, and prosperous solution that improves the quality of life as well as the bottom line. E51 employees offices in Iowa City and Des Moines �9 6 4019w4s, of our business comes from repeat clients AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect 19 ii PA:F_1,-191«1011131&11 :1*I Experience QUALIFIERS NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS HIGH-RISE DESIGN The Whiteway Building introduced student studio apartments to Iowa City in 2000. This project was so successful, it soon led to the Vogel House Apartments, Plaza Towers, and in 2014, Park@201. These developments are home to an active commercial and residential mix. This project will benefit from our experience with high-rise construction in both Iowa City and Des Moines. Added requirements such as stair pressurization, stair tower lock controls, rescue communications, and the fire command control room introduce complexities, particularly when considering multiple towers. Emergency power will be a significant budget consideration, as each tower will mandate independent facilities. We've successfully navigated these considerations many times, even at Kinnick Stadium's Brechler Press Box, which is technically considered a high-rise. Recent High -Rise Experience: One Park Place Park@201 Plaza Towers Stopulus 400 River UI Kinnick Stadium Press box 515 Walnut, Des Moines IOWA CITY METRO AREA DESIGN AND LEVEL II DESIGN REVIEW EXPERIENCE FAMILIARITY WITH THE FORM -BASED RIVERFRONT CROSSINGS CODE This project will benefit from our experience with the City's design review process and our familiarity with the district's form -based code. Through our extensive experience with these processes, we know the City of Iowa City appreciates that we respectfully and proactively engage them with logical and accurate visual depictions of any deviation we propose. Neumann Monson has designed four buildings utilizing Riverfront Crossings design standards with approval from the Design Review Committee. When necessary, we have pursued deviations from the code. We are familiar with these procedures and have had success working with the City to create exceptions that are more contextually appropriate. We believe it's important that buildings relate to their surroundings in a way that's respectful to neighbors and the larger community. Recent projects that have been through Level II Design Review Hieronymus Square (Riverfront Crossings) Augusta Place (10 S. Gilbert) Plaza Towers Sabin Townhomes/Harrison Street Parking Facility (Riverfront Crossings) Park@201 AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect PAGE 1 20 ii PA:F_F-19140111 1&110*I Experience QUALIFIERS NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS Recent projects designed and approved in Riverfront Crossings One Place at Riverfront Crossings (South Downtown subdistrict; Commercial Building Type) Hieronymus Square (South Downtown subdistrict; Mixed -Use Building Type) Sabin Townhomes/Harrison Street Parking Facility (Central Crossings subdistrict; Liner Building Type with Parking Structure) Augusta Place (South Gilbert subdistrict; Multi -Dwelling Building and Liner Building Type with Parking Structure) AFFORDABLE HOUSING - This project will benefit from our experience incorporating affordable housing in Iowa City and beyond. As designers, we are happy to provide these needed options that allow all people to improve themselves and their circumstances through access to quality housing. We will work with you and the City to develop solutions that satisfy required criteria and create a viable and sustainable financial model for you and your tenants. During our 40th Anniversary year, we launched #40FORWARD; a year-long service campaign committed to more than 40 volunteer programs around Eastern and Central Iowa. The centerpiece project was our design for FUSE, a permanent home for the chronically homeless. This innovative solution integrates health and social services into permanent housing to set residents on the path to success. Recent projects that have incorporated affordable housing or workforce housing: Iowa City Sabin Town Homes, Affordable housing (three, two-bedroom units) Augusta Place (10 S. Gilbert), Affordable housing (six, one -bedroom units) 7 S. Linn, Meets Iowa Workforce Housing Requirements Park@201, Workforce Housing FUSE Housing for the Chronically Homeless (Neumann Monson's services DONATED) Des Moines Fort Des Moines Renovation, 142 income restricted units, qualifies for 4% LIHTC Wilkins Building (713 Walnut Street), 31 units restricted to 80% average mean income 515 Walnut, 135 units restricted to 80% average mean income I"IIVI1 WUHLI rY UKbAN UtJIVN A building is connected to its street, the street to its neighborhood, the neighborhood to its city, and the city to its region. Quality urban design optimizes relationships between buildings, places, spaces, activities and networks. Building and the open spaces between buildings invigorate cities and neighborhoods and promote human activity. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect 21 ii PA:F_1,-191«0 11131&110:1*I Experience QUALIFIERS NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS Thoughtful place -making begins with an inventory of context, infrastructure, and people. It is informed and requires listening. A successful project has a strong design logic that layers ideas, needs, and wants. Each day our actions as architects, engineers, and developers create a legacy that we leave for future generations. Neumann Monson Architects' goal is to improve the health and beauty of our world through quality placemaking, to understand the unique position of each project within its global context, and to remain mindful of the community and individual. A successful, well-designed, project marries the needs of its place and its program. The design of Park@201 is an example of such a union. The mixed-use building serves the rapidly growing needs for quality urban living, class A office space, and unique street -level retail on a bustling pedestrian plaza. The 15 -story tower is distinguished from the mix of eras and styles in its downtown setting and stands as a symbolic urban gesture. The building's transparent wrapper provides glimpses of the life within and inherently links a context of human scale back to the city below. STUDENT HOUSING Today's student housing must provide more than ever. Student expectations are increasing and competition for those students is also on the rise. Shifts in learning and socializing styles are affecting the physical environment. Student housing must strike a creative balance between maximizing capacity and making room for amenity spaces. Neumann Monson has been designing student -housing for most of our forty -plus years. Our designs strike a balance between collaboration and solitude; group interaction and undisturbed thinking. By harnessing natural daylight and sustainable building systems, we produce spaces that energize occupants to be their best selves. Recent student housing projects in Iowa City include: Vogel House 10 S. Gilbert/Augusta Place Hieronymus Square 7 S. Linn Northside Commons Sabin Townhomes 219 N. Linn AXO Sorority East brook Flats Whiteway Building J Design -Build Delivery Techniques When the Design -Build team embraces open, transparent communication in Woe search of the most effective solutions, their effectiveness is compounded.r I i � dramatically. Time and time again, over our forty -year history, we have kI4�' �.w� '�l_, delighted our clients in this way. Open communication allows the team to test more solutions quickly and early in the process, so the most effective path is identified. When done effectively, it builds a stronger foundation of ideas from the project onset. This foundation of solid communication and decision-making 41I�� s also minimizes risk. �I--I ®.��I_ �s AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect 22 fiPA:F_1,-191«0 11131&110:1*I Experience QUALIFIERS NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS Not all architects are able to successfully navigate the Design -Build process. It takes agility, foresight, and experience. Many architects can be flexible and make hasty decisions. But without foresight and solid communication skills to coordinate all these ideas concisely, the end product will suffer. Not all architects have a proven track record of producing high-quality, award-winning, design -build projects (with challenging budgets, no less). Neumann Monson solidly ticks all these boxes. Your team and your project will benefit from our proven ability to work collaboratively, with foresight, flexibility, and vision to achieve your goals, streamline your schedule, and maximize your budget. You can be assured the end product is one of which you will be proud. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION STYLE, ABILITY, UNIQUENESS OF APPROACH `An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.' More than any other factor, the quality of the drawings and specifications we deliver improves our ability to aid during the construction phase. We have a team of nine Construction Document Technologists that review every set of documents we create not once time, but five times. On a Design -Build project, the successful collaboration that takes place during the construction phase is a direct extension of the successful partnership established during the design phase. When the design and construction team have established familiarity and trust, solutions to the unknowns encountered during construction come much easier. On a project of this scale there will inevitably be challenges. We will remain a committed team member to collaboratively reach solutions with foresight, flexibility, and vision. We'll generate solutions that achieve your goals, streamline your schedule, and maximize your budget. We assume we would be part of meetings at least every other week, sometimes more depending on the phase of work. Our proximity to the site will allow us to quickly address issues as they arise. We will review submittals on all products and assemblies to assure they meet the conditions of the contract. We will also confirm completion of the work and provide all warranty and maintenance information, and the training needed to successfully take control of the building. I - i-rz -1-r �-Thp AXIOMCONSULTANTS 23 I1101a5Tia:1[r]:19-101.DM Experience QUALIFIERS