Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-08-01 Info PacketI t i IP ALIN CITY O IOWA CITY www.icgov.org City Council Information Packet IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule August 6 Work Session IP2. Memo from Senior Planner: Land Development Process IP3. Pending City Council Work Session Topics Miscellaneous August 1, 2019 IP4. Memo from City Manager: Blackbird Investments / Forest View Tenants Association Request for Financial Incentives IP5. Memo from Neighborhood & Development Services Director: Strategic Plan Action Item: Review of Affordable Housing Action Plan and New Strategies IP6. Memo from Senior Center Coordinator: Potential use of Senior Center Kitchen Facility IP7. Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: Future of the Telecommunications Commission IP8. Letter from Climate Action Advisory Board: Recommendation for Climate Action Commission IP9. Memo from City Clerk: Listening Post Update IP10. Email from Big Ten Property Management LLC: Letter from City Manager [Staff response included] IP11. Quarterly Investment Report: April 1 to June 30, 2019 I11312. Civil Service Examination: Communications Aide IP13. Civil Service Examination: Senior Engineer Draft Minutes IP14. Human Rights Commission: July 16 IP15. Parks & Recreation Commission: July 10 August 1, 2019 City of Iowa City Page 1 AAl CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.Icgov.org City Council Agenda — August 6, 2019 Information submitted between distribution of packet on Thursday and close of business on Monday. Late Addition(s): Consent Calendar Item 6. Resolutions and Motions: 6.z June Disbursements 2019 - Motion to approve disbursements in the amount of $12,545,298.26 for the period of June 1 through June 30, 2019, as recommended by the Finance Director subject to audit. Disbursements are published and permanently retained in the City Clerk's office in accordance with State Code. Item 21. Announcement of Vacancies: Parks & Recreation Commission - One vacancy to fill an unexpired term. Upon appointment — December 31, 2022. (Luke Foelsch resigned) Correspondence included in Council packet. Applications must be received by 5:00 P.M., Tuesday, September 10, 2019. Late Handout(s): Consent Calendar Item 8 Correspondence: 8.i Adin Herr: Public Transit [Staff response included] I I IIVI I I IQIIVI I rG\d%Gl' V/V 1/GV IA IP10 Email from Big Ten Property Management LLC (x2): Letter from City Manager [Staff response included] Item Number: 1. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council Tentative Meeting Schedule j r 1 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule *1 Subject to change 00=0 CITY OF IOWA CITY August 1, 2019 Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, August 6, 2019 4:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session (following special formal) 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 20, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 3, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, September 17, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, October 1, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, October 14, 2019 4:00 PM Reception City of Iowa City 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, October 15, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, November 4, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, November 19, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 3, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, December 17, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Item Number: 2. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from Senior Planner: Land Development Process ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Senior Planner: Land Development Process CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: August 1, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner Re: Land Development Process Background The City Council requested that staff explore the current land development process and report back in the summer of 2019. This request came from an evident misalignment of expectations between the many stakeholders involved in land use and development approvals in the community. Such misalignment is contributing to the inefficient use of staff time, increased project delays and costs, and confusion amongst all stakeholders. At the City Council's work session on July 24, 2019, staff from Opticos Design presented an introduction to this topic. At the August 6 work session, staff will continue this conversation with the Council. Specifically, staff would like the Council's feedback on the three questions at the end of this memo. It is staff's hope that through this memo and ongoing conversations with the City Council expectations can be clarified for all stakeholders in the land use and development approval process. Summary of the Land Development Process Figure 1 provides a high-level summary of the City's land development process — from comprehensive planning to building permits and inspections. The City Council is encouraged to review Attachment 1, which provides a detailed overview of each of the steps. Step 1.. Comprehensive Step 2. Legislative 73aAdpmirrt',trative S#ep fib. Non Admirristra#i+re Step 4. Final PermitsPlanning Land Use Appr®vals als Ad Land Use Approvals and Inspections • Step 1: The comprehensive plan, including district plans, is the guiding policy document for growth and development in the city. It covers a wide -range of topics and outlines a community -agreed upon vision. Comprehensive planning processes are initiated by the City, but include a wide -range of stakeholders. • Step 2: Legislative land use approvals include annexations, rezoning, and subdivisions. These actions are site-specific and initiated by property owners and developers. Legislative land use approvals also include text amendments to the zoning code. These requests require a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and formal approval from the City Council. Consistency with the comprehensive plan is evaluated for these proposals. August 1, 2019 Page 2 • Step 3a: Administrative processes include all staff -level reviews and approvals. This includes design review, form -based code review, and site plan review. Through these processes staff ensures that the applicable standards in the zoning code (e.g. landscaping, screening, parking, etc.) are met. • Step 3b: Some design review and form -based review requests require City Council review and approval. One example includes height bonus requests beyond two stories within Riverfront Crossings. • Step 4: After a project receives all the necessary land use approvals, the applicant applies for a building permit. Overview of July 24 Work Session with Opticos Design On July 24, Tony Perez, the Director of Form -Based Codes with Opticos Design, facilitated a discussion with the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission on the land development process. The following are the key takeaways from the discussion: 1. Comprehensive Planning: Perez noted the importance of comprehensive planning in creating the foundational vision for a community. He identified three areas that are often lacking in comprehensive plans that should be incorporated: a. Information on physical characteristics — both the existing built environment and envisioned built environment. b. Identification of walkable, urban areas; auto -oriented, suburban areas; as well as those transitional areas. c. Identification of areas that are stable and areas that are changing. 2. Predictability: Perez discussed the value that form -based codes can provide in creating a more predictable process. Form -based codes and standards are frequently adopted to implement a community -agreed upon vision that ensures quality design, allows for a streamlined review process, and provides clarity to developers and community members alike. Perez noted that form -based standards are not appropriate for auto -oriented, suburban areas, but are appropriate in walkable, urban areas. Furthermore, Perez discussed the option of making conventional zoning standards clearer. Both form -based regulations and amendments to the conventional zoning code would allow the city to codify requirements, as opposed to condition them, resulting in a more predictable process. By utilizing a predictable, administrative approval process, the City's expectations are made clear. Projects that sometimes meet community resistance such as multi -family and affordable housing have assurance that if the regulations set forth are met, the project will be approved. A discretionary, non -administrative review process can add uncertainty to these projects. 3. Zoning Code Amendments: Members of the City Council mentioned revisiting the City's Multi -Family Site Development Standards and Minimum Open Space Requirements for on-site, private open space. A concern was also raised regarding the Planned Development Overlay rezoning process. Perez stated that OPD processes are a sign that the base zoning regulations are not producing the desired product. Staff would like to August 1, 2019 Page 3 remind the City Council that, currently, the OPD process is the only process that allows for neo -traditional neighborhood design. 4. Threshold Projects: Some projects may concern the City Council more than others. It is important to identify these threshold projects, which could be projects of a certain size, land use, or geographic location. For these projects, the City Council may want to require more information as part of a rezoning. 5. Design Review: Perez stressed the importance of the ground floor streetscape in walkable, urban areas. He stated that the ground floor fagade and associated public realm are more important than the footprint or mass of the building, particularly for block scale buildings. Misaligned Expectations with Rezonings There is currently a disconnect between staff, the development community, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council on the level of detail required at the time of rezoning. Staff reviews rezonings to ensure consistency with the comprehensive plan and that the uses, densities (i.e. dwelling units / acre), and intensities (e.g. height, FAR) permitted by the proposed zone district are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Rezonings are a request to use the land differently — different uses, different development standards — and they are not always tied to a specific project. The question that needs to be answered in the review of a rezoning is whether or not the proposed zone district is appropriate for the area and consistent with the comprehensive plan. That said, it is often difficult to separate the rezoning from the development project. In addition, there seems to be an interest from both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to have additional detail on certain rezonings (e.g. Riverfront Crossings and Multi -Family zones). This usually results in staff requesting additional detail from the applicant at the time of the rezoning — detail above and beyond what is required by the City's zoning ordinance — in anticipation that more detail will be requested. This often includes requests for concept plans, elevations, examples of previous development projects, and details on landscaping and open space amenities. Staff occasionally receives questions from applicants on why this information is being requested because it is not a required part of the application. This is particularly true for projects in Riverfront Crossings, which will be subject to the design review process. The City has two different rezoning processes: 1) rezoning and 2) planned development overlay rezoning. The application requirements for each differ. 1. Rezonings: Requests to change from one base zoning designation to another base zoning designation (e.g. CC -2 to RFC -CX). The following items are not required as part of a rezoning application, but are required later in the land development process: • Concept plans • Elevations and renderings August 1, 2019 Page 4 • Landscaping plans • Details on building materials and open space amenities • Details on storm water management 2. Planned Development Overlay Rezonings: Requests to change from a base zoning designation to a base zoning designation with a planned development overlay (e.g. RS -5 to RS-8/OPD). OPD Rezonings allow the developer some flexibility with respect to several project components including site design, landscaping, parking, building placement, and mixture of land uses. OPD Rezonings may be requested for the following types of planned developments: • Sensitive areas development • Conservation development • Neo -traditional development • Mixed use development • Infill development • Alternative ownership development (e.g. manufactured housing, condominiums) • The following items are required as part of an OPD rezoning application: o Preliminary plan that shows the following: contours, proposed streets, proposed uses of the land and building, number of dwelling units proposed, location of buildings, location and areas of open space. o Elevations sketches to indicate the design and materials and the overall character of the development. o Landscaping plans o If the site includes regulated sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, woodlands) a sensitive areas development plan. • The following items are not required for a Planned Development Overlay Rezoning, but are required later in the land development process: o Details on open space amenities o Details on stormwater management Staff does have the ability to request additional information if certain conditions exist. For example, traffic studies and stormwater management reports have been requested due to unique situations where staff had concerns that warranted additional information. Input from the Planning and Zoning Commission On April 4 and April 18, the Commission discussed several items related to the land development process [Attachments 2 and 31, including the good neighbor policy, application requirements for rezonings, and rezoning criteria. The Commission's comments are summarized below: • The City should consider requiring a larger notification area for larger scale projects, projects in the downtown or in Riverfront Crossings for Good Neighbor meetings • Require Good Neighbor meetings for rezonings, but not for plats or vacations August 1, 2019 Page 5 • Require site concepts and elevations for projects in the downtown, Riverfront Crossing, and any multi -family rezoning • Some Commissioners had reservations regarding requiring Good Neighbor meetings, and recommended this be left to staff to advise the applicant • Most Commissioners were interested in exploring ways of notifying and engaging interested stakeholders in the land development process Questions for the City Council Question #1: Does the City Council desire to explore threshold projects? If so, what might be considered a threshold project and what types of additional information would the Council like to see for these projects at the rezoning stage and why? Threshold projects are projects of utmost concern to the City Council. For these projects, the City Council may want to require more information for these projects during the rezoning stage. Some examples include: - Central Business District rezonings - Rezonings within a certain distance of city gateways or other geographic areas of importance - Rezonings of a certain size or scale - Rezonings that allow certain land uses of concern Identifying these threshold projects and updating the rezoning application to reflect the additional information required would help staff advising applicants, as well as the applicants themselves. Question #2: In order to create a more predictable process for all parties, does the Council want staff to explore text amendments to the conventional zoning code to address common concerns? Are there certain standards or processes that need to be reviewed? During the discussion with Perez, the City Council mentioned revisiting the Multi -Family Site Development Standards and the Minimum Open Space Requirements. Can the Council outline more specifically the concerns that exist related to these standards? Does the Council have concerns with commercial site development standards or landscaping standards? The Planning and Zoning Commission also expressed an interest in revisiting the City's good neighbor policy. Currently, this is voluntary. Does the City Council wish to require good neighbor meetings for certain projects? As was previously stated, there is an interest in projects in Riverfront Crossings. As part of Opticos's scope of work they reviewed the Riverfront Crossings form -based code. Staff plans to share their analysis in the near future and will work with the Council to identify and prioritize changes to the Riverfront Crossings form -based code. Question #3: Considering time and budget constraints, what does the City Council see as the highest priority? August 1, 2019 Page 6 Staff anticipates amendments to the Riverfront Crossings form -based code based on Opticos's analysis. In addition, staff is reviewing the code to identify regulatory barriers to affordable housing, which was identified as an action in the City's affordable housing action plan. Staff is also in the process of reviewing the zoning code to identify amendments to help meet the City's climate action goals. These efforts need to be prioritized along with amendments to the conventional zoning code (e.g. multi -family site development standards) and updating rezoning applications to include information required for threshold projects. Conclusion It is staff's goal that expectations can be clarified for all stakeholders in the land use and development approval process. More specifically, staff wants to have a consistent message to applicants in terms of what is required at the application stage for various application types. It is also our goal to ensure that the City's regulations result in quality projects that improve our community and address its various needs. Attachments: 1. Comprehensive Overview of the City's Land Development Process 2. Memos to the Planning and Zoning Commission, April 4 and April 18, 2019 3. Meeting Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission, April 4 and April 18, 2019 Step 1. Comprehen- sive Planning: Community vision Guiding policy document for growth 18, development Covers a wide -range of topics (e.g. housing, land use, historic preservation, economic development, climate and the environment) - Project -specific plan amendments are occasionally needed Planning staff facilitates development of plan updates and district plans and coordinates witl applicants on project-specif� plan amendments. Require recommendation from PZ and approval by Council. Step 2. Legislative Land Use Approvals: Annexation Rezoning Subdivision Planning staff facilitates coordination with multiple City departments, such as Public Works, Fire, City Attorney's Office, and Parks Require recommendation from PZ and approval by Council. Step 3a. Administrative Land Use Approvals: Design Review Form -Based Code Review Site Plan Review Building Services staff coordinates design review, form -based code review, and conducts the review of all site plans to ensure compliance with zoning regulations and applicable guidelines. Step 3b. Non - Administrative Land Use Approvals: Design Review Form -Based Code Review Design Review & Form -Based Code Review are conducted by staff; however, City Council approval is required for some requests. Step 4. Final Permits and Inspections Building Permits Certificates of Occupancy Final Inspections Building Services staff condJall the review and approval of building plans, issues building permits, performs final inspections, and issues certificates of occupancies. Community Visioning Process a. Purpose: The comprehensive plan is the guiding policy document for growth and development in the city. The comprehensive includes a vision, goals, policies, and objectives related to a variety of topic areas — housing, environment, transportation, land use, and others. The plan also includes a future land use map, which outlines the general intended land uses, density, and intensity of development. The development of a comprehensive plan requires input from a variety of stakeholder groups, including residents, advocacy groups, developers, and others. b. Role of City Staff: City staff helps to cultivate the necessary feedback that guide the plan's goals and objectives by facilitating a series of public meetings and workshops at the earlier stages of the comprehensive planning process. City staff, sometimes with support of a consulting team, will write the plan text and develop the future land use map. c. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning & Zoning Commission is tasked with advising the City Council on all matters pertaining to the physical development of Iowa City, including the comprehensive plan and any laws pertaining to land development necessary to implement the comprehensive plan. Staff works closely with the Planning & Zoning Commission to help further refine the goals and objectives that materialize from the public meeting stages of the community visioning process. d. Role of the City Council: City Council is tasked with ultimately approving content from the community visioning process that is recommended to the Council by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Project Specific Plan Amendments a. Purpose: Project specific plan amendments might be necessary on certain occasions to ensure that a proposed development conforms with the goals and objectives stated in the comprehensive plan, as well as the future land use map. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): Applications for comprehensive plan amendments must include evidence that the following approval criteria are met: • Circumstances have changed and/or new public information has come to light such that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. • The proposed amendment will be compatible with other policies and provisions of the comprehensive plan, including any district plans or other amendments thereto. c. Application Requirements: The following are required as part of an application for a project specific plan amendment: • A location map and general description of the area for which the change is requested. • A copy of the text that is proposed to be changed. • Application fee. • Applicant's statement. • A list of all neighboring properties within 300' of the subject property. d. Role of Staff: Staff works with the potential applicant prior to their submittal of an application to discuss concerns and issues. Staff helps the developer select which components of the development plan do not conform with the comprehensive plan. Upon receipt of an application to amend the comprehensive plan, staff coordinates the following: • Analysis of the comprehensive plan amendment • Development of the Staff Report • Neighborhood notice requirements • Presentations before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission must recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council within 45 calendar days of the date the City receives an application for a comprehensive plan amendment. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for comprehensive plan amendments. Annexation a. Purpose: To record the inclusion of territory into the City's corporate boundaries. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): There are three ways that territory can be annexed into a city in Iowa, including: • Voluntary annexation: The property owner willingly applies for inclusion into the city limits. • Voluntary 80/20 annexation: A procedure that allows a city to potentially annex land, provided that at least 80% (by acreage) of all affected property owners are agreeable to the annexation. • Involuntary annexation: This occurs when a city petitions to have territory annexed into the city, and when less than 80% (by acreage) of affected property owners are agreeable to having their land annexed. c. Application Requirements: An application for annexation and all supporting materials must be submitted to the City Clerk's office. This application is forwarded to Neighborhood and Development Services for review. The following are required as part of an application for annexation: • A legal description of the property to be annexed. • A location map of the property to be annexed. • A list of all neighboring properties within 300' of the subject property. • Application fee. • Applicant's statement. d. Role of Staff: Staff coordinates with potential applicants on proposed annexations prior to the submittal of a formal application. Staff identifies issues related to land use, infrastructure and utilities, and coordinates with County planning staff. Staff also ensures that annexation of residential development complies with the City's affordable housing policy. A rezoning to one of the City's zoning classifications is required to be reviewed with each application for annexation. e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning & Zoning Commission evaluates how the proposed land use associated with each annexation application will affect the surrounding area, and if the proposed land use conforms with the goals and objectives stated in the comprehensive plan. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for all annexations. Rezonings Rezonings are a request to use the land differently — different uses, different development standards — and they are not always tied to a specific development project. The question that needs to be answered in the review of a rezoning is whether or not the proposed zone district is appropriate for the area and consistent with the comprehensive plan. Standard Rezoning a. Purpose: Requests to change from one base zoning designation to another base zoning designation (e.g. CC -2 to RFC -CX). b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required) Rezonings might be required in any instance where a potential development or proposed land use is not a permitted use under a parcel's existing zoning designation. c. Application Requirements: The following are required as part of rezoning applications: • Legal description. • Zoning exhibit. • A list of all neighboring properties within 300' of the proposed rezoning. The City does not require concept plans, elevations and renderings, landscaping plans, details on building materials and open space amenities, and details on storm water management as part of rezoning applications. Role of Staff • Pre -application meetings with applicants • Concept Plan Review (If provided) • Application Review and analysis for consistency with the comprehensive plan • Development of the Staff Report • Presentations before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council • Neighborhood Notice Requirements e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission must recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council within 45 calendar days of the date the City receives a complete rezoning application, or the rezoning shall be considered recommended for approval. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for rezonings. Planned Development (OPD) Rezoning a. Purpose Requests to change from a base zoning designation to a base zoning designation with a planned development overlay (e.g. RS -5 to OPD/RS-8). b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): OPD rezonings allow the developer some flexibility with respect to a number of project components including site design, landscaping, parking, building placement, and mixture of land uses. OPD rezonings may be requested for the following types of planned developments: • Sensitive areas development • Conservation development • Neo -traditional development • Mixed use development • Infill development • Alternative ownership development (e.g. manufactured housing, condos) c. Application Requirements: The City requires more detail from applicants as part of OPD rezonings. In addition to the requirements of a standard rezoning, the following items are required: • Preliminary plan that shows the following: contours, proposed streets, proposed uses of the land and buildings, number of dwelling units proposed, location of buildings, location and areas of open space. • Elevation sketches to indicate the design and materials and the overall character of the development. • Landscaping plans. • If the site includes regulated sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, woodlands) a sensitive area development plan. d. Role of Staff: • Pre -application meetings with applicants • Concept Plan Review • Application Review and analysis • Development of the Staff Report o Specific Review Criteria for OPD Rezonings o Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan • Presentations before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council • Neighborhood Notice Requirements e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission must recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council within 45 calendar days of the date the City receives a complete rezoning application, or the rezoning shall be considered recommended for approval. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for rezonings. Subdivisions Subdivisions involve a split of a parcel of land into 3 or more new parcels of land. These new parcels are often tied to a specific development project. Upon receipt of an application for a subdivision, City staff reviews the proposed subdivision plat to ensure that the application meets the requirements of the subdivision ordinance. One of the most critical components of subdivision review involves the determination that a subdivision development can access City utilities, and that the subdivision will ultimately contribute to the goals of the comprehensive plan. Preliminary Plat a. Purpose: To illustrate the proposed layout of the subdivided parcels and how the proposed layout will accommodate existing and proposed utilities, streets, and other public improvements. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): A preliminary plat is required for all proposed subdivisions within the city limits or within (2) miles of the city's corporate boundaries. Staff has the ability to waive the preliminary plat stage of the development process, in the event that the subdivision is a re -subdivision of land. c. Application Requirements: Each preliminary plat application must include the following: • (13) Full-size copies of (1) 8.5" x 11" copy of the preliminary plat that must show the locations of existing lot lines, streets, public utilities, water mains, sanitary sewers, storm sewers, drain pipes, culverts, watercourses, bridges, railroads, buildings, Storm water detention facilities, and any other public improvements in the proposed subdivision; existing streets and utilities on adjoining properties; a cross-section of proposed streets and alleys; the layout of proposed water mains and sanitary sewers; the drainage of the land, including proposed storm sewers, ditches, • swales, culverts, bridges, storm water management facilities, and other • structures. • A grading plan, pursuant to the grading ordinance. • Plans and proposed methods for the prevention and control of soil erosion pursuant to City requirements. • A sensitive areas development plan (if applicable). • A list of all neighboring properties within 300' of the subject property. • Application fee. d. Role of Staff: • Pre -application meetings with applicants. • Application and Plat Review by Staff. • Development of the Staff Report. • Presentations before the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council. • Neighborhood Notice Requirements. e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission must recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council within 45 calendar days of the date the City receives a complete preliminary plat application, or the application shall be considered recommended for approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission uses information obtained from the City staff report, the applicant, and the general public, to determine whether the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance, comprehensive plan policies, and state law. Role of the City Council: The City Council provides final review and approval of each preliminary plat application. Once a preliminary plat is approved by the City Council, the applicant may proceed with preparation of the final plat. Final Plat a. Purpose: To provide a final layout of the subdivided parcels. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): A final plat must be submitted to the City Clerk within 24 months of City approval of the preliminary plat. c. Application Requirements: The application for a final plat should note any variations from the previously approved preliminary plat. Certain substantial changes from the preliminary plat such as changes in the layout and location of streets, lots, outlots, etc. might result in the necessity for the applicant to file an amended preliminary plat. Each Final Plat application must include the following information: • (13) Full-size copies of (1) 8.5" x 11" copy of the final plat. • (3) sets of construction drawings. • (4) copies of legal papers. • Storm sewer and storm water detention calculations. • Application fee. d. Role of Staff: • Application and Plat Review by Staff. Review ensures the final plat conforms with requirements from the code, state law, and any conditions imposed on the preliminary plat. • Development of the Staff Report. • Presentation before the City Council. • Neighborhood Notice Requirements. e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning & Zoning Commission does not review final plats. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review body for all final plat applications. Level I Design Review a. Purpose: Design Review is intended to ensure the following: • Compatibility with the defining characteristics of the surrounding area • Preservation of the integrity of existing neighborhoods • Support a unifying theme for a particular development or area in order to spur economic growth Design Review applications consist of Level I and Level II reviews. Applications for Level I Design Reviews are reviewed administratively by the staff the Design Review Committee or by the Form Based Code Committee. Level II Design Reviews are reviewed by the City Council. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): Level I Design Review is required for certain projects located in the Central Planning District, development within the Planned High Density Multi -Family Residential (PRM) zone, projects in the Towncrest Design Review District; parcels impacted by urban renewal in the downtown (e.g. Old Capital Mall). c. Application Requirements: An application and all supporting materials must be submitted to the Department of Neighborhood and Development Services. Applications for Design Review are reviewed for compliance with several codified guidelines and standards for each development activity. d. Role of Staff: Per the requirements in the zoning code, the staff Design Review Committee is charged with reviewing projects to the following design guidelines: 1. Building Design • Projects should have a unified architectural theme. • Renovation of buildings should conform to the original architectural style of the building, if applicable. • There should be a proper alignment of horizontal and vertical architectural features. • Buildings should be constructed in a manner that creates visual interest on the first floor, using windows, doors, and lighting to attract pedestrians. • Lighting and fixtures should blend in with the architectural design. • Colors should be a part of the architectural style. • Rooftop equipment should blend in with the building, or be screened from public view. 2. Relationship of the Building(s) to the Site • Pedestrian amenities and landscaping should be integrated into the site design. • Parking should be screened from public view. • The rhythm and proportions of buildings should be taken into consideration. • Building materials should harmonize with adjoining buildings and sites. • Site grading should blend in with surrounding site grades. Landscaping • Landscaping should improve the visual and aesthetic quality of the streetscape. • Plants should be protected from pedestrian and motor traffic. • Paved areas should be designed to facilitate safe and efficient pedestrian circulation. • Trash and storage areas should be screened from public view. • Street furniture and miscellaneous strucutres should be integrated with the overall architectural concept. 4. Canopies and Awnings • Canopies and awnings must respect the style and the character of the structure on which they are located. • Canopies and awnings must not be higher than the top of the first -floor windows. e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning & Zoning Commission does not participate in Design Review. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council does not review Level I Design Review applications. Form -Based Code Review a. Purpose: The purpose of form based code review is to ensure that certain development types, building and frontage types, and parking locations and treatments are designed in a manner that is consistent with the goals, objectives, and guidelines of a form -based code district. Currently, the Riverfront Crossings District and Eastside Mixed -Use District are the only two areas where form based code review is applicable. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): Once a form based code district is established, all subsequent development that takes place in said district is subject to the use regulations and site development standards that are specified for that district. Any exterior alterations, new construction of buildings or structures, or other forms of major site development will be subject to the city's design review process. For properties in Riverfront Crossings, the form based code committee will also review height bonus requests that are no greater than 2 stories above the base maximum height for the applicable subdistrict. c. Application Requirements: Each project that is reviewed by the Form Based Code Committee must show evidence of the following: • A site plan that includes a parking plan. • A landscaping plan. • Building plans to include: o All elevations o Floor plans • Color and material samples. • Lighting cut sheets. • Photometric study. • Streetscape plan. d. Role of Staff: Design review for projects that fall within the form based code districts shall be conducted by the staff Form Based Code Committee (FBC Committee). The FBC Committee reviews development projects to ensure consistency with the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code. e. Role of the Planning & Zoning Commission: The Planning & Zoning Commission does not participate in the Form -Based Code review process. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council reviews projects that involved a historic preservation height transfers, open space height transfers, or public right-of-way height transfer. Site Plan Review a. Purpose: Site Plan Review is a process where staff reviews plans for developments other than construction of one single-family or two-family dwelling. The Site Plan Review process ensures that development of property complies with city codes and public works and public safety standards. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): Site Plans must be submitted for any development except for the development of one single-family dwelling or one two-family dwelling or related accessory structure in any zoning district. Site Plans are broken into two categories, Major and Minor Site Plans. Major Site Plans are required for the following: • Construction of over twelve residential dwelling units and any additions or alterations to existing development containing over twelve dwelling units. • Construction of over 10,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area. Minor Site Plans are required for any non-exempt activity that is not required for a major site plan. c. Application Requirements: In addition to submitting detailed site plans and landscaping plans, as required for Minor Site Plan applications, the following information is required to be included with all Major Site Plan applications: • Existing and proposed contours. • A stormwater runoff plan. • The location and size of existing and proposed utilities. • A cross section of all proposed streets, alleys, parking areas, and sidewalks. • A traffic circulation and parking plan. d. Role of Staff: Minor Site Plans are reviewed administratively. Major Site Plans are reviewed administratively, unless a request is made to the Planning and Zoning Commission to review the Major Site Plan. For major site plans, the Director of Neighborhood and Development Services or those owners of 20% or more of the property located within 200 feet of the exterior boundaries of the proposed development site, may request review of the site plan by the Planning and Zoning Commission. When such a request is received, the Planning and Zoning Commission may review and approve, review and approve with conditions, or review and deny the plan within 20 working days of receipt of the written request for Planning and Zoning Commission review. The commission's scope of review shall be the same as that of the building official. e. Role of Planning & Zoning Commission The Planning & Zoning Commission review Major Site Plans upon receipt of a request by the Director of NDS or neighboring property owners, as is outlined above. f. Role of the City Council The City Council is not involved in site plan review. Level II Design Review a. Purpose: The purpose of Level II Design Review is to have City Council review certain items that have been reviewed by the Design Review Committee. b. Applicability: Level II Design Review is required for the following: • Urban renewal projects as described in Iowa Code R-14 (minor alterations can still be reviewed under Level I Design Review). • Certain public-private partnership agreements. c. Application Requirements: An application and all supporting materials must be submitted to the department of housing and inspection services. Applications for Design Review are reviewed for compliance with several codified guidelines and standards for each development activity. d. Role of Staff: When reviewing a project subject to design review, the Design Review Committee and the City Council will adhere to the following guidelines. 1. Building Design • Projects should have a unified architectural theme. • Renovation of buildings should conform to the original architectural style of the building, if applicable. • There should be a proper alignment of horizontal and vertical architectural features. • Buildings should be constructed in a manner that creates visual interest on the first floor, using windows, doors, and lighting to attract pedestrians. • Lighting and fixtures should blend in with the architectural design. • Colors should be a part of the architectural style. • Rooftop equipment should blend in with the building, or be screened from public view. 2. Relationship of the Building(s) to the Site • Pedestrian amenities and landscaping should be integrated into the site design. • Parking should be screened from public view. • The rhythm and proportions of buildings should be taken into consideration. • Building materials should harmonize with adjoining buildings and sites. • Site grading should blend in with surrounding site grades. 3. Landscaping • Landscaping should improve the visual and aesthetic quality of the streetscape. • Plants should be protected from pedestrian and motor traffic. • Paved areas should be designed to facilitate safe and efficient pedestrian circulation. • Trash and storage areas should be screened from public view. • Street furniture and miscellaneous strucutres should be integrated with the overall architectural concept. 4. Canopies and Awnings • Canopies and awnings must respect the style and the character of the structure on which they are located. • Canopies and awnings must not be higher than the top of the first -floor windows. e. Role of the Planning and Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission does not participate in Design Review. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for Level II Design Review applications. Form -Based Code Review a. Purpose: Height bonuses and development rights transfers allow for the provision of additional height bonuses for certain properties that qualify. b. Applicability: • Height Bonus Requests that exceed two stories o Height bonus requests are possible for properties located in the Riverfront Crossings. Height bonus requests in excess of 2 stories above the maximum base height are subject to review by the City Council (Level II Design Review) Height transfer are possible under the following scenarios: o Open Space Height Transfers —These transfers are permitted when a substantial dedication of on-site open space (at least 20,000 square feet) can be provided, and when the site can demonstrate that it is ideally located to serve the need for public open space. o Historic Preservation Height Transfers — These transfers are permitted when the sending site is a designated local landmark. o Public Right -Of -Way Height Transfers —These transfers are permitted when the sending site is needed in order to construct or improve rights-of-way necessary to realize the vision of the Riverfront Crossings master plan. c. Application Requirements: Height Bonus Requests: An application and all supporting materials must be submitted Neighborhood and Development Services. Applications are reviewed by the Form Based Code Committee to ensure the regulations in the Riverfront Crossings Form -Based Code are met. Height Transfers: 1. Open Space Height Transfers: • The area designated for open space must be dedicated to the City as a public park. • All buildings and structures that will not be retained for park purposes must be removed and the land graded and seeded to the satisfaction of the city, unless the city council approves an alternative arrangement. 2. Historic Preservation Height Transfers: • If the sending site has not already been designated as an Iowa City landmark, the applicant must apply for and obtain approval of this designation as a condition of the transfer of development rights. • All historic buildings and structures on the sending site must be preserved against decay, deterioration, and kept free from structural defects by the owner or such person, persons, or entities who may have custody or control thereof. 3. Public Right -Of -Way Height Transfers: • The subject land must be dedicated to the City for use as public right-of-way. • All buildings and structures on the land to be dedicated must be removed, unless the City Council approves an alternative arrangement. d. Role of Staff: The review of height bonuses in excess of 2 stories and height transfers is performed as a Level II Design Review by the Form -Based Code Committee and the City Council. The Committee reviews the requests and makes a recommendation to the City Council for final review and approval. e. Role of the Planning and Zoning Commission: The Planning and Zoning Commission does not review requests for bonus heights or height transfers. f. Role of the City Council: The City Council is the final review and approval body for all height transfers, as well as any requests above 2 stories. Building Permits a. Purpose: Issuance of a building permit certifies that a proposed development complies with the provisions of the adopted City building codes. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): A building permit is required prior to any new construction, demolition, or alterations or additions to existing structures. c. Application Requirements: An application and all supporting materials must be submitted to the department of Building Inspection Services. d. Role of Staff: Building Inspection Services evaluates all incoming building permits. Certain permits require additional review from the Board of Adjustment, Planning & Zoning Commission, City Council, or Design Review Committee. Final Inspections a. Purpose: A final inspection is done to verify that construction on new buildings, or alterations or additions to existing structures, meets the requirements of all adopted city codes. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): A final inspection is required for all new construction prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. c. Application Requirements: Completion of a building permit will establish the need for a final inspection. d. Role of Staff: City Building Inspectors perform final inspections and coordinate scheduling for final inspections as needed per project. Certificates of Occupancy a. Purpose: A Certificate of Occupancy is issued upon completion of new construction or upon completion of alterations or additions to existing structures. Buildings should not be occupied for a new use until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. b. Applicability (e.g. when this is required): A Certificate of Occupancy is required when there is a change in use or occupancy in land or existing buildings (other than single-family residential dwellings). A temporary Certificate of Occupancy can be obtained for instances where it would not be feasible to require completion of tree plantings or other landscaping obligations. c. Application Requirements: A Certificate of Occupancy can be obtained by applying for a building permit. d. Role of Staff: Staff will issue a Certificate of Occupancy upon completion of final inspection. r CITY OF IOWA CITY 0 ! MEMORANDUM Date: April 1, 2019 To: Planning and Zoning Commission From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services Re: Good Neighbor Policy, Application Requirements, and Rezoning Criteria Background On March 12, 2019, the Planning and Zoning Commission had a consultation with the City Council on the proposed rezoning at 2130 Muscatine Avenue. During this consult there was a discussion on implementation of the good neighbor policy, the level of detail provided at the rezoning stage (e.g. concept plans), and the criteria used for reviewing rezoning applications. The Mayor requested that the Commission discuss these items and provide thoughts and any recommendations to the City Council. At the Commission's meeting on April 4, 2019, staff would like to begin discussion of these items. This memo provides some background information for the Commission's consideration, including a background on the good neighbor meeting policy, a summary of the land development process and specific information required as part of rezoning applications, and a summary of the criteria staff utilizes in the review of rezonings. Good Neiahbor Meetinas The City established the good neighbor policy in 1998. The policy was developed to encourage more dialogue between the applicant and adjacent properties owners. In 2013, staff reviewed the policy. Attachment 1 is a memo dated May 8, 2013, which outlines the recommendations at the time. In 2013, staff recommended and the City Council agreed that good neighbor meetings should continue to be optional for applicants. Today, staff would also recommend that good neighbor meetings continue to be voluntary for the following reasons: 1. Every project is different. Some are small in scale with limited impacts to the surrounding community while others are large with significant impacts. 2. Some projects utilize the good neighbor policy as part of the rezoning, but not later in the process at preliminary and final platting. 3. Neighbors are notified by the City via letter and signage posted on the property. Staff regularly answers questions from the public and relays that information to applicants. If staff receives several questions staff would request that a good neighbor meeting be held if one has not been. Over the course of the past several months there have been a wide variety of cases that have been brought before the Commission. Table 1 provides an overview of some of these cases and whether or not a good neighbor meeting was held. TABLE 1. Recent Cases and Application of Good Neighbor Meeting Policy Case Description Good Neighbor Meeting? Rezoning & preliminary plat Forest View Yes o Large scale, significant change from current conditions Vacation Hutchinson Ave north of Park No Road o Small scale, little impact Rezoning Moss Ridge Rd & Highway 1 No o Small scale, commercial at edge of community Rezoning Herbert Hoover Highway east Yes of Scott Blvd o Multi -family housing at edge of community Rezoning 2130 Muscatine Ave No o Small scale, infill development Rezoning & preliminary plat Cherry Creek Yes o Moderate sized development adjacent to existing single-family neighborhood Preliminary plat Rollins Pass No (Held at rezoning) o Moderate sized development at the edge of the community The Commission has also expressed an interest in increasing those notified of good neighbor meetings. Currently, the good neighbor policy requires notification of property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project. Map 1 shows the notification distance and all of the properties located within 300 feet of 2130 Muscatine Avenue. The blue shows the 300 -foot radius and the red identifies all of the properties who received notification. VI MAP 1. 300 -Foot Radius Example , 2112 I • =. — F ST p,iUSCATi INF AVE LU V) U) Additional notification is required for comprehensive plan amendments, rezonings, preliminary plats, and vacations prior to Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. Staff works with the applicant to complete the following: o Sign(s) posted near the property a minimum of 7 days prior to the Planning & Zoning meeting (this is not required for comprehensive plan amendments) o A letter to adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the property must be sent by the City a minimum of 7 days prior to the meeting o Comprehensive plan amendments require setting a Planning & Zoning Commission public hearing After the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation, additional notification requirements (e.g. public notice in a newspaper) is required prior to City Council meetings. In summary, the 300 -foot notification requirement for good neighbor meetings is consistent with the City's requirements for notifying property owners prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Although staff has not completed a review of other jurisdiction's notification requirements, 300 feet is comparable to other local jurisdictions that staff is familiar 3 with. That said, staff is aware of other communities that have larger notification requirements, specifically 500 feet, for more rural contexts where lot sizes are much larger. Summary of the Land Development Process Figure 1 provides a high-level summary of the land development process — from comprehensive planning to building permits and inspections. For the purposes of this memo, staff would like to focus on the rezoning process, which falls under Step 2. Legislative Land Use Approvals. Staff reviews rezonings to ensure consistency with the comprehensive plan and that the uses, densities (i.e. dwelling units / acre), and intensities (e.g. height, FAR) permitted by the proposed zone district are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Rezonings are a request to use the land differently — different uses, different development standards — and they are not always tied to a specific development project. The question that needs to be answered in the review of a rezoning is whether or not the proposed zone district is appropriate for the area and consistent with the comprehensive plan. That said, it is often difficult to separate the rezoning designation of the land from the development project proposed for it. In addition, there seems to be an interest from both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to have additional detail at the rezoning stage. Staff also requests this additional detail from applicants when the rezoning has the potential to have a larger impact. Step 1, Comprehensive Step i. Legislative Step 3a.. Administrative Step 3a, Non- Step 4, Final Permits Planning Land Use Approvals Land Use Approvals Administrative Land and Inspections Use Approvals Level of Detail Provided at Rezoninas It seems that there is currently a disconnect between staff, the development community, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council on the level of detail required at the time of rezoning. For example, recent cases have resulted in recommendations of denial from the Planning and Zoning Commission for lack of a concept plan. These recommendations have resulted in consults with the City Council. Furthermore, the Commission has expressed concern when rezoning applications lack concept plans, elevations, and landscaping plans or when this information was provided, but was not detailed enough. Staff advises applicants and often recommends that applicants prepare information that the Commission will likely request. This often includes requests for concept plans, examples of previous development projects, and details on landscaping and open space amenities. Staff occasionally receives questions from applicants on why this information is being requested because it is not a required part of the application. Below is a summary of the City's two different rezoning processes and the application requirements: 1. Rezonings: Requests to change from one base zoning designation to another base zoning designation (e.g. CC -2 to RFC -CX). The following items are not required as part of a rezoning application: • Concept plans • Elevations and renderings M Landscaping plans Details on building materials and open space amenities Details on storm water management 2. Planned Development Overlay Rezonings: Requests to change from a base zoning designation to a base zoning designation with a planned development overlay (e.g. RS -5 to RS-8/OPD). OPD Rezonings allow the developer some flexibility with respect to a number of project components including site design, landscaping, parking, building placement, and mixture of land uses. OPD Rezonings may be requested for the following types of planned developments: • Sensitive areas development • Conservation development • Neo -traditional development • Mixed use development • Infill development • Alternative ownership development (e.g. manufactured housing, condominiums) Due to the flexibility offered in OPD rezonings and the ability to request waivers from development regulations, more detail is requested at the time of application. The following items are typically included as part of an OPD rezoning application: • Preliminary plan that shows the following: contours, proposed streets, proposed uses of the land and buildings, number of dwelling units, location of buildings, location and areas of open space. • Elevations sketches to indicate the design, materials and character of the development. • Landscaping plans • If the site includes regulated sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, woodlands) a sensitive areas development plan. The following items are not required for a Planned Development Overlay Rezoning: • Details on open space amenities • Details on stormwater management Table 2 outlines recent rezonings reviewed by the Commission and whether concept plans, elevations, and landscaping plans were provided. As shown in the table below, the applicants of the rezoning on Herbert Hoover Highway for the proposed affordable housing project were requested to provide additional detail not typically required as part of a standard rezoning. Specifically, the applicants provided a site plan, elevations, and a detailed landscaping plan. This was more than what was asked of the applicant of the rezonings on the southwest corner of Lower West Branch Road and Taft Avenue and the northwest corner of Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1. 5 TABLE 2. Comparison of Recent Rezoning Cases and Detailed Provided Case Description Concept / Site Elevations Landscaping Plan OPD Rezoning & Forest View Yes No, detailed Yes preliminary plat o Large scale, design significant guidelines change from required as a current condition conditions OPD Rezoning & Cherry Creek Yes Yes Yes preliminary plat o Moderate sized development adjacent to existing single- family neighborhood Rezoning Lower West Branch Yes No No Rd & Taft Ave o Moderate sized development at the edge of the community Rezoning Moss Ridge Rd & Yes No No Highway 1 o Small scale, commercial at edge of community Rezoning Herbert Hoover Yes Yes Yes Highway east of Scott Blvd o Multi -family housing at edge of community Rezoning 2130 Muscatine No No No Ave o Small scale, infill development Criteria for Reviewing Rezonings It is common practice for zoning codes to outline specific review criteria for different application types. This is especially common for rezonings. The City's zoning code does not identify specific review criteria for standard rezonings; however, staff has historically used the following two criteria when reviewing rezoning applications: 1. Consistency with the comprehensive plan, including any district plans and the historic preservation plan; and 2. Compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. For planned development overlay rezonings, the zoning code outlines specific review criteria that must be considered. Therefore, in addition to consistency with the comprehensive plan and C. compatibility with the neighborhood, staff reviews these proposed rezonings against the following criteria: 1. The density and design of the planned development will be compatible with and/or complementary to adjacent development in terms of land use, building mass and scale, relative amount of open space, traffic circulation and general layout. 2. The development will not overburden existing streets and utilities. 3. The development will not adversely affect views, light and air, property values and privacy of neighboring properties any more than would a conventional development. 4. The combination of land uses and building types and any variation from the underlying zoning requirements or from city street standards will be in the public interest, in harmony with the purposes of this title, and with other building regulations of the city. These are also the criteria that the Planning and Zoning Commission should use when evaluating rezonings. Conclusion It is staff's goal to have a consistent message to applicants in terms of what is required at the application stage for various application types, particularly rezonings. It is also staff's goal to not require too much detail that the process becomes increasingly burdensome. Staff is particularly concerned about how additional requirements impact multi -family development and affordable housing development since it is very difficult to develop multi -family housing within the community without going through the rezoning process. The City also adopted detailed development regulations for multi -family development that are required and reviewed at the site plan stage. The purpose of these regulations is to ensure quality development. Furthermore, staff has been compiling additional research on what other local jurisdictions require at the rezoning stage. Staff could conduct additional research for other areas of interest, as well. This information will inform a memo that staff is preparing to the City Council regarding the land development process. This memo and an associated discussion with the City Council will occur in May. At this point staff is providing the information in this memo to help inform the discussion at the Commission's meeting on April 4, 2019. Attachments 1. Memo dated May 8, 2013; Good Neighbor Policy Evaluation Approved by: 1 aD n' iee-Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator Neighborhood & Development Services 7 r CITY OF IOWA CITY �= IP3 `�N ' MEMORANDUM Date: May 8, 2013 To: Tom Markus and Geoff Fruin From: Jeff Davidson and Marcia Bollinger Re: Good Neighbor Policy evaluation Introduction Issues have surfaced, particularly in the last couple years, regarding implementation of the Good Neighbor policy. Lack of structure allows for inconsistency in who is notified about meetings, what information is provided, and accuracy of information. The timing of meetings can also make neighborhood input challenging and frustrating. Lack of staff participation in the meetings can result in incomplete/inaccurate information being provided. Reporting of the meeting is not required so it is unclear if any of the input received was taken into consideration by the developer. The process has caused more confusion or anxiety than what it mitigates. And on a broader level, the public perceives the Good Neighbor meetings as being an extension of the City and therefore all information provided is accurate and thorough. In many instances this is not the case. History/Background The intent of Good Neighbor meetings has been to enable the land development process to run more smoothly by encouraging community dialogue early in the planning process. It can help to pinpoint, discuss and try to resolve neighborhood issues related to the impacts of proposed projects. The Iowa City City Council reviewed and approved the City's current Good Neighbor Policy in March, 1998. The City Council did not mandate Good Neighbor meetings but approved it as a suggested process, and made available staff resources (Neighborhood Services Office — NSO) to encourage developers/applicants to provide that opportunity. The NSO has provided guidance regarding notification, meeting locations, and also notifies the neighborhood association leaders in the area (if applicable) of the meeting. Applicants for land use changes to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission are asked if they intend to hold a Good Neighbor meeting as part of the application process and this information is provided in the staff report. Board of Adjustment applicants are not required to document if they intend to conduct a meeting on their application but are encouraged to as part of the initial staff review process. Discussion of Solutions A survey was conducted of seven nearby cities concerning their policies on Good Neighbor meetings. Those surveyed were: Cedar Rapids, North Liberty, Des Moines, Ames, Davenport, Bettendorf, and Marion. Davenport and North Liberty require Good Neighbor meetings. Of those that do not require the meetings, three allow city administrators to require them when they deem that the nature of the