NEUMANN-MONSON ARCHITECTS ii PA:F_1,-191«1011131&11 :1*I AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect PAGE 1 24 ? D G v = y• C v N S M — — sy S 00 A Q m c� � N M v N a � N E r�•r = 00 v ' = Q X 0 Q v N n a Q' M• �• G Z M Iowa City • • M • • • • • Plaza Towers Iowa City • • • • Park@201 Iowa City • • • • • Hieronymous Square Iowa City • • • • Harrison & Sabin Iowa City • • • • • 7 South Linn St. • • • • • Iowa City Augusta Place Iowa City • • • • • • Vogel House Iowa City • • • Whiteway 2000 Iowa City • • • One University Place Iowa City • Eastbrook Flats Iowa City • • Alpha Phi Omega Iowa City • FUSE Housing First Iowa City • 515 Walnut Street DSM • • • • Wilkins Building DSM • • • • 350 E. Locust Street DSM • • 219 E. Grand DSM • • Fort Des Moines DSM • • • AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 3: Architect PAGE 1 24 Ci m SNAPSHOT Site COMPARISON EXISTING vs. PROPOSED VS. aluilt in 1970s Urban Renewal Period 1978 N 96 Residential Units a 30 One -Bedroom 30 Two -Bedroom 36 Three -Bedroom 0% Affordable Housing 3.41 Acre Site $2,762,100 Land Value $6,858,700 Buildings Value $86,838 per ACRE 57.48 tenants/acre density Popular but Aging Historically Fully Rented (99% Occupied for 40 Years) Most Years Have Waiting List Not Sprinkled NARRATIVE: i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:1*I 2023 Scheduled Completion of Construction 1000 Residential Units 100/200 Efficiency & One -Bedroom 400 Two -Bedroom 300 Three -Bedroom 20,000 ft2 Commercial Retail/Office 10% Affordable Housing Requirement $3,500,000 Annual TAXES 2.54 Acre Site 0.87 Acres Conveyed for Capitol St. $1,377,953 per ACRE 787.40 tenants/acre density Unique Opportunity High Quality Student Housing "On -Campus" Alternative Reopens Capitol Street Will Pull from Residential Areas Huge Plus to Affordable Housing The existing Pentacrest Gardens apartments are uniquely situated - straddling a critical connection point of Capitol Street between Burlington and Court Streets. Redevelopment of this property would bring incredible benefit in the form of a new piece of critical infrastructure for the City as well as an incredible development opportunity for student residents of Iowa City. Increased walkability, pedestrian safety, and public transit capabilities would all be enhanced by this development. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 26 ii PA:F_1,-191«0 1113IMI N :1*I Project PROCESS FOUR DISTINCT PHASES , 4 nnn 0 05 I I I PHASE 1 PHASE 2 Rezonina Heiaht Bonus Disc April 2018 - Sept. 2018 The rezoning phase of the project began in April of 2018 with the City's Planning and Zoning Commission and successfully wrapped up in September. The rezoning resulted in a thorough understanding by both parties as to the needs and intentions by one another. This successful application of local processes has already resulted in a deep understanding of the overall effort. Late 2018 The height bonus discussion phase culminates with the submittal of this document and associated dialog with the City Council. It is our hope that this pre -application will provide much of the information and justification for why we feel a granting of height to 15 -stories in our early design -phase will be both warranted and beneficial for the City. PHASE 3 Desian Late 2018 - 2019 Large scale effort for the comprehensive design of this substantial development. Schematic design will be presented early for design -review process with City staff and formal height bonus application will follow thereafter. The process will involve full integration with the City and Level II committee. We are confident our high quality design will be a welcome addition for this property. PHASE 4 Construction 2020-2023 Construction of an accepted design would begin in 2020 and result in a phased effort to construct the overall facility. With a predicted 24 months required for each side and a theoretical 6 month overlap from one to the next, a 3+ year overall construction project is predicted at these early stages. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot PAGE 1 27 Project FOOTPRINT A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHAT COMPRISES THIS EFFORT 11, The project will be comprised of a series of fifteen (15) story buildings separated by at least one courtyard running East-West between the buildings on the West side of Capitol street with the possibility of a through - courtyard on the East side as well. Capitol Street will be restored between Burlington and Court Streets. OPEN SPACE: 20,000 SF (required) - 47,740 SF (shown at interior and exterior) South Downtown District Plan diagram from p 61 of the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Masterplan with the proposed 12 East Court site diagram overlaid. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 28 Scale of BUILDINGS SIMILAR BUILDING SCALE COMPARISON MATRIX 12 EC West 12 EC East 814FT (North Building) 834FT (North Building) 814FT (South Building) 824FT (South Building) 316 Madison (Apprommate Main Root} (Approbmate Main Roos} — — — — — — — — — — -- F1_5 F1_5 Stories f Wppraved ii PA:F_V-19140111113 1&11 N :1*I HGI Park@201 Plaza Towers The Rise 37 -OFT 832FT 833FT 831 FT Section diagram illustrating the elevational height of the tallest buildings in the Downtown and South Downtown districts. PROJECT 12EC HILTON GARDEN PARK@201 PLAZA TOWERS THE RISE YEAR 2023 2017 2012 2006 2018 STORIES ABOVE GRADE 15 (proposed) 12 13 14 15 APROX. ELEVA- 814-834 FT TIONAL HEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) 850 FT 832 FT 833 FT 831 FT PLAN DIAGRAMS NARRATIVE: 12 East Court will be constructed in the South Downtown sub -district. As proposed, it integrates well into the overall scale and feel of this part of town that sits just South of the Burlington Street corridor. In addition, the significant topography of the site (further discussed and detailed on the following page) allows for a project of this scale to better fit the "feel" of the site. Despite the fifteen stories proposed and indicated, the eventual top -elevation of our buildings would be lower than that of many similar efforts in downtown Iowa City. This exhibit shows a number of those buildings and how they compare to the proposed construction of our project. An elevation horizon of 850' above sea level is indicated by the dashed line. The view of this exhibit is looking directly North with a West -to -East cut through the Downtown and South Downtown areas of Iowa City. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 29 W*F- 00 I W -A VQILISm. I.ka-id.DM Scale of BUILDINGS PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT and TOPOGRAPHY f -23FT OFT -27FT -SFT -25FT -13FT -27FT OFT fi MEV-1 91401113 1&110:1 * I OVERALL SLOPE OF THE SITE: The 12 East Court parcel slopes aggressively from East to West across the entire site as indicated here and as confirmed by our completed site survey. LOW POINTS: The lowest expected points for each of the proposed structures is indicated here. These points would be used to establish finished - floor elevations from which the final height would be measured. 15 STORY SCHEMATIC: The 15 -story diagram at the left utilizes the prior two diagrams to complete the overall proposed layout of the project. The towers vary in height with the topography and provide a natural fit to the overall building placement. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 30 W*F-1»I[of-A VQaSm. PIN Quality CONSTRUCTION HIGH-RISE CONSTRUCTION The final materials and look of our buildings needs to be determined and designed. These materials will be reviewed and approved by the form based design committee with the City. Materials will meet national and statewide standards of practice for high-rise construction - meaning "durable high quality materials and architectural design." Construction for this project will also be managed and completed by a General Contractor that will be hired by our team during the design process. This will allow and integrated design -build approach with a capable contractor that has been involved with the project throughout a large portion of the design. This will result in a smoother construction effort as well as a familiarity between them and the City going into the multi-year effort. We intend to have the contractor as part of our design review meetings with the City throughout the entire process. Deep concrete foundation system with underground parking facility integrated into it Concrete and steel building core Commercial grade architectural enclosure system (window or curtain wall) Broken -up fagade including distinct breaks with decorative changes in material and composition fiPA:F_F-191«1011131&11 :1*I Windows sizing and patterns with appropriate trim elements Corner treatments along street -facing facades and facades that face high-value elements Mechanical systems will be hidden from view r L Complimentary looks to the primary and front facades, ' Entries with common lobbiesIJ Awnings and decorative doorway elements The form -based code for the City of Iowa City includes provisions for all of these materials and aesthetics. A number of the items listed above are from that code. We will diligently work with the Form Based Code Committee to ensure the highest quality design is implemented and our high bonus request will also require a level II design review for additional scrutiny by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 31 W*F- 00 I W -A 00ILIr-M.NI.ka-id.DM High Quality AMENITIES A HOST OF WONDERFUL ADDITIONS FOR RESIDENTS This one -of -a -kind building located in the heart of Iowa City will feature some incredible amenities for the residents that will make the facility both appealing and high-quality. Planned facilities include but are not limited to: GATHERING SPACES Areas for socialization and study are planned for the many areas of the buildings and site. Rooftop and step -back areas are likely spots for a number of these areas. Gathering spaces will potentially integrate a variety of features including seating and study areas, solar canopies, green spaces and planters, and more. ROOFTOP RESTAURANT' Our team will be examining the potential to include a rooftop restaurant of some sort. Significant details and implementation would have to be worked out with City approval but we would like to take advantage of the vistas of the Iowa River, Pentacrest/Old Capitol, Kinnick Stadium and downtown. COURTYARDS at GROUND LEVEL The ground level courtyards conceptualized in the master plan and included in some areas of this application will be fully designed to include incredible green spaces and forecourts that take advantage of the North-South orientation of this site to maximize sunlight into the corridor and provide additional areas for study, collaboration, and socialization for residents. POOL and SPA A pool and spa facility is planned for one of the buildings. INDOOR BASKETBALL COURT, TRACK and WELLNESS FACILITY i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:1*I An indoor half-size basketball court will be included for use by residents and plans are to include a raised track facility for year-round exercise and fitness activities. An adjacent exercise room will be designed to provide a comprehensive wellness facility accessible to all residents. COMMERCIAL RETAIL -OFFICE Some commercial retail and office space will be provided in strategic locations to maximize opportunities for highly visible, high-quality square footage. Much of this will be coordinated with City staff and the Iowa City Downtown Association to ensure it is properly designed and integrated. UNDERGROUND PARKING Plans include a full underground parking structure to service the entire facility. All parking count requirement will be met by this facility AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 32 W*F- 00 I W -A VQILI -M.NI.ka-Z0 The Student EXPERIENCE BUILT FOR AND AROUND STUDENTS Key within the City of Iowa City Master Plan as well as the requirements of the CZA are to provide a project that contributes substantially to the student experience. This can be done in a variety of ways that enhance lifestyle, learning, and safety and we have a number of ways that we plan to achieve these goals on our project. Critical to the design of common spaces throughout the project will be collaborative workspace design. We plan to have critical integration of these facilities in efficient and effective ways utilizing spaces both large and small to create quiet areas, meeting spots, and study zones for students to thrive. ST'UDENT'-BASED FACILITY The entire premise of the 12 East Court project will be to provide high quality student housing. While it isn't certain that this facility will be 100% student - occupied, expectations are that that vast majority of it will be student based and planning and design are focused on that goal. Unlike nearly any other private location in Iowa City, this project will be located central to the University of Iowa campus. Only a block from the Wellness Center, Main Library, Engineering College and Pentacrest, the experience of students at this location will be as close to "on campus" or dormitory living as a private site can offer. Our staff will work with the City of Iowa City design committee to ensure these features both meet code as well as sensible student living criteria in a way that facilitates the learning experience for the residents. ii PA:F_F-191«Zd1131&11 :1*I UNIVERSITY COLLABORATION Much like the plan for safety, our plan for the overall student experience features integration with the University of Iowa in as many ways as possible to enhance our project and make sure that it best meets the needs of the students who will be living there. Key to this effort will be our team collaborating with Melissa Shivers, VP for Student Life. We have already met with Ms. Shivers two times and plan to continue these discussions throughout the planning and design of the project. A MORE SAFE and SECURE ENVIRONMEN Key to the overall experience will be a safer and more secure environment. An enforceable safety plan outline is included in the following section to help ensure this environment is provided and maintained. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 33 W*F- 00 I K -A VQILI Sm. NMI. ka-id.DM Security and MAINTENANCE AN UPGRADED PROGRAM FOR AN UPGRADED SITE fii'A:F_F-191«1i11131M1 :1*I An enforceable security and maintenance plan is required for any project of this scale and ours will have a robust and unique plan which will be imperative because of it's focus on student housing, proximity to the University, and sheer volume of living units. Great opportunity exists for this project to provide far greater security and maintenance options for the residents. The owners will establish a new operation on site which will be dedicated to providing high-quality, professional, 24-7 security and maintenance offerings for all of the residents. COMPREHENSIVE FIGHTING DESIGN and PHOTOMETRICS Our team will be developing and designing and comprehensive interior and exterior lighting plan for all sides of the building, forecourts, common areas, and corridors. These lighting plans will focus on secure lighting levels and will be photometrically appropriate by pre -design and post -measurement. All plans will be developed and submitted to the City of Iowa City Building Department. This will also work towards making the alleyways West and East of the building more secure at the same time. INTERIOR and EXTERIOR CAMERAS Exterior and interior access points to the building as well as many of the interior common areas will be integrated with video surveillance. This system will work with current technologies to make viewing and associated response times as simple as possible. ON-SITE SECURITY and MAINTENANCE,. A 24-7 professionally staffed help desk will be available on site for the residents of the facility. The owners will also provide an online portal for residents to make maintenance requests and receive professional assistance with security and maintenance needs at any time. FiT6Dq*&1D0] IL 111 Exterior access points as well as many internal common areas will be controlled via electronic key -fob operation that can be both monitored and controlled by staff on site. This will allow for quick and efficient checks and adaptation to access security needs as required. This is also more adaptable than older number -pad type systems. UNIVERSITY of IOWA COLLABORATIOI Our team also plans to work during planning and design with University of Iowa personnel including public safety (located a block North of this facility) to integrate with them in terms of planning, lessons learned and integration with their adjacent facilities. A detailed, fully -developed, enforceable safety and security plan based on this outline will be submitted during design -review for the formal height bonus application. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 34 LO m • SCALE fiPA:F_F'191«011111 1&110*I Master Plan COMPARISION FOOTPRINTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS COMPARED TO THE MASTER PLAN (PAGE 601 AXIOMCONSULTANTS 36 w:SD y I - - � � I mz a 4 • • �a000� � al' �� __ I°e a � w •ra 6 a I � HARRISON ST. a a w 4b • b o � a i 4' L L.,� .� ••` . +a . . rar. � =a mak_ 4.. — — — —_A lE _tl ba � • a <. 'V Mr J PAPWTI" ST Plan diagram of the South Downtown Sub -District from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Masterplan document with the 12 East Court site outlined in red. " a 4 ■ 4 4 9 6 m 4 f 71 4 Wo v 0o L 4 A7 44 *""TR 0 7 HARRISON ST y a a y •* �1 I{g a a � � L �a °= e a a � rr e • a� = e r elm_ �! � G �. _ — — ....;,.a • or a� nTfSC ET Plan diagram of the South Downtown Sub -District from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Masterplan document with the 12 East Court site outlined in red and the proposed building footprint diagram overlaid. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 36 1:j *F-300 I WA 1101 ki 95M. 1:1 [c]. 19 -101 ki LIM i PA :F_ -V'1 91401113 1&110 :1 * I Master Plan COMPARISON BIRDS -EYE MASSING IMAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS COMPARED TO THE MASTER PLAN (PG. 61) P_ bs_ip 00V ir ■ vow, WOEC�11 ob Ir gilLo- JFA Birds -eye diagram of the site from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Masterplan document with the 12 East Court site out- lined in red. IL IP irzo 014 A ML 02, Birds -eye diagram of the Riverfront Crossings Masterplan with the 12 East Court site outlined in red, and an overlay of updated buildings along Burlington that illustrate their current size and shape, and an overlay of the 12 East Court development massing. AxIOMCONSULTANTS Section 5. Scale 37 Ab 6 ob Ir gilLo- JFA Birds -eye diagram of the site from the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Masterplan document with the 12 East Court site out- lined in red. IL IP irzo 014 A ML 02, Birds -eye diagram of the Riverfront Crossings Masterplan with the 12 East Court site outlined in red, and an overlay of updated buildings along Burlington that illustrate their current size and shape, and an overlay of the 12 East Court development massing. AxIOMCONSULTANTS Section 5. Scale 37 i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:1*I Project MASSING CONCEPTUAL BIRDS -EYE VIEW OF SITE PLACEMENT `^'^ yR1.,Ui4tnttt�ytt. �ft Rendered Aerial View looking Southwest from the Graduate Hotel. Conceptual view showing the project located behind the University of Iowa School of Music (Voxmann) and with the under -construction Hieronymous Square building to the left of the image. The University of Iowa Power Plant facility can be seen to the right far in the distance. 12 East Court will be tallest at the Northeast corner (closest to downtown) and step down to the South and West. r� ""M NEIGHBORHOOD POINT -of - REFERENCE DIAGRAM: The Graduate Hotel 210 South Dubuque Street AXIOMCONSULTANTS S, , C ._' 38 ii PA:F_1,-191«0 11131&110:1*I Project MASSING CONCEPTUAL STREET -LEVEL VIEW OF SITE PLACEMENT Rendered street -level view looking Southwest from the Mill. Conceptual view showing the project located behind the University of: Iowa School of Music (Voxmann) and with the under -construction Hieronymous Square building to the left of the image imagined as completed. The foremost 12 East Court building would be the tallest in terms of rooftop elevation on the site. NEIGHBORHOOD POINT -of - REFERENCE DIAGRAM: The Mill Restaurant 120 East Burlington Street AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 5: Scale 39 i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:1*I Project MASSING CONCEPTUAL BIRDS -EYE VIEW OF SITE PLACEMENT Rendered Aerial View looking Northwest from Clinton St. and Harrison St. Conceptual view showing the project located behind Johnson County •q g Courthouse and the University of Iowa School of Music (Voxmann.) 12 East Court will support the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings ! Masterplan by complimenting the Clinton Street promenade to the right. S RIF NEIGHBORHOOD POINT -of - REFERENCE DIAGRAM: The Midwest One Bank Building (One Place at Riverfront Crossings) 500 South Clinton Street AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 5: Scale 40 fiPA:F_1,-191«0 11131&110:1*I Project MASSING CONCEPTUAL STREET -LEVEL VIEW OF SITE PLACEMENT Rendered street -level view looking Northwest from Harrison St. Conceptual view showing the project located behind Johnson County Courthouse and the University of Iowa School of Music (Voxmann.) West portion of the project will not be visible or mostly obstructed from this Southeast view where the Johnson County Courthouse is on prominent display. NEIGHBORHOOD POINT -of - REFERENCE DIAGRAM: Harrison Street AXIOMCONSULTANTS Sectic 41 W*F- 00 I K -A VQILI Sm. NMI. ka-id.DM Project MASSING CONCEPTUAL BIRDS -EYE VIEW OF SITE PLACEMENT �, tit{1t iifi�� .a s„ fiPA:F_F-19140111 1&110*I t� Rendered Aerial View looking East from Riverside Drive and Burlington St. Conceptual view showing the project located behind the University of Iowa Wellness Center, the View at 316 Madison and the University of Iowa Power Plant (in the foreground.) The two western -most buildings of 12 East Court will appear as a set of smaller buildings from across the river. k NEIGHBORHOOD POINT -of - REFERENCE DIAGRAM. Spiraled Pedestrian Bridge crossing over Riverside Drive at the intersection with Burlington Street. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Sectb, 42 m IMPACTS W*F-1»I[oi1101atT .1:1ICU 19-101.DM Master Plan INTEGRATION REALIZING THE VISION liiPA:11191«Zfl113IMIN:1*I Throughout the rezoning process the 2013 Master Plan has been a topic of much discussion. The document is well researched, well crafted, and has been well integrated to date. Throughout our planning and visioning process, we have adjusted and fine-tuned our assumptions and plans to better fit the general intent of the overall plan. In their current iteration, and as conveyed in this document, we believe our plan both meets and enhances the original intent of the Master Plan. Indeed the Master Plan states (on pages 52 and 61 respectively): "It bears emphasizing - the Development Opportunities identified on the following pages are conceptual in nature. Like their predecessors in previous planning efforts, their value is to identify visions and ideas for specific areas. Successful visions will endure, but details will change and evolve as projects are implemented. " [About SD -4 where this site is located] "Additional building height and density may be possible if parking demand is accommodated underground of off-site. " Not only do we feel that this project FITS this site in terms of topography, we feel that it meets the requirements of the Master Plan intent for the site. It could easily be argued that no site in Iowa City better meets the requirements as an ideal location for student housing. The height and density on the site are justified by the demand for student housing in the market, but also by the proximity of this site to campus (it's essentially ON campus) and the unique opportunity to improve a facility that has been 99% rented for over four decades with students. AXIAL VIEWS The opening of Capitol Street will open and provide the South axial view of the Old Capitol. Per page 112 of the Master Plan this helps to create a well connected environment. Axial relationships help to reinforce the public realm network and provide areas of civil importance. rc _ 5. -r 7-,�,�I`,= The plan is designed to create a well connected environment. Axial relationships help to reinforce the public realm network and to provide areas of civic importance. Vertical elements, such as buildings, statues, fountains, gateways, Or other public art should be designed to be located within these areas. Individual buildings should be designed to respond to key functional and aesthetic cues. Important corners should receive special architectural features to respond to the increased visibility. These features include fa;ade enhancements, turrets, and/or entrance embellishments. All buildings facing the street must utilize quality materials and have a high level of detailing. Buildings fronting onto key streets, comers, parks, plazas, and other special spaces will have even higher standards than those in ot her I oc at ions. Terminated vistas with axial views to take advantage of include the Old State Capitol Building in the Downtown district, an 1830's era mansion at Prentiss and Gilbert, the County Courthouse in the South Downtown district, the Artist's Mews within the Gilbert district, and the historic Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Passenger Station within the Central Crossings District, F Special Requirements Enhanced Facades -� Axial Views Terminating Vistas Existing Waterways Study Area Boundaries AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 6: Impacts PAGE 1 44 1:1*F-30:1IKA1101a15-Ma:11[C]:19-101.D-&i Master Plan INTEGRATION REALIZING THE VISION IIIA ORILIT'N fi PA :F --V-1 91401111113 1 &11 :1 * I The opening of Capitol street also opens up perhaps the most critical thoroughfare into the rapidly development Riverfront Crossings area of Iowa City. As the direct connection to the new Riverfront Crossings Park, the historic Johnson County Courthouse and developing riverfront areas (as well as potential future University dormitories) bicycle, pedestrian, public transit and auto routes are all opened up and enhanced. DI:`y`,='E Bicycle facilities should be integrated into the design of the District in order to promote a variety of mobility options. The facilities shown here are conceptual in nature, and will be designed and installed over time as the City and MPO implement the Metra Area Bicycle Plan. Currently, the bicycle network within the District includes the off-street Iowa River Corridor TraH that parallels portions of the Iowa River, but few on -street bicycle facilities. Over time, multiple north -south options connecting Highway 6 and Downtown Iowa City may be provided. On -street facilities include Sharrows on Gilbert Street, a bike boulevard on Maiden Lane, and bike lanes on Madison Street, Capital Street,. and Clinton 5treet. Off-street north -south options include the future Ralston Creek Trail and an extended Iowa River Corridor Trail. This redundancy in north -south routes allows cyclists multiple options, and takes into consideraticn their destinations and skill comfort level. bicycle - Existiny Trail NeLwurk Proposed Near Term Trail Network — — — 4 Proposed Long Term Trail Network — — — 4 Sharrows R i k a I —es —i Bike Boulevard Crossing Enhancements for �J Bicyclists and Pedestrians Existing Waterways This will provide a more walkable, pedestrian -friendly environment for the overall area (pg. 30), and creative critical connectivity for the proposed near-term trail network identified and detailed on page 31 of the Master Plan. The centrally -located public transit hub on the North side of the Old Capitol Center is directly served by this future route as well and buses and other forms of transit will have direct access to the area via the Southern Capitol Street connection (page 32.) Trd`ISIt In the future, the District will be served by regional passenger rail and light rail service. The prospect of this service allowed for the creation of a transit -oriented development (TOD) framework for the district. The focal paint will be a transit hub located between Wright Street and Lafayette Street. The proposed regional passenger rail station, to be housed in theformer Rock Island Station, will be located on the north side of the transit hub and will serve the entire city. The south side of the transit hub will housea light rail stop, which will provide access to the central portion of the district. Two additional light rail stops are proposed - one to the north of Burlington Street, which will provide service to Downtown and the University of Iowa, and a southern stop, located along 1 st Street,. which will provide access to the Gilbert Street corridor and adjacent riverfront park. In addition, bus service will be expanded within the district in order to provide an additional layer of access for residents and visitors. Bus stops are proposed for key locations, and will be integrated with rail stops in order to provide enhanced coverage. Existing bus lines will be revised to accommodate modifications in the street grid, and a new route is proposed for the Clinton Street Promenade, which will be the primary connection between Downtown and the new regional park. i•. `s r,rr�rr�r.rrr^rrrruhyr ^»1,rr4..... nrrrnrr,�uuuY }rla+irrbfwe u�4Hy transit Bus Routes Proposed Bus Routes ^rrrr..r^ Regional Passenger Rail/Stop(future) Potential Light Rail/Stop (future) Existing Waterways Study Area Boundarles AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 6: Impacts PAGE 1 45 ii PA:F_V'1914 11131&110:1*I A Studied NEED FOR STUDENT HOUSING STRATEGIC HOUSING MASTER PLAN (2017) Incredible University Towns across the Midwestern United States are undergoing similar transformations to the City of Iowa City. As populations (both student and resident) continue to increase, towns are trying to find ways to develop in intelligent ways and in sensible fashion. For a number of decades the focus has been on PUSHING OUT and URBAN SPRAWL. As urban environments are re -imagined and continue to grow and enhance - the realization has been that taller, pedestrian -based facilities are better than flatter, inefficient developments designed and planned around automobiles. While cars continue to be an important part of our development, they should not be the impetus for design in Iowa City or any other similar University town in the Midwest. Downtown, students don't require a car to survive, and facilities with lower parking requirements like 12 East Court street contribute to smarter density, without an automobile focus, that enhances student life and livability. These developments also locate density into urban areas and out of strained residential ones. The December 2017 Strategic Housing Master Plan completed by Brailsford and Dunleavy for The University of Iowa, Iowa City, and Coralville identified the following primary challenges in the Iowa City housing market: The loss of affordable housing options in close proximity to Downtown Iowa City Continued enrollment growth of the university has increased pressure on rental options in surrounding neighborhoods On -campus housing supply has not increased with enrollment, pushing increasing numbers of upper division and graduate students into the private rental market The proliferation of renter -occupied houses in neighborhoods that were once predominantly owner -occupied has reduced supply, diminished character, and strained resources iht iibf ter= iht ki:puki vvi:kt The UI has a similar percentage of students residing in university and affiliated housing when compared to peer institutions. The University of Iowa's housing program, based on fall 2017 data, houses 26% of the total enrollment versus a peer aver -age of 28%. Comparing off -campus rental options shows that the market for UI students offers the smallest inventory of "student -oriented" properties. Iowa City and Coralville's limited number of large-scale student housing developments has led to a higher than average percentage of students occupying housing within the general rental market. These key findings, coupled with low vacancy rates and adjacency of campus and downtown has contributed to housing short -ages and incompatibility issues seen across the community. The 2019 delivery of additional large-scale, "student -oriented" properties will reduce the percent of students occupying units in the general rental market. However, to reach a more comfortable proportion, additional university beds and/or student -oriented properties would need to be added to the market. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 4: Snapshot 46 W*F- 00 I K -A VQILISm. II.ka-idal-&] Benchmark to COMPARIBLES SIMILAR MIDWESTERN COLLEGE TOWNS fi PA :F_F't 914Z011131 &11 :1 * I Student housing is a critical and integral part of this project. Much of the discussion to date has centered around similar cities, and their size and student populations. This page is being provided merely as a simple reference for the reader and for future discussions in hopes that it may prove helpful. iviA ;a-)Lj N, WISCONSIN STUDENTS: 44,413 tL Pu eo I r i AXIOMCONSULTANTS ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN POPULATION: 113,934 METRO AREA: 344,791 STUDENTS: 46,002 BLOOMINGTON, INDIAN POPULATION: 80,405 METRO AREA: 175,506 STUDENTS: 43,710 IOWA CITY, I POPULATION: 75,798 METRO AREA: 171,491 STUDENTS: 32,948 47 i PA:F_-V'1 91401113 1M10:1*I Financial BOOST TREMENDOUS IMPACTS FOR THE CITY The 12 East Court project will provide incredible financial gain for the City of Iowa City that might otherwise go unrecognized. Not only are these benefits substantial, but they are unlike nearly anything another project within the City limits could offer. As proposed, our project would bring not only a SUBSTANTIAL increase to the City of Iowa City tax -base, but would add a critical piece of infrastructure between Burlington and Court Streets in the form of a 4 -lane Capitol Street addition that connects vital pieces of the City's infrastructure. In addition, this street will come online at NO COST to the City of Iowa City while providing tremendous impacts to the overall fabric of the Riverfront Crossings District. Lastly, while commercial additions are not required for this property, our team does plan to strategically include some high quality additions to the overall inventory which are detailed a bit more below. TAXABI_..IF (BASF INCIRFASIF Section 4 (page 26) of this document includes a graphic that indicates some taxable expectations for the property as proposed. Final numbers obviously will not be available until the ultimate design is completed but based on our forecasts and utilizing the numbers available to us, we are looking at the following: Current Taxes: Assessed Value = $9,620,000 Annual Property Taxes = $296,118 ($24,677/month) Expected Taxes as Proposed: Assessed Value = $175,000,000+ Annual Property Taxes = $3,500,000 + ($291,667/month) *This would conservatively represent an almost 12 -FOLD increase at a minimum. The rental rates for the overall project will be determined as the project unfolds but are expected to be market rate, and competitively based, based on what this site has historically rented at. This property has experienced near -capacity rental for four -decades and the ownership group wants to ensure that this continues at this location. RIIVIA,I I PIIBIMFBB inrl IPO1/!►NTO1/! N ARROrIA,TION INTFGIRaATION Our team has already met with the Iowa City Downtown Association numerous times. In addition, Nancy Bird has spoken about this project (and in support of it) to the Iowa City Council at previous meetings. In speaking with Nancy and her group we intend to maintain a continual dialog, attend regular meetings with the group to update them on progress, to determine best -fit needs for the areas of our project that WILL include commercial spaces as well as additional possibilities for great additions to the lower level in terms of potential office space or retail focused on residents and neighboring areas. This effort HAS and WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE close dialog and planning with the City of Iowa City and the Iowa City Downtown Association to provide a smart and thought-out additions to the overall business community for Iowa City. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 6: Impacts 48 fi PA :F_ -V'1 9140111113 1 &11 :1 * I Climate ACTION AND ADAPTATION PLAN MORE EFFECTIVE IMPACTS The Iowa City Code includes height bonus requirements for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. We intend to look at a number of these items as we begin design but don't require them for our height bonus. In addition, we feel that we can implement a number of design elements into our project that will achieve a number of the goals of the 2018 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan which the City recently completed. Because the overall makeup of the steering committee for this plan came from a number of different stakeholder groups - we feel many of the goals included represent best -fit options for projects like ours, heading into the future. It is our hope that these details will provide a better path forward for this project to determine some additional benefits that we may provide. Of the 35 actions identified in the overall plan, we would draw attention to the following sampling of areas where we feel our project can integrate with the overall plan and provide positive impact: r r BUILDINGS I rr 1.3 Increase Energy Efficient in New Buildings. We plan to have all LED lighting throughout, utilize high efficiency`` HVAC equipment and utilize majority electrical equipment in towers. { Climate Action and 1.4 Increase in On -Site Renewable Energy Systems and Adaptation Pian Electrification. We will have solar panel arrays on the roofs and will potentially implement them as architectural features. 2.3 Increased Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation. We will be located close to campus and provide a large amount of secure bicycle storage. 2.4 Increase Compact and Continuous Development. We will be one of the most compact developments in the city. 2.6 Manage Parking Options. Parking requirements for this project can be met entirely on site and underground. 3.1 Increase Recycling at Multifamily Properties. We will incorporate a building -wide recycling program and plan to design recycling chutes into the overall program for the facility. 3.4 Divert Construction Waste from the Landfill. Construction plans and specifications for our project will include a waste -diversion program and we will work with the City Solid Waste Division to identify effective methodology for such a large endeavor. 4.5 Stormwater Management. Conceptual plans for the Capitol Street design include implementation of stormwater infiltration measures which will be similar in installation cost and maintenance to more standard piping and intakes. Final implementation of this will need to be approved and coordinated with the City Public Works Department. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 49 I:JC7:F_1»IM-A1Ld Local BENEFITS A HOST OF BENEFITS FOR THE COMMUNIT` fiPA:F_1,-191«1i1113IM1 :1*I From the earliest days of planning for this massive effort, the primary focus has been on keeping everything local. From our project leadership (including the owners) who were all born and raised in Iowa City, to our planning and design team which are all Iowa -City based small businesses, to internal requirements that we have for construction - our intent is to have this project be more local from the ground up than nearly any of its size in the metro area. We want to do this as a project for Iowa City based entities, not for large firms coming in from out of town. Indeed no issue has been more at the forefront of the discussions regarding this project than keeping as much of the work local as possible. A few of the highlights of this process and our intentions are included below. All of these will ultimately be predicated on final scheduling, availability, and budget. From planning, through design, and into construction we will keep as much of this project local as we can. This will mean a tremendous influx of dollars into the local economy for upwards of six (6) years while the project is under design and construction. The design team is already entirely Iowa -City based and a number of local contractors have already been engaged for discussions and planning. The Ownership group has placed a number of requirements on the project to use as much local labor as is financially feasible. We also desire to maintain fruitful existing relationships with local firms to continue our many years of working successfully together. In addition to locally -based labor, our team also intends to engage local trade unions to create a working dialog and an open process throughout the entirety of or project. We have already met with Bill Gerhard on three separate occasions and will continue to do so. We have discussed having project based requirements for our eventual general contractor to partner with local labor groups in meaningful ways and we mean to coordinate this effort openly throughout the process. We intend to do our best to maximize the percent of potential union labor for this project while still meeting our project budget and self-imposed local labor goals. The potential that this project has to affect the affordable housing market in Iowa City is tremendous. Baseline requirements alone would inject tremendous inventory and/or funding into the City for many years to come. Our plan for the affordable housing piece of this project includes even greater injection of resources in our opinion - this is described in more extensive detail on the next page. IMI�IFRgl`ry of IOWA and CITY C' I� IIS Irl Ik' Our team has already engaged a number of stakeholders at the University of Iowa including Rod Lehnertz and David Kieft and will continue to do so. While not a University Project, integration with the University and their student housing staff will be key to our success. Their input will be key to the final iteration of this effort and making sure that the student experience is maximized to the fullest extent with their input and assistance in related issues. AXIOMCONSULTANTS 50 i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1M10:141 Affordable HOUSING LASTING BENEFITS FOR YEARS TO COME Our project aims to achieve one of the largest (if not the largest) injection of assets into the Affordable Housing program in Iowa City to date. The vast majority of affordable housing in our area is at the 80% median -income level and new City requirements are that 60% median -income levels must be met for new affordable housing units. While this helps underserved populations, there is a demand for affordable units for lower levels than this. We feel that additional at -risk populations can be better served by a multi -faceted affordable housing package in more effective ways than a simple percentage of units within this facility. The project will require a 10% unit commitment into the affordable housing inventory OR a contribution in - lieu of. Current buyout costs are ninety-four thousand, six -hundred, fifty-two dollars ($94,652) per unit. In our opinion, providing affordable units in a complex that is meant for student housing is likely not the best mix for either the future students who will live there, nor the families who might occupy those units. Therefore, we have come up with the following proposal that we are willing to provide for our requirement. We feel that this option exceeds the minimum affordable housing requirement for the project AND provides a better overall application of assets for the communities in this metro -area that require affordable housing. 1 CASH nONATION INTO THE FUND $2,000,000 to be made in ten (10) $200,000 annual increments This is the equivalent of 21 + units 2. AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS 20 units located in RFC (or another location approved by the City Manager and City of Iowa City staff) will be converted to affordable housing for a period of 30 -years. This is the equivalent of 60 units 3. A SPECIALTY HOUSING FACILITY for OUR UNDERSERVED and MOST AT RISK POPULATION Imo° iiA ill! il!E', :1" im or 0 If or FW` Iowa City's FUSE Project which our team worked on previously. Within five (5) years of project completion the Owner will construct a dedicated affordable housing multi -family residence to be built at a location approved by the City Manager. This facility must be appraised at three -million dollars ($3,000,000) by a licensed appraiser at completion. If a suitable site can not be identified, an additional contribution of three -million dollars ($3,000,000) will be made into the Affordable Housing Fund. This is the equivalent of 31 + units REQUIREMENTS for THIS PROJECT -100 units or $9,465,200 PROVIDED BY THIS PROPOSAL -112 equivalent units or $10,679,120 *Owner would like reasonable flexibility for items 2 and 3 above, to be able to work with staff to allow for modifications or combinations that best meet these requirements. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 6: Impacts 51 m HEIGHT BONUS iiPA:F_- ,'19140111 1&110:141 Height BONUS JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST REQUEST PER CODE. Per the City of Iowa City Riverfront Crossings District General Requirements, Article G, 14-2G-7, Section G: BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS our team is requesting consideration for: The granting of additional bonus height in the amount of seven (7) stories for each of the proposed buildings to be constructed at 12 East Court Street. This would allow for construction of 15 -story structures for each of the building locations on the site which is the maximum allowed under the SOUTH DOWNTOWN SUBDISTRICT. The code provides for a number of incentives for developments to incorporate features that provide both public benefits as well as important goals towards furthering the objectives of the overall downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan. This project is eligible in a number of areas and we are specifically requesting to utilize three (3) different means in our overall request. Each of these areas is detailed in the subsequent sections to identify how we aim to achieve the associated goals. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY HEIGHT TRANSFER STUDENT HOUSING :I/_1001►1/a:trr]:N01M-11►1��:� Level II design review will be required for this project so this request will be put before both the City's Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the City Council. This project will meet or exceed the other applicable requirements as detailed throughout the various sections of this report and as required in the CZA. These include but are not limited to.: MEETING F.A.A. HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS DEMONSTRATED EXCELLENCE IN BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN USE OF HIGH-QUALITY MATERIALS DESIGNED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD All height bonus requests will be made in narrative and numerical form throughout this section. The narrative will provide a more detailed description followed up by snapshot numbers. Numbers will refer to requested stories ACROSS the four buildings. While the final project will be comprised of multiple towers/buildings this request (for the purpose of clarity) should be read as if it were a single building. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 7: Height Bonus PAGE 1 53 iiia EV39140111 1&110:141 Public ROW TRANSFER 14 -2G -7-G-4 NARRATIVE of ELIGIBILITY: Per item 14 -2G -7-G-4 of the Iowa City code, the public right-of-way height transfer is an option for sites providing that the "sending" land is needed to construct or improve rights-of-way that help to realize the vision of the overall Riverfront Crossings Master Plan and general vision of downtown Iowa City. JUSTIFICATION of REQUIREMENTS: The subject land has been contingently dedicated to the City of Iowa City in the Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA) signed on September 4th, 2018 (Ordinance 18-4765) and detailed in item 3, a, i of that agreement. The width of the right-of-way is described as "sufficient width" and is expected to be 100'-0" per prior discussions with City staff. The adjacent blocks of Capitol Street to the North and South are also 100'. Transferring this land to the City of Iowa City will provide an incredible opportunity for the City to add vital infrastructure. This piece of roadway will create a gateway into the new Riverfront Crossings subdistricts to the South, create opportunities for pedestrian and public transit flow, and revitalize this section of town. Additional information on these benefits was detailed in previous section of this document. REQUEST: Our team is proposing to transfer a calculated 304,000-ft2 (8 allowed stories x 38,000 SF of transferred area) of right-of- way to be utilized for the construction of a Capitol Street extension between Court and Burlington streets. This number is based on our completed survey and should be highly accurate at this point in time. As configured with our footprint and programming of the site (page 28 of this document), this would comprise an additional five (5) stories of height for the overall project. Ify[ep Cs'�ag 14ECrl�i I��Fi� 11M� _- pT REQUEST NUMBER: 304,000-ft2 (5 floors) AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 7: Height Bonus 54 i PA:F_-V'1 91401113 1&1104*I Student HOUSING 14 -2G -7-G-8 NARRATIVE of ELIGIBILITY. Per item 14 -2G -7-G-8 of the Iowa City code, additional building height may be granted for projects that are ideally located and designed to provide high quality living environments for college students. The project must be located within the University, South Downtown or West Riverfront Subdistrict; must be within 1000' of walking distance from campus; must submit an enforceable plan for on-site management and security; provide 24-hour management and security; provide a high quality interior and exterior living environment for students; and have secure bicycle parking and storage. JUSTIFICATION of REQUIREMENTS: Our project meets or exceeds each of the requirements detailed above, and within the City code: Located in South Downtown Subdistrict ✓ < 1 000'from University of Iowa campus ✓ Enforceable Security/Mgmt Plan (pg.33) ✓ 24-hour ON-SITE Mgmt./Security ✓ High Quality Interior and Exterior ✓ Secure Bike Parking and Storage ✓ Owner will Maintain Valid Rental Permit ✓ REQUEST. Our team is requesting an additional one and one- half (1.5) stories of height based on the proposed elements to be integrated into our building. While we feel we have justification to ask for the maximum four (4) allowed, we feel our application will be strong enough to only require < 40% of the needed height bonus under this provision. Our project will provide a unique, high-quality, student living experience in Iowa City. The location of this project is essentially WITHIN the University of Iowa campus, has the support of University staff, students, and student representatives, and provides much needed student density in a location where it is best suited. We truly feel this project is a once -in a lifetime opportunity for the City to approve. REQUEST NUMBER: 1.5 floors requested (4 allowed) AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 7: Height Bonus 55 1iMEV39140111 1&1104*I Historic PRESERVATION 14 -2G -7-G-3 NARRATIVE of ELIGIBILITY. Per item 14 -2G -7-G-3 of the Iowa City code, the historic preservation height transfer is an option for sites providing that the "sending" site is listed as an Iowa City Landmark, eligible for such a landmark, or is listed on the National Historic Register or is eligible for such a designation. JUSTIFICATION of REQUIREMENTS: The Tate Arms house located at 914 South Dubuque Street was designated such a landmark in 2014 and preserved by the Owner. The Owner was granted 34,800 ft2 of credit for height transfer. Per the Memorandum from City Staff (Karen Howard) submitted on December 23rd, 2014 to the Iowa City Council, 7,400 ft2 of credit was used leaving 27,400 ft2 in a "bank" for the Owner. REQUEST NARRATIVE. Our team is requesting to use the entire 27,400 ft2 of available credit directly as bonus height credit towards the building project to be constructed at 12 East Court Street. With an expected four towers to be constructed per the rezoning application process, this total could roughly be expected to comprise approximately two upper levels (above the step -back) for one of these buildings. This breakdown is provided only as a point of reference. We request that ALL of the credit be utilized towards additional height above the prescribed 8 -stories under the rezoning. We believe that allowing the transfer of the square footage on this historic property, albeit comparatively minor to the project as a whole, is emblematic of an important precedent. The preservation of historic properties in our City is important to its overall fabric and towards maintaining the identity we all love as citizens. The City's program of preservation and height bonus is an important one and critical towards the continued desire by developers to continue to provide such efforts. The transfer of this square footage sets a great example for ALL projects moving forward and cements the City's process as a VIABLE and DESIRABLE option for developers moving forward. REQUEST NUMBER: 27,400ft2 (-0.5 floors) AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 7: Height Bonus 56 i PA:F_-V-1 91401113 1MIN:141 Height BONUS SYNOPSIS OF THE REQUEST NARRATIVE of ELIGIBILITY: The City of Iowa City code allows for ten (10) different methods for a developer to request additional height for a project. We are planning to make requests within three of these categories at the current time. Below is a matrix of the various options the City allows with the areas filled in for the various requests that we plan to make. We hope that this simple chart provides an easy visual for understanding of the overall request and will serve as supplemental material for the additional information described in greater detail earlier. 2. 3. 4. _T5. T 7. 8. 9. �10. 11. Open Historic Public Class A Public Art Enrgy and Student Hotel Aff Elder Space Presery ROW' Office Env Housing Space — Housing Housing SQ -FT I - FLOORS I - OPTION? I - 11 mily-AR �II1.00� 0.5 5 - - - 1.5 - - - *While our project will also include elements to justify height bonus requests utilizing methods 7 and 10 above, we believe we can easily justify our request using methods 3, 4, and 8 while STILL providing value-added benefits under items 7 and 10 as detailed earlier in this document. REQUEST NARRATIVE: Our team will be requesting the additional height for this project in order to maximize the site to its full potential and because we feel that it makes sense for this location as well as complying with the overall intent of the City Master Plan and satisfying demand for high quality student housing. # NAME 1 Right -of -Way Transfer 2 I Student Housing 3 Historic Preservation SECTION ALLOWED REQUESTED JUSTIFICATION 14 -2G -7-G-4 No limit 5 Transfer of land for Capitol Street extension 14 -2G -7-G-8 1 4 1 1.5 1 High quality and unique student housing 14 -2G -7-G-3 No limit 0.5 __fPreservation of Tate Arms REQUEST NUMBERS: 7 total floors requested ALLOWED by COMPLETED REZONING (Riverfront Crossings, South Downtown Subdistrict) = 8 WILL BE REQUESTED = 7 TOTAL FLOORS PROPOSED ACROSS THE SITE = 15 *As measured from finished -floor elevation (FFE); buildings to the East will be higher than those to the West AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 7: Height Bonus AGE 1 57 m ADDENDA tiGrl.It,Ti:NM1.ka:idILLIM Addenda and FOLLOW-UP iii'�r_FII9100111 9.110*1 This section exists so that this pre -application can be a "living document." As this will be public request, we want it to exist in it's original format and then intend to addend it as needed with additional requests and/or memoranda that can be added in this APPENDIX section. We hope that this will provide the best approach to this application process and serve as an excellent record for the process for this particular project. AXIOMCONSULTANTS Section 8: Addenda PAGE 1 59 Item Number: 8. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Pending City Council Work Topics ATTACHMENTS: Description Henoing uty Uouncil Work Topics ;" rrrm�m�� -�.a 6 CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS November 28, 2018 Strategic Plan Actions Requiring Initial City Council Direction: 1. Through cooperation with the Iowa City School District, Iowa Workforce Development, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa Works, and others, increase opportunities for marginalized populations and low- income individuals to obtain access to skills training and good jobs 2. Improve collaborative problem -solving with governmental entities in the region on topics of shared interest 3. Explore expanded use of a racial equity toolkit within City government, embedding it within city department and Council levels 4. Review the preliminary traffic accident analysis and related set of recommendations and hear from University of Iowa Professor Jodi Plumert on her related research. Discuss approach to on -street parking regulations for narrow streets. Other Topics: 1. Joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission 2. Review alternative revenue sources 3. Consider a plan for rubberized surfacing at park playgrounds and develop strategies to address equity gaps noted in the Parks Master Plan and plan for the equitable distribution of destination parks within an easy and safe distance of all residents. (request Parks Commission to discuss first) 4. Review of RFC Form Based Code, including density bonus provisions and height allowances 5. Discuss future City actions in response to the home at 101 Lusk 6. Review options to bolster the South District Home Investment Partnership program Item Number: 9. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 29, 2018 Memorandum from Police Chief and City Attorney: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) recommendations for ordinance amendments ATTACHMENTS: Description Memorandum from Police Chief and City Attorney: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) recommendations for ordinance amendments City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: November 29, 2018 To: City Council From: Jody Matherly, Police Chief Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney iii Re: Community Police Review Board (CPRB) recommendations for ordinance amendments By memo to the City Council of July 23, 2018, a copy of which is attached, the CPRB requested that Council consider adopting certain revisions to the CPRB ordinance (City Code 8-8). This memo will provide staffs input on each of these recommendations and suggest one additional change to the ordinance. CPRB Proposals 1. In the event that an internal affairs investigation is released to the public it will be available to any member of the public. Staff has no objection to the city attorney providing such internal affairs investigation to the board in the form that it is released to the public. Staff notes that the findings and conclusions of the police chief would have been provided to the board as part of the chiefs report to the Board. 2. Staff has no objection to the board including in its annual report to the city council a statement of whether the board's decision differed from that of the police chief and/or city manager. 3-6. Staff supports the CPRB proposal that the police chief meet with the CPRB to discuss the anticipated differences in the chiefs report and the board's yet to be issued public report. The police chief welcomes the opportunity to review how the facts of the complaint and the concerns of the board relate to the policies, procedures, laws and training that govern the conduct of the ofFioer. As do other board discussions about a complaintlintemal investigation, this discussion would occur in closed session. 7-10. Staff has no objection to the board stating in its public report whether the board affirmed or rejected the conclusion set forth in the police chief's report (use of "conclusion'" rather than "opinion" will track the language of the ordinance). 11. Staff does not support the board's proposal that the board be able to request an independent investigation of the facts of the complaint if the board's public report to the Council does not affirm the decision of the police chief. Staff has both logistical and legal concerns about this proposal as follows: a. The board currently has the option of hiring an independent investigator once it receives the chiefs report. (8-8-7(B)(1xf)). This is the highest "level of review" available to the board, with the lowest being "on the record with no additional investigation." b. An investigation, if necessary, should be done before the facts are revealed to the public in the board's report, not after. c. Differences in the reports of the police chief and the board typically have less to do with a disagreement about the facts, and more to do with a difference in perspective. If there are such differences, the chief and the board should have a discussion and learn from each other's perspectives in an attempt to facilitate less November 29, 2018 Page 2 conflict in the future. As noted above, staff supports the CPRB's proposal for meeting between the CPRB and the chief. d. The independent investigator will not have the same access as the police chief does to the police officer against whom the complaint is made. Under Iowa's civil service law (Iowa Code Chapter 400) and the police officer's bill of rights (Iowa Code Chapter 80F), the police chief has the authority to discipline officers, to initiate an internal investigation into a complaint against an officer and to question the officer. An officer who invokes his 5th Amendment privilege against self- incrimination may be compelled, by threat of termination, to respond to the questions posed by the internal investigators. This is known as the Garrity/Gardner principle referred to in section 8-8-5(8)(1) of the ordinance: "Prior to Investigation of any board complaint, the police chief shall first give Garrity and Gardner advice to all police officers implicated in the complaint, as required by constitutional law. This means the officer cannot be required to waive the officer's constitutional right against self-incrimination. However, the officer may be required to answer questions during the Investigation as a condition of the officer's employment, but any admissions made by the officer cannot be used against the officer in a criminal proceeding." The CPRE Is not the employer, does not have disciplinary authority, and therefore the officer cannot be compelled to answer the independent investigator's questions. See, e.g. City & County of Denver v. Powell, 969 P.2d 776 (Court App. 1998) (Public Safety Review Commission not officers' employer and cannot compel them to testify; any statements they might make would be voluntary and would, therefore, effect a waiver of their 5m Amendment rights such that their statements could be used against them in a subsequent criminal proceeding.) e. The police chief notes that it is his job to thoroughly investigate complaints of misconduct. If he fails at that it is his expectation he will be held accountable. Staff proposal Section 8-8-5 (13)(4) of the ordinance provides, in part: "The city manager will participate in the interview process with the officers involved in the complaint. A review of the city manager's involvement under this provision will be done in two (2) years to ensure the practice is producing its intended purpose." This provision was added in 2013 on the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee as one of several proposed changes to address the following Issue Identified by the Committee: Of those who had heard of the Police Citizen Review Board, a major area of concern was that the current system is structured so that the police department is policing itself. The high level of public suspicion related to the Police Citizen Review Board is such that many citizens feel that if they participate in process the outcome will prove disadvantageous to them. Diversity Committee Report to City Council, March 2013 p.4 (IP2 03-07- 13). The city manager and city attorney had been involved in the Committee's discussions and the staff response to this recommendation was: The importance of maintaining objectivity in these cases remains a critical component of the process. City staff believes that the city manager can participate in the interviews but wishes to review this practice over time to November 29, 2018 Page 3 insure the recommendation is achieving its intended purpose and the integrity of the process is maintained. Memorandum to City Council from City Manager Tom Markus dated June 11, 2013 (Agenda 6-18-13 Item 15). The minutes of the Ad Hoc Diversity Committee reveal that the proposal originated from the Committee's desire to include persons outside the police department in the investigatory process. (See minutes of 11/19/2012 and 2120/13). The provision has not been reviewed since its adoption in 2013. After participating in police officer interviews for two and a half years, the city manager does not believe that the practice adds value to the process, but rather, slows it down by complicating the scheduling of interviews of officers and supervisors who often don't have many, if any, work hours that overlap with traditional business hours. Additionally, each case can require hours of preparatory work. The city manager will continue to review the outcomes of the police chiefs investigation and the CPRB's report. It is his ability to question the police department's findings and make changes in the police department — whether policy or personnel — that provides value to the process. The city manager notes that he is happy to meet with the CPRB and police chief if the CPRB questions the police chiefs decision. To this end, staff proposes an addition (in rad) to the CPRB's proposed amendment #3: The fallowing subparagraph 6 shall be added to the end of SECTION 8-8-5 (B): In the event the board's decision differs from that of the volice chief, the chief shall meet with the board in closed session to discuss the discrepancy of opinion If the board requests the city manager's Msence at said meetinthe ci mane r ' also attend. Such meeting shall take place prior to the issuance of the board's public report to the city council. Encl. Cc: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk for distribution to CPRB MEMORANDUM DATE: July 23, 2018 TO: City of Iowa City Council FROM: Community Police Review Board Members Re: proposed revisions to Ordinance 8-8 The members of the CPRB request that the City Council consider adopting the following proposed revisions to the CPRB ordinance. (Suggested additions are shown in bold and underline.) The last sentence of SECTION 8-8-2 (L) shall be amended to read as follows: If the police chief and the city manager find the police officer's actions constitute misconduct and discipline is imposed by the police chief or city manager, the internal affairs investigation may become a public record to be released by the city attorney to the extent provided by law, in which case the city attorney shall forward a copy of such internal affairs investigation report to the board. 2. The second sentence of SECTION 8-8-2 (N) shall be amended to read as follows: In addition to the central registry, the board shall provide an annual report to the city council, which report shall be public and shall set forth the general types and numbers of complaints, how they were resolved, whether the board's decision differed from that of the police chief and/or city manager, demographic information, and recommendations as to how the police department may improve its community relations or be more responsive to community needs. 3. The following subparagraph 6 shall be added to the end of SECTION 8-8-5 (B): In the event the board's decision differs from that of the police chief, the chief shall meet with the board in closed session to discuss the discrepancy of opinion. Such meeting shall take place prior to the issuance of the board's public report to the city council. 1 4. The last un -lettered subparagraph of paragraph (B)(2) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall become numbered paragraph 3. 5. The following shall be inserted as subparagraph (B)(4) of SECTION 8-8-7: If the board disagrees with the decision of the police chief or city manager with respect to the allegations of misconduct, the board and the police chief and/or city manager shall meet in closed session to discuss their disagreement about the complaint. Such meetingshall hall take place prior to the issuance of the board's public report to the city council. 6. Subparagraph (B)(3) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(5). 7. The following sentence shall be added to the end of newly re -numbered subparagraph (B)(5) of SECTION 8-8-7: The public report shall indicate whether the board affirmed or rejected the opinion set forth in the report of the police chief and/or city manager. 8. Subparagraph (B)(4) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(6)- 9. Subparagraph (B)(5) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(7). 10. Subparagraph (B)(6) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(8)• 11. The following shall be inserted as new subparagraph (B)(9) of SECTION 8-8-7: If the board's public report to the city council does not affirm the decision of the police chief or city manager, the board may request an independent investigation, which shall be completed within 90 days after the issuance of the board's public report. The city council maX grant requests for extensions to this deadline upon good cause shown. E The independent investigator shall be selected and hired by the board. The independent investigator shall issue a public report to the city council and to the board concerning the investigation. Such public report shall include detailed findings of fact concerning the complaint, together with a clearly articulated conclusion which explains why and the extent to which the complaint is "sustained" or "not sustained". The independent investigator's public report shall not include the names of the complainant(s) or the police officer(s). The independent investigator's public report shall not include any discipline or personnel matters, although the independent investigator may comment generally as to whether the investigator believes discipline is appropriate without commenting on the extent or form of discipline. A copy of the independent investigator's public report shall be given to the complainant(s), the police officer(s), the police chief, the equitX director, and the city manager. The independent investigator shall not issue a report which is critical of the sworn police officer's conduct until after a "name clearing hearing" has been held, consistent with due process law. The independent investigator shall give notice of such hearing to the police officer so that the officer may testify before the independent investigator and present additional relevant evidence. The independent investigator shall be responsible for protection of all state and federal rights enjoyed by the officer. The officer may waive the right to this hearing upon written waiver submitted to the independent investigator. If the independent investigator's report is not critical of the officer's conduct, the investigator is not required by law to offer a hearing to the officer, but the investigator may hold hearings as deemed appropriate by the investigator. 12. Subparagraph (B)(7) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(10). 13. Subparagraph (B)(8) of SECTION 8-8-7 shall be re -numbered as subparagraph (B)(11), and shall be further amended to read as follows: No findings or report submitted to the board or prepared by the board or any independent investigator shall be used in any other proceedings.