applicant's proposal makes one necessary. Five of seven (Cedar Rapids, North Liberty, Ames, Davenport and Bettendorf) indicated that their planning staff attend Good Neighbor meetings. One (North Liberty) indicated that City staff moderates the meetings. May 8, 2013 Page 2 Joint Staff discussed the issues related to the current Good Neighbor Policy implementation at their March 5 meeting which included: • Requiring Good Neighbor meetings • Notification requirements • Notification process • Info provided in meeting notice and staff review • Meeting notice schedule • Meeting schedule • Staff presence at meetings • Summary of meeting After discussing the alternative structures that could be established for the Good Neighbor Policy, staff developed the following recommendations: Good Neighbor meetings should continue to be optional for applicants. Staff will continue to recommend them for potentially controversial projects. If the applicant chooses to hold a Good Neighbor meeting, they will be required to comply with the following: • Notify all property owners within 300' of the property as well as the Neighborhood Services Coordinator so meeting information can be sent to impacted neighborhood associations. • Staff will review the Good Neighbor letter prior to it being sent out to verify that information is complete and accurate. • Meeting notices must be sent out not less than 7 days prior to the meeting. • Meeting shall occur not less than 7 days prior to board/commission meeting to enable adequate time to provide input. • City staff will be in attendance at each meeting. • Applicant will develop a summary of input provided at the meeting which will be available for distribution at the board/commission meeting. Financial Impact: Additional staff time will be necessary to implement the policy; not necessarily during the notification process but in attending the Good Neighbor meetings. It is hard to quantify if/how much time will be saved by staff involvement at the meetings but oversight at this stage is critical to ensure accurate information is available. It is expected that staff other than just the Urban Planning staff can participate in this task including, but not limited to the Neighborhood Services Coordinator, Traffic/Transportation staff and Community Development staff depending upon the proposed project and complexity. Recommendation The FY 2012-13 Strategic Plan has established focus on 5 major priorities, 2 of which are Neighborhood Stabilization and Coordinated Communication and Customer Service Orientation. The Good Neighbor Policy can contribute significantly to the success of each of these goals if implemented responsibly. Staff recommends that the Good Neighbor Policy be restructured to include those recommendations stated above. We will be at the City Council Work Session on May 13 to present this information and answer any questions. MINUTES APPROVED PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AP RI L 4, 2 01 9 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Max Parsons, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin, Mark Signs STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DISCUSSION ON THE GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND REZONING CRITERIA: Russett noted this discussion came up during the March 12 City Council/Planning & Zoning Commission consult meeting where the Mayor requested the Commission discuss some of the items presented at that meeting, mainly related to the Good Neighbor Policy application requirement and rezoning criteria. Russett noted this evening the Commission doesn't need to recommend any items, this is just the start of the conversation and in May the City Council will also discuss this item so any information discussed this evening will be shared with Council and Council will then make any specific recommendations to staff next month. Russett stated the Good Neighbor Meeting Policy was established in 1998 and reviewed in 2013 and at that time both staff and City Council felt Good Neighbor Meetings should be kept voluntary, and today staff recommends meetings remain voluntary as well for a variety of reasons. 1. The projects that come before the Commission and that staff review are all very different, some are large scale with large impact, some are small with small impacts. 2. Some meetings happen early in the process of the rezoning stage and don't happen at platting. 3. There are notification requirements the City sends out as well as postings on the site for notification to neighbors. Russett shared a table that showed some of the applications the Commission reviewed in the last few months and whether or not a Good Neighbor Meeting was held. The Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 2 of 8 results are varied, there were a couple of rezonings (Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 rezoning and the 2130 Muscatine Avenue rezoning) that did not hold Good Neighbor Meetings, the vacation the Commission reviewed a few weeks ago did not hold a Good Neighbor Meeting but the larger scale projects like Forest View, Cherry Creek and the affordable housing project on the east side did hold Good Neighbor Meetings. Russett noted the Commission has expressed some concerns about the number of people who are notified of the Good Neighbor Meetings. The requirement is for notification for neighbors within 300 feet of the project area. Russett showed a map of an area to show what 300 feet looks like, the example property was 2130 Muscatine Avenue. Staff has not done a comprehensive review of what other local jurisdictions require, but based on the cities staff is aware of the 300 foot requirement is comparable, they are aware of one other jurisdiction that does use a much larger area because it is rural in nature. Russett next presented some background on rezonings and how staff looks at rezonings. Rezonings are requests to use the land differently and are not always tied to a specific project. When staff receives an application for a rezoning they review that rezoning against all of the uses that are permitted in that zone district. They look at the intensities that are permitted, the densities, and they review whether they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan vision as well as whether or not they would be compatible with the neighborhood. She noted sometimes it is difficult to separate the rezoning of the land from the specific development project that is being proposed. Often both the Commission and the City Council want more information on the project, staff does as well, particularly for the larger projects. In terms of application requirements for rezonings, there are two types of rezonings. First is the standard rezoning which is one base zone to another base zone designation (i.e. RS -5 to RM -12 or CO -1 to CC -2). The other type is the OPD or Planned Development Overlay where there is a base zoning designation and then an actual overlay. These are often done when there are sensitive areas on the site. The application requirements for these two different types of rezonings vary. There are more details on OPD rezonings required (landscaping, elevations, concept plans) than on standard rezonings. Russett showed another table of projects the Commission has reviewed over the past few months along with the level of detail provided for those rezonings. Different levels of detail are provided depending on the project. The Lower West Branch Road and Taft Avenue and the Moss Ridge Road and Highway 1 rezonings only provided concept plans whereas the rezoning of the multifamily housing on the east side provided a concept plan, elevations and landscaping. In terms of criteria, Russett stated the criteria is different between a standard rezoning and a Planned Development Overlay rezoning. The general criteria for standard rezonings is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with the neighborhood. For OPD rezonings they look at those two criteria but also specific criteria related to density, design, impact to streets and utilities, etc. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 3 of S It is staff's goal to have a consistent message to applicants in terms of what is required at the application stage for various application types, particularly rezonings. Staff must often times provide advice to applicants on what they should provide so the Commission can make an informed decision and that should be a consistent message. If they are asking for concept plans or landscaping plans that are not required as part of the application the applicant has the right to question why they need to provide it. It is also staff's goal to not require too much detail that the process becomes increasingly burdensome. Baker asked if the area of notification and the lack of a requirement for a Good Neighbor Meeting is the same no matter what the type of application. Russett confirmed that was correct. Baker suggested that perhaps the larger the development the wider the area of notification ought to be as well as the requirement of a Good Neighbor Meeting. He feels the impact of the project should dictate a different standard. Parsons questioned how to clarify a size of a project. Does that mean acres it covers, because in the example of the Chauncey project, it has a huge impact but yet only covers a small area. Baker suggested possibility density as a measure as well as size of acres involved. In most cases number of acres involved would create a higher density. Hektoen noted the State Code allows people who live within 200 feet of a rezoning have the authority to protest rezonings and trigger a super majority vote from Council. Baker is not sure that addresses the issue, he still sees a bigger difference in the projects on Muscatine Avenue and one the size of Forest View and how the community input and notifications for each of those projects should perhaps be different. Russett said for a project such as Forest View staff would, and has, told the applicant they should hold a Good Neighbor Meeting as it is very important for the project. Baker appreciates that, noting if they don't hold a Good Neighbor Meeting then they will hear from the neighbors at the Commission meeting. He also asked if there is any interest in having the area of notification larger for larger scale developments. Hensch noted there are a couple common things the Commission hears from the public at meetings, they say they are never notified (but they are usually outside of the circle or just ignored their mail) or they were not invited to a Good Neighbor Meeting. Hensch said he does struggle with an application that chooses to not hold a Good Neighbor Meeting, philosophically he is opposed to that because it is a good communication tool, it shows concern for the neighbors and respect to the neighbors. It does not mean the applicant has to do or change anything to appease the neighbors but maybe small things can be changed and problems avoided. He does not see a downside of requiring a Good Neighbor Meeting for a rezoning. He does not see it as necessary for a vacation or plat, but for a rezoning, when someone moves into a neighborhood they know what the neighborhood should look like, but with a rezoning it brings a choice of changes for land uses and could change a character of a neighborhood and therefore the neighbors should be involved in that decision. Part of the role of the Commission is to do what is best for the community. He feels requiring a Good Neighbor Meeting and expanding the notification area is a good thing. He understands it won't solve all the problems but there does need to be changes. Putting notification in the newspaper is not the solution, no one reads newspapers anymore, and it is time to rethink how these notifications are being presented. Perhaps they should be done via social media. Hensch did note he does not want to create more work for staff so it must be put on the responsibility of the developer. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 4 of 8 Hektoen asked what Hensch would envision the consequence being if a developer doesn't hold a Good Neighbor Meeting. Hensch said the developer then could simply not proceed with the rezoning. Parsons asked if notice goes out, no one responds, then what it the purpose of holding a Good Neighbor Meeting. Hensch said that is fine, at least the option was there. Parsons asked what would constitute a Good Neighbor Meeting, could the developer hold it at their office at an inconvenient time. Hensch said there are already rules for Good Neighbor Meetings set from Neighborhood Development Services on what constitutes a meeting. Russett said the current process is the applicant would set up the meeting, staff would work with the applicant on developing the letter to the neighbors and creating the list of the people who would get the invitation. She noted staff does attend the meetings, they do not moderate them, but are there in case there are questions related to processes. Dyer also agrees that Good Neighbor Meetings should be required and also there has to be better notice for projects with bigger impacts for the community at large and especially the neighborhood. In the case of Forest View they did hold Good Neighbor Meetings and that was good but there was not good notification of the meetings. Additionally that project will affect everyone on the Peninsula not just those within 300 feet. In earlier meetings the people living in Idyllwild came to express their concern about drainage and therefore a whole lot of work was done regarding drainage as a consequence. The project affects whole neighborhoods, not just 300 or 500 feet from the edge of the project. She also agreed there has to be better ways of notifying neighbors, more visible ways. In the case of big buildings, such as the ones downtown, that concerns everyone, not just those within 300 feet. It will affect the skyline, traffic, and aesthetics for the entire city. She is not sure what the answer is regards who to decide which projects are large (area, density, dollar value, etc.). In the example of the Chauncey there were lots of people at the zoning meetings and Council meetings because those people were not in the area of which to be invited to the Good Neighbor Meetings. Russet asked Dyer about projects that are downtown and affect the skyline does that concern include Riverfront Crossings. Dyer confirmed she would include Riverfront Crossings when discussing downtown skylines. Hensch noted the issue of if the Commission receives a report from the Good Neighbor Meetings has also come up in the past. Sometimes they occur but the Commission does not get a report. He also discussed the inconsistency in requirements and the Commission decisions and that is true, sometimes the Commission is aggressive on a project developer and sometimes back off regarding elevations, concept drawings and construction material lists. He agrees there needs to be consistency and developers deserve the right to know what is required, but these items are what helps the Commission make their decisions. It helps the Commission make a correct decision for a neighborhood if they can see exactly what the developer wants to do with the rezoning. Baker noted that was one of the problems with Forest View is there are design standards and guidelines but that doesn't really show what will actually be built on that area. Hensch said there were some concepts with that application, they just didn't have any elevations. He understands some of the big projects will be phased in over time so all details may not be available but to deal in trust and hope doesn't always work out. He also knows that sometimes it does require the developer to have certain drawings created and that costs money, but if they want the development they should be willing to invest in the process. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 5 of S Baker questioned however if a developer shows a drawing or elevations at the rezoning, how obligated are they to follow those. Hensch noted they are not obligated but it shows a good faith effort. Hektoen noted the drawings or elevations can be made as a condition of the rezoning, to say they must have substantial compatibility with concept plans show. Dyer noted that some of the OPDs they have reviewed over the past few years have required changes before approval and the developers have ended up being happy with the changes suggested by the Commission and ended up being better projects for the community. Sometimes it is providing more open space in a family development or changes in building materials to add distinction. She feels strongly that multifamily projects and OPDs need to have concept drawings and elevations. Hensch also said often a developer comes before the Commission, the 45 -day clock is ticking, and they don't have concept drawings or elevations it can seem like a "rubber-stamp" being pushed though. He feels in many cases the projects get so much better when there has been this input by the Commission and the public and developers come back with better solutions. Townsend noted that when there is a rezoning, there are the signs that go up, so it would be nice to have Good Neighbor Meetings so the community can find out more details and an opportunity to ask questions. Otherwise people see the signs and have to call City Staff and ask the questions, staff may or may not have the answers to. Dyer asked if the wording on the signs is legislative or could there be more information put on the signs. Hektoen doesn't feel the wordage is codified. Dyer said an attachment to the sign could post when the Good Neighbor Meeting is being held. Baker feels the consensus is a recommendation to require a Good Neighbor Meeting for all rezonings and elevations for all projects. Hensch said this is just an initial discussion meeting and they can come back to this at the next meeting after some thought. He would like the suggestions to be thoughtful, not detrimental to staff time, and helpful to citizens. Hektoen noted that requiring site plans or concept plans it is important to note that all projects are different and the stage of which they are in when they come before the Commission are different so it is important to keep in mind within the zoning context the Commission has the tool to impose conditions to address public needs that are created by the rezoning. So if there is an application that is very nebulous or will be a 15 year build -out and the Commission can articulate the public need, they can impose a design review as a condition of the rezoning to come back before the Commission with a concept plan. Baker asked if that could have been imposed on the Forest View project. Hektoen said the condition of a design review was imposed. Dyer said that would be a staff review though, not Commission. Russett said for the project at 12 East Court Street, they did add the condition of a design review by the Commission. The project is in Riverfront Crossings, Pentacrest Gardens apartments. Baker asked if the Council could also impose such a condition and Hektoen said they can. Russett will have this discussion topic on the next meeting agenda as well for continued discussion. Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 6 of 8 Parsons stated his reservations of making Good Neighbor Meetings required, he doesn't feel they are necessary for all rezonings. He feels the trust is in staff, they know the rules and see all the applications and they know what the Commission wants and what the public would or would not want in their neighborhoods. He feels requiring such meetings for small projects would be a burden on staff. Townsend agrees with Parsons but does feel there should be a way people in the neighborhood could find out more information, such as having a link posted on the site, etc. Parsons asked when the notices of rezonings go out to the public. Russett said it must be a minimum of seven days but they try to have them out at least two weeks prior. Dyer noted if the neighbors are to have an impact, they need to be part of the process long before the rezoning meeting. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: MARCH 21, 2019 Dyer moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 21, 2019. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett gave an update from the Council meeting on Tuesday where the Council discussed a few things pertinent to the Commission. First, staff presented Council with a residential infill analysis and she will send out the PowerPoint presentation to the Commission. Staff has been directed by Council to work with the consulting firm, Opticos Design, to think about ways to address out of scale or oversized infill residential. Also the City has executed a contract with Opticos to work on a Form -Based Code for the South District. Council has asked staff to explore an amendment to the contract to include a visioning session for the North Side Marketplace as well as a parking study for the North Side Marketplace. That area is Linn Street east to Gilbert Street and Market Street to Bloomington. In terms of recent applications sent to Council. 2130 Muscatine Avenue rezoning was adopted as well as Rollins Pass preliminary plat. Council had the Forest View public hearing on Tuesday and was continued to the April 23 meeting, staff has received some protest petition so are running the numbers to see if a super majority vote is needed. Hektoen mentioned there will be two people coming from Minneapolis to discuss the Race, Place and Land Use Minneapolis 2040 Plan. They have eliminated single-family zoning and will be speaking about that at the Iowa Memorial Union on April 25 at 7:30pm. Baker asked when Council would vote on Forest View. Parsons said that is not known for sure. Baker asked if there was time as a Commission to have discussion at the next meeting on whether they wanted to recommend to Council to impose a condition of their vote to have elevations and design review to come back before Council for approval. Russett said the Commission has already made their recommendation to Council on that application. Hektoen noted that Planning & Zoning's review of the application has passed, the recommendation has Planning and Zoning Commission April 4, 2019 Page 7 of S been made. Hensch said they can reach out to the Councilors as citizens. Baker noted that the Forest View project is such a long-term project with three distinct components and he wondered if a developer could do one of the components and not do the others. Russett said there are times where things are platted as outlots or zoned ID (interim development) but once you have the zoning designation and it's platted that is what is done. There could be a scenario where nothing gets built. Baker is concerned about the commercial area being developed but the residential is deferred, delayed or whatever. Russett agreed that could happen. Hektoen noted they should not be discussing the Forest View project as it was not on the agenda, but it was noted in the recommendation they must provide the replacement housing in the first phase of the project. Baker will not be at the May 16 meeting. Adjournment: Dyer moved to adjourn. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. MINUTES FINAL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AP RI L 18, 2 01 9 — 7:00 PM — FORMAL MEETING E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Phoebe Martin, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sara Hektoen, Anne Russett OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: Hensch called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. DISCUSSION ON THE GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND REZONING CRITERIA: Russett recapped what the Commission discussed at the April 4 meeting regarding the Good Neighbor Policy and application requirements, particularly for rezonings, and rezoning criteria. She noted a few comments from that meeting stood out to her and she wanted to highlight. One was the City should consider requiring a larger notification area for larger scale projects for Good Neighbor Meetings. Another was to consider requiring Good Neighbor Meetings for rezonings but not necessarily for platting or vacations. Also for Good Neighbor Meetings the notifications should be greater for projects in the downtown and Riverfront Crossings and also an interest in requiring concepts plans and elevations for any rezonings in a multifamily rezoning district or for a planned district overlay. Russett noted there were also some reservations requiring Good Neighbor Meetings for all rezonings and to perhaps leave it up to staff to work with the applicant on when a Good Neighbor Meeting should be required. Finally, it was stated the City needs to find better ways to communicate projects to the community. The Commission also mentioned there had been instances where the outcome of the project wasn't what they expected, particularly for rezonings where the Commission recommended approval for rezoning and the result wasn't what was expected. Russett would like to discuss that particular topic in more detail this evening and has some follow up questions. She asks the Commission to provide some specific examples of where they approved a rezoning and was disappointed with the outcome. And also why they feel that may have happened, was it because of the standards in the Riverfront Crossings Code or multifamily site development standards, or how standards were implemented. Was it perhaps because there was not enough detail in the staff report, or other reasons. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 2 of 16 Parsons noted one project the Commission was very disappointed in was the landscaping plan for the UIHC building on North Dodge Street. Hensch said the primary issue seems to be landscaping plans, he noted the Kum & Go project on Riverside Drive also didn't meeting the landscaping they had expected and minimal seems to be the theme on these projects, the developers do the minimum of what they need to do and then there is no follow up to see if the plantings actually live through a season. Hensch noted it is the Commission's responsibility to look out for the welfare of the neighborhoods and they should look nice. Martin asked about landscaping plans and what the requirements are for landscaping plans and what is the responsibility for replacements if plantings die. She noted the particular project on North Dodge did do some plantings but they died and haven't been replaced. Dyer noted they were supposed to have trees and none of those got planted. Baker asked then if the current regulation is the City can force the developer to implement a landscaping plan but there is no requirement of maintaining it. Russett said if it is brought to staff's attention there is an issue they will go out to the site and it could be noted as a zoning violation and the City would work with the property owner to improve the landscaping. She noted staff is only aware of issues if they are brought to their attention, they do not have the manpower to do proactive enforcement of landscaping plans. Signs noted that some property owners do not take care of the plantings, especially in the first year, and also there can be issues with snow plows taking out trees and plantings. Dyer also brought up the buildings in Riverfront Crossings are supposed to have a setback after the third or fourth floor and that hasn't happened in all projects. An example is the Hodge building on Dubuque Street (not on the corner of Prentiss, but further down on Dubuque Street). Another was the Park at 201 came and got permission to have their balconies stick out but then built it so the whole building sticks out. Dyer is concerned the Commission needs to see elevations of the major projects because this is the first place the public gets to see what the project will be. If there are no elevations, there is nothing for the public to see. Another thing about Riverfront Crossings Zone is the requirements state staff approves the standards and staff approves the design but they don't follow the requirements. Hektoen noted there is are provisions in Riverfront Crossings that allow administrative waivers of certain standards. What Hektoen is hearing is perhaps the way staff is exercising that authority is inconsistent with the Commission's expectations. Dyer agreed and noted there is no public viewing or comment if it is a staff decision. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 3 of 16 Parsons noted there was a past Commissioner that flat out stated she felt the staff was being way too lenient with the standards because projects didn't turn out as they thought they should. Signs noted the Hodge property on South Dubuque Street are a good example of the Commission spending a lot of time establishing the Riverfront Crossings criteria and Code and the second building doesn't meet it. Additionally the developer came back on the next building and again didn't want to meet the Code standards and requirements and used the precedent of not having to follow the standards and requirements on the previous building. Signs notes that is a blatant example of not following the rules. Russett asked if there were any other examples that were landscaping related or outside of Riverfront Crossings or downtown that didn't meet the Commission expectations. If anyone thinks of examples, please email her. Signs also noted the Hieronymus Square project, nothing it is in Riverfront Crossings, but when it first came to the Commission it did not have any of the design elements required for that district, it came with just one giant surface. Ultimately the Commission approved it with some modifications, but proposals should not come before the Commission that do not meet the rules and staff should alert the developers as such. If there are needs for modifications there is willingness on the Commission's part to do so but it needs to be done judiciously. Dyer noted the building being built next to City Hall first came before the Commission with a drive through for the fire department, it didn't have the towers above, and the final project is totally different from what the Commission saw at the Planning & Zoning meeting. It is entirely different except for the townhouses along Iowa Avenue. Signs agreed and noted they came before the Commission for a variance on those townhouses because they are not as deep as they are supposed to be because of parking behind and again he questions if the rules are there why are they designing things that don't meet the rules and then coming to staff and the Commission for forgiveness and variances. Parsons asked about the fire department drive through and Signs noted that was taken completely out of the plans. He added part of the pitch for the development was to have that drive through, a benefit for the City. Dyer agreed, it was a trade-off that the City would get the drive through and the developer would get their variance, and now just the developer got what they wanted. Hensch noted those are some good examples and it shows maybe just a bit of frustration with staff review of projects and how what the Commission thinks a project will be is noticeably different after the staff review. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 4 of 16 Dyer believes there should be citizen involvement if staff review is how downtown and Riverfront Crossings is going to be developed. There is design review for other areas that involve citizens. Russett said this discussion is very helpful and gives her some thoughts on how to address the concerns. Hensch suggested discussing the Good Neighbor Policy next. He doesn't know if there is consensus but believes the majority feels Good Neighbor Meetings should be mandatory for rezonings. Hensch noted if no one shows up for the meetings then that is okay, that means there is no need for concerns. Martin agreed, noting the cost is postage and a mailing. Signs asked if there should be a size of project that would trigger the requirement for a Good Neighbor Meeting. Hensch noted he is not comfortable with stating that because for example the rezoning for that little commercial space next to Walgreens on Muscatine Avenue could have impact on the neighbors. He feels the conversations could be helpful for neighbors and a lot of issues could be taken care of right at these meetings. Hensch doesn't feel it is burdensome to require a Good Neighbor Meeting for all rezonings. Dyer noted a rezoning by definition is a change. Hensch agreed and said one that could affect multiple entities. Martin noted the public library is free to use for meetings. Signs asked how the process of notification for Good Neighbor Meetings is done. Does the City do the mailings or are they up to the developer to do. Russett stated it is the developer's responsibility but the City often helps and will also review the letter that is sent out. Signs asks because the Commission hears many times from neighbors that they didn't get a letter. In some cases they may be out of the 300 foot circle by one lot or something. Sometimes also the case is a renter lives in the home and the notification goes to the owner who may not be in the area. But overall it feels like something is not working in this process. Martin noted the Commission only hears from the handful that didn't get the notification, but there is a many more that do receive the notifications. Hensch noted obtaining information about homeowners in the radius for notifying neighbors is not difficult, there is also a government website where anyone can get the information about property deed holders. Therefore there is no burden for this notification requirement. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 5 of 16 Martin said it would be easy for the developer to also save a PDF of the labels for the mailing so they could prove a homeowner was invited to the Good Neighbor Meeting. Dyer also noted that on the signs notifying of a zoning change there is a phone number and perhaps a website could be added as well. She was also thinking that those signs are seen when driving and one is not prepared to write down a phone number or website, so the notification of when the Good Neighbor Meeting is being held should be on those signs as well. Hensch agreed with Dyer and stated the notification requirements are really 20th century technology driven, a sign and a public notice in the legal section of the newspaper are the only way the neighbors know what is going on. While he acknowledges he does not want to be burdensome to the staff there has to be some technology to find a better way to communicate with the neighbors about this. A communications expert can find a 21St century way to alert neighbors and the public and to think bigger than just posting the sign and putting the notification in the legal section of a newspaper no one reads. Dyer suggested a link on the City's webpage that directly links to projects and not have to go through a bunch of pages and documents. Hensch also added that having the legal announcement in the newspaper is just not readable for people over the age of 45, the typeset is too small. Hensch feels the Commission is pretty much unified on the need for Good Neighbor Meetings on rezonings and also the encouragement of finding some current technology to share this information with neighbors and the public. Signs noted that in cases where there has been robust Good Neighbor Meetings it seems to have less venomous comments from neighbors at the Planning & Zoning meetings. They may not like the situation, but they do have a better understanding of the situation. Hensch also feels the 300 feet distance is random and should be increased. Martin also noted in the situation of the Muscatine Avenue property the radius is a quarter filled by Walgreens. Hensch asked if the requirement could be as simple as all adjacent blocks. Signs stated that larger projects should have larger exposure. Something on the scale of the Muscatine Avenue property is smaller and a smaller radius is appropriate and property captures all the concerned neighbors but in the case of the Forest View project, 300 feet doesn't seem at all reasonable and should have encompassed a larger area. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 6 of 16 Martin added that a rezoning in downtown or Riverfront Crossings or the Forest View situation, there is a broader reach, it will affect everyone that lives in the community. She noted so many people asked her about the Dubuque Street sign and what it was for. Hensch agreed, perhaps there needs to be a tiered response, if it is a single parcel being rezoned then the 300 feet is probably fine, but for the larger developments there is a more major community impact. He trusts staff to come up with the correct criteria. Dyer said this makes a good argument for using electronic means instead of mailings or signs for notifications. Signs noted the challenge with electronic is what channels do you use. There is not one place everyone goes to get information. Dyer said they can use the Nextdoor app, neighborhood newsletters, etc. People are not reading newspapers and there aren't as many reporters so there aren't advance stories to alert people what is coming up before City Council or Zoning. There were no reporters present at the meetings regarding the Forest View rezoning, in the past there were reporters that were assigned to cover such meetings every time they met. Martin asked if the City was at all in connection with the Corridor Business Journal. Russett said the City of Cedar Rapids is but she has not had any connection with them since she started with the City of Iowa City. Hensch stated he does not have the perfect answer on notification to the citizens but good faith efforts need to be made and it is the obligation of the City to find all possible avenues to notify neighbors so they can be involved in the conversation. Baker asked if there would be alternatives to the mailing of letters. Hensch noted the mailing of letters would continue but there needed to be additional ways as well. Dyer stated having more public notifications may get to people who are interested in a project but not in the general vicinity. Hensch agreed and also noted that renters should have a voice, or at least know what is going on, but will never get the notification because they are not property owners. 60% of the people in Iowa City are rentals, so automatically those 60% are excluded from participation in the conversation because they are never notified. Martin added many rentals are rented by one family for decades. Signs agreed and says that renters are impacted and especially the further away from campus the more long term rentals there are. Hensch noted that a long-term renter is invested in their neighborhood. Townsend noted that when a house is for sale there is a sign in the yard that has flyers with information on the house and could something like that happen with the Planning & Zoning signs. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 7 of 16 Signs asked if staff puts out the signs or the developer. Russett said staff puts out the signs. Parsons noted he is the only reservation, he agrees with all that the Good Neighbor Meetings are important but as a Commission they have approved applications in the past where the Good Neighbor Meeting was not used and it was not an issue. Martin said when Ann Freerks was the Commission Chair she always asked if a Good Neighbor Meeting was held and if the answer was no she asked why not. Parsons agreed it is fair to ask. Hensch noted that in the case of the rezoning on Muscatine Avenue next to Walgreens he was not in favor but he voted for it because his reservations were not required. He wished there had been a Good Neighbor Meeting held, but it was not and it was not required so he could not hold that against the developer on the vote. Parson has enough reservations and likes it to be listed as a recommendation but not a requirement. Russett noted it is both recommended and optional. Parsons stated to remove the word optional and just say recommended everywhere. Baker asked if the recommendation to extend the range of notification to the number of people, if there are several apartment buildings in a close area with a couple hundred renters the two owners of the complexes would currently get the notification but not the renters so the goal is to also get the 200 renters notified. Hensch said the goal is to get them notified, perhaps by social media or somehow. Martin said signs could be placed in building common areas or somewhere to notify the renters so they aren't excluded just because they are renters. Baker said then the developer could contact the building owner and get permission to post a notice in the rental building. Hensch agreed but thinks it is better to get away from flyers and paper notification and move towards better technology. Martin thinks flyers are a good way to go however and people do read them. Parsons is interested in knowing if other cities reach out to their citizens in electronic formats. Hensch noted that Iowa City is on Twitter, Nextdoor and Facebook plus a website so those should at least be utilized. Hektoen noted that any citizen can sign up to receive emails about meeting agendas as they come out. To have electronic communications there has to be an act by the citizen to follow the communications. Hensch acknowledged it is an ongoing struggle on communicating to citizens and there is no one way to reach everyone but that doesn't mean we don't try. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 8 of 16 Martin noted she recalls hearing from many that if there was more of a concerted effort made it would matter. Dyer noted there are four or five items per agenda max, perhaps there could be those listed without having to read through the entire agenda packet to just get to the one item a person is interested in. Signs noted that staff said they hadn't had much time to research what other cities were doing so if they can have time to do that perhaps a better option will be found. Dyer added that Good Neighbor Meetings come before the application comes to Planning & Zoning and corrections can happen and problems resolved before the item comes before the Commission. Baker asked in the current process if the developer obtains the names and addresses of the neighbors within the 300 feet or if staff does that. Russett replied staff will help if the developer needs it. Baker asked if staff is then aware of who all received the letters and Russett noted that is not always shared by the developer to staff. Baker asks because if someone comes to a meeting and says they were not notified, it would be good to be able to check to see if they were. Baker said that list should be on hand at the meeting or given to the City. Hensch also commented that when a Good Neighbor Meeting is held it is nice for the Commission to receive a report of what is said at the meetings as it is helpful to know what the possible concerns are and makes the Commission more effective in their jobs. Russett wanted to touch on the topic of notifying renters. Before she began working at the City there was quite a bit of effort Neighborhood Development Services went through to try to figure out ways to notify renters and it was very difficult. Hensch agrees and doesn't think individual renters need to be seek out and notified, but can try to broaden the communications via social media or other efforts to notify any interested citizen. Hensch moved on to application requirements and asked staff to present their questions within that area. Russett noted it was stated at the last meeting by Dyer that she feels strongly that elevations and concept plans should be required for multifamily projects and OPDs. Hensch noted again an issue he had with the property by Walgreens was there was no concept and no elevations. He feels it is not fair to the Commission to ask them to make a decision with no information. At a certain age in life one learns that trusting others is not always a wise course of action, it is better to be able to have facts and be shown what is going to be done. He also feels it is not asking the developer to spend a large sum of money on plans — they are just asking for a concept plan and elevation to show what the intention is. Asking the Commission to do a rezoning with an option of Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 9 of 16 three or four things they "might" do with no drawings is uncomfortable because what may end up being done may not be right for the neighborhood. It is the Commission's job to look out for the neighborhood and the citizens. Dyer said some developers (often the smaller or medium size developers) present the concept plans and elevations at every application so it is possible for all to do so. Signs shares the frustration but feels they need to be cautious about what happens if they bring the plans forward and the Commission doesn't like it. Martin noted it is a concept plan, it is not an exact final plan, and changes can happen but it is something to begin working off. Hensch said it is an opportunity for feedback and sometimes by the time the plans get through the Commission they can really be improved. Signs recalled the project off Camp Cardinal Road by the highway, the Commission got very deep in the weeds on the exterior of their concept plans. Martin noted they were violating a setback from a highway. Hensch added that application was asking for a lot of waivers and when an applicant comes forth asking for a bunch of waivers then the Commission can become much more descriptive. Dyer noted that any OPD is basically a waiver so if you want to do something different than what is allowed in that area a developer should be able to show exactly what they want to do. Hensch noted he is comfortable with developers pushing back, a good robust conversation makes things better. Parsons agreed, it can be a negotiation, the Commission will grant waivers but what will the developer agree to in return. Hensch noted it is not that the Commission doesn't want these project to happen, they just look at how they can help make them better. Signs noted the biggest frustration is the optional part of this, some developers come with very detailed plans and others just have vague ideas. With the case of the Muscatine Avenue plan the Commission was forced to vote because based on the rules a detailed plan wasn't required but in the end they have no idea what they were voting on. Baker asked if they are suggesting changing the rules to require elevations. Hensch said he is not suggesting requiring elevations but to have a concept plan so the Commission can make an informed judgement. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 10 of 16 Baker noted going back to the Forest View development, he focused on the commercial aspect of the development but also feels like the multifamily portion of the development was ignored and they don't have a good sense of what that is going to look like. Dyer noted she raised the question of concept plans and elevations for the multifamily development at Forest View many times during the discussions. Hensch stated it is difficult with the 45 day rule, if a developer is not interested in a deferral than a decision has to be made. Even if the Commission denies the item they can move forward to the Council and the Commission loses opportunity to negotiate with the developer. Hektoen agrees with OPDs it makes sense to ask for elevations and concept plans but to ask for that for the base zone it may be the problem is with the base zone, the regulations such as if the screening is not sufficient. The structure of the Zoning Code produces the project that is desirable for the community and perhaps there needs to be amendments to the Code. Martin asked if there are just too many options and perhaps it is not the Code itself but that there are too many interpretations of it and what that means to that particular developer. Hektoen stated it is a Code issue, if the Commission doesn't want to vote for a RS -5 zone because they don't know what it is going to look like, that says to her the Commission doesn't think the Zoning Code is producing projects that are consistent with expectations. Hensch agrees there is truth to that, he notes the Keokuk Street apartments were within compliance with the Zoning Code and there is no open space, the buildings are packed in there, and it ended up as a disaster. The base zone requirements were met but had the developer came in with a concept plan showing that it would have been denied because there is no green space, no play area for children, no parking areas. Concept plans flush those concerns out and help developers make their plans better for the good of the neighborhood. Dyer noted that with multifamily buildings the Commission always maintains there should be outdoor space for the residents, especially if it is planned to be for families, and occupying every square foot of land with a building doesn't help the people that will be living there. Parsons noted the Code has requirements for open space in multifamily developments. Russett acknowledged there are and stated there are also multifamily development standards so she would be interested to know when the Keokuk project was built because over several years the City has continually amended those multifamily design standards to address problem projects. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 11 of 16 Hensch trusts staff to come up with some rules regarding minimal information such as a concept plan for the Commission to see with applications. He does not like the Commission to have to make decisions with little information and that is not fair or good for the community. Hektoen said any concept plan of value would have to be part of a conditional zoning agreement (CZA) that states the expectation of some level of consistency with that concept plan, otherwise they are under no obligation to follow that concept. Hensch is fine with having a CZA on applications. Hektoen continued to say in terms of the level of investment in the concept plan, they will have to invest in something that produces something accurate enough that they can commit to it if a CZA is attached. Hensch noted that some developers come in with full packages, concept plans, elevations and details and other come in with nothing so how does that happen and why is that okay. Hektoen noted that some people own land for speculation or as an investment where as other applicants are in the business of developing the land so it depends on the purpose of why they own the land and what they want to do with it. Some just want a certain zoning designation so the land will be more marketable but the concept isn't identified yet, which is well within their right as property owners. Russett reiterated that concept plans, elevations and renderings the Commission receives may not be the final detailed plans and by showing that can set up unreasonable expectations. If the concept is not detailed then staff cannot review it against the form -based code and changes will need to happen and then the final product is different than what the Commission had seen. Dyer said the Commission is stewards of the public space and people in the neighborhoods or even everyone in the community is affected by private decisions and the Commission is a public agency that has some responsibility to see that development is done responsibly. Dyer has been a member of the Commission for seven or eight years and has never experienced anyone on the Commission making judgments in bad faith, no one is representing their own interests. She feels a great responsibility for the community and thinks there needs to be information given so they can exercise their responsibility. Hensch stated that no one is guaranteed a rezoning and the property values in Iowa City tell him this is a highly coveted area for people to live so it doesn't seem like a few extra requirements will be an issue or cause property values to go down. Russett agrees and reiterated what Hektoen stated that if the Commission wants to the project to comply with the concept plan there needs to be a condition. If the developer must comply with the elevations there needs to be a condition and often times these renderings aren't full designs so when staff is presenting them to the Commission they Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 12 of 16 need to be clear what the Commission is seeing is not the full design of the project, it is just a sketch. Hensch agreed and added if the Commission wants to make a requirement or CZA they need to add that. He noted they all feel an obligation to keep Iowa City a special place to live and the only way that can happen is if everyone is watching out for the welfare of Iowa City as a whole. Hektoen added that with conditions the Commission will need to be able to articulate the public need for identifying and addressing the public need. Baker asked if the Commission can do all of this now, impose the CZA and ask for concepts and elevations, they have that authority now. Hektoen said it cannot be said in a vacuum right now, the Commission cannot be arbitrary or capacious, there has to be a reason why and the Commission cannot impose their design views on a developer. Baker agreed but said they are just asking for basic design information at this time, not specifics. Hensch noted the Commission just wants to ensure the building is going to be an attractive and safe, sturdy building for the next 100 years, not just for the next 20 years. Baker stated then they don't need a change in the regulations to accomplish the goal. Signs feels they do, right now these items are optional and not required and the point is if the Commission wants to see these things they need to be required. Baker asked if they had to be required in every case. Small development versus big development, doesn't matter the Commission wants all these items. Hensch stated as they learned from the Lusk Avenue development a small parcel can have a big impact on a neighborhood. Hektoen stated there are single family rezoning applications and one cannot reasonably expect them to have every single family home redesign to be approved, so stating concept plans are required for every application causes her concern on how realistic that is, and what the public need is being identified there, if the Commission thinks the Zoning Code is not producing projects that are good for the community, if more open space is necessary, setbacks need to be better, stepbacks, etc., those need to be amendments to the Code not just the Commission acting as the design review committee. She has heard this evening quite a few things the Commission finds lacking in the Zoning Code itself so that should be the focus rather than requiring a site plan or concept plan for every project when a lot of times it is premature. Hektoen added the OPDs are an interesting situation because they are asking for waivers and obviously have thought through their project further. She cautions the Commission away from requiring concept plans and elevations in every zoning application. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 13 of 16 Parsons added it is tough from a developer's standpoint to put all the detail into a project they don't even know if it is a go. Hektoen agreed noting sometimes there is an option to purchase the land contingent on the rezoning and if the rezoning doesn't get approved they don't want to have a whole lot of money sunk into the project. Martin understands but she doesn't think there is a lacking in the Code but rather a lacking in the developer's good faith efforts. She also stated it does not cost that much put something on paper. Hektoen said they can't just put something on paper because it has to be feasible. A developer has to have their budget put together, and all their research on a concept done to put something on paper and that takes time and money. Signs takes note of a property owner that just seeks a rezoning to make a property more marketable or interesting, what could be expected of that person. Martin stated for a project on Dodge Street they presented a few different options based on zoning of commercial, residential or multifamily. At least there were things to have a discussion about. This was the area across from the old HyVee next to the cemetery where there are now townhouses. The land was residential, it then became commercial and went back to residential. Dyer noted the reason for this whole discussion topic was the desire to be more consistent in what is expected. Hensch agreed and noted at some meetings the Commission can be very prescriptive and the next meeting less so. He wants the Commission to be more consistent and to have better regulations they could be. He has faith in staff to synthesize the thoughts of the Commission into something reasonable and workable. Overall allow the Commission to be more consistent and objective and treating all applications as fairly as they can. That comes back to the original point that many on the Commission feel they often don't have enough information to make an informed decision. Townsend stated as a new member she just wants to be clear what she is voting on and if she can't see it she is confused about what she is voting on. If there is not plan, not even a concept, then what is she voting on. Hektoen replied the Zoning Code. Hensch agreed and noted there can be four different land uses within one zoning code so that is the issue. Townsend feels if someone is looking to rezone a property they should have some idea of what they think the final property should look like. It could be several options and all those options should be presented. Hektoen noted the City is moving towards more form -based code, traditionally the zoning code has been based on use and the Commission is voting on what the property should be used for (commercial, residential, industrial) not necessarily the form which includes setbacks, screening and other issues. Riverfront Crossings is structured as a form -based code, but there have been a lot of waivers allowed that the Commission has Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 14 of 16 also expressed concerns about. There is a reshuffling of expectations of what a zoning code does and should do. Townsend asked if after the land has been rezoned can it come back to the Commission when they decide what they are going to do with it. Parsons noted that happened at the property along Herbert Hoover Highway for the multifamily that was going in next the Churchill Estates, the applicant wanted to see if the rezoning went through and then came back to the Commission with the preliminary or final plat with all the details. Russett noted that was an unusual order of things. Parsons agreed noting most times the plat is approved with the rezoning and not separately. Russett added typically if the Commission wants renderings or concepts or elevations that happens at rezoning not a platting, platting is really about the subdivision of land and creation of the lots. So when that applicant provided that additional information it was because the Commission requested it, those items are usually provided at the rezoning stage. Russet did note if a rezoning has to be platted it will come back before the Commission as a preliminary plat, otherwise it does not come back before the Commission. Hensch said they could apply a condition on the rezoning to make sure the platting comes back before the Commission. Dyer noted the ones they have had difficulty with were not the ones where people wanted to rezone their property to sell it but rather when there are specific projects they want to do but don't show any information. Russett thanked the Commission for their thoughts and felt it was good information and staff can incorporate this into the memo they are preparing for Council and City Council will also have the minutes from these meetings to also help inform them for their discussion on these items. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: APRIL 4, 2019 Signs moved to approve the meeting minutes of April 4 2019. Parsons seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Russett noted that Signs and she just got back from the National APA conference in San Francisco. Signs will present some findings at an upcoming meeting. He did note one of the takeaways was a lot of things this community is struggling with are the same as what other communities across the country are struggling with. Planning and Zoning Commission April 18, 2019 Page 15 of 16 Adjournment: Parsons moved to adjourn. Townsend seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0. Item Number: 3. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Pending City Council Work Session Topics ATTACHMENTS: Description Pending City Council Work Session Topics I ! i wirOT CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS July 30, 2019 August 20, 2019 1. Discussion of preliminary budget priorities for FY2021 Strategic Plan Actions Requiring Initial City Council Direction: L 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 Other Topics: 1. Joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission 2. Evaluate need for a Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) 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. (Parks Commission to discuss in July) 4. Review of RFC Form Based Code, including density bonus provisions and height allowances 5. Review of staff's growth boundary analysis (Johnson County Fringe Area Agreement Update) 6. Discuss amending City Code to require staff and rezoning applicants of large-scale developments to consider the effects of the proposed projects on future carbon emissions and absorption capacity, and to take actions that will help achieve the City's carbon emission reduction goals 7. Discuss alcohol usage policies in City parks 8. Review of the Aid to Agencies process 9. Possible joint work session with Planning and Zoning Commission on the South District Form Based Code (Fall 2019) Item Number: 4. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from City Manager: Blackbird Investments / Forest View Tenants Association Request for Financial Incentives Description Memo from City Manager: Blackbird Investments / Forest View Tenants Association Request for Financial Incentives lb �.®gar CITY OF IOWA CITY Nf N 9 a �w MEMORANDUM Date: July 31, 2019 To: Mayor and City Council From: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Re: Blackbird Investments / Forest View Tenants Association Request for Financial Incentives Background Earlier this year, the City Council approved a rezoning for the area along N Dubuque Street and 1-80 commonly referred to as Forest View. The City Council also recently created an Urban Renewal Area that could potentially facilitate Tax Increment Financing (TIF) support for the construction of Algonquin and Forest View Drive. These two roadways will serve a broad public purpose for the City and staff is currently reviewing roadway costs to determine a proportion that may be appropriate for future TIF rebates. In addition to the possible development agreement covering a cost share of the roadway, the developer (Blackbird Investments) needs to complete the platting process and secure City Council approval on their final housing relocation plan. These steps must be completed prior to construction commencing. New Financial Request On July 16th, I received a request from Blackbird Investments and the Forest View Tenants Association to change to wider homes in the new Forest View neighborhood. The cost of moving to a wider home was estimated at $20,500 per home for a total cost of $1.2 million. The request stated that Blackbird Investments does not have the financial ability to cover the additional $1.2 million and thus they are seeking assistance from the City to fill that gap. A second request was also made to have the City take ownership of private common areas that are planned in the development (Lot 49 and Outlot D). The stated intention of this request was to avoid having the homeowners become financially responsible for maintaining the property. Legislative Process Implications A change to the size of homes may cause a need for another rezoning as additional waivers from dimensional standards beyond those previously approved may be required. Alternatively, Blackbird Investments could choose to plat larger lots and presumably reduce the number of new homes in the neighborhood. If a rezoning is needed, it will likely be a 3-4 month process with staff and Planning and Zoning Commission review occurring prior to the Public Hearing and three considerations of the City Council. Both the rezoning process and a change in lot sizes will have implications for the housing relocation plan. $1.2 million of gap financing is a significant request that is greater than our annual allotment to the Affordable Housing Fund. Thus, such a request would likely need to be made through TIF. As previously mentioned, staff is currently reviewing the use of TIF to support public infrastructure that serves a greater benefit than the neighborhood itself. This process considers the cost of the roadway, but does not trigger a full gap analysis of the entire development. The new request is for gap financing, which triggers a full financial review of all the components of the development as well as compliance with the Council's TIF policies. A gap analysis will take several months to complete and likely require outside consultant expertise because of the size and complexity of the development. It is unlikely that such an analysis could be completed by the end of the calendar year. Once it is completed, the Council would have to amend the Urban July 31, 2019 Page 2 Renewal Plan to include the project. The recently approved Urban Renewal Plan did not contemplate funding support beyond the $12.9 million total roadway infrastructure costs. State law requires a formal amendment to the Urban Renewal Plan anytime a new project is considered. That process will take 2-3 months. Staff Recommendation Prior to potentially initiating legislative processes that will be time-consuming and costly for all involved, staff would like to receive direction from the City Council as to whether you wish to entertain this new request. Staff's recommendation is to allow the developer to apply for existing affordable home dollars through our established competitive processes or via outside agencies such as the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. If they are successful in receiving funding for increasing the width of all or some of the homes, they can then work with staff on any land use approvals that may be required. Staff does not support transitioning to a gap analysis for use of TIF. As it stands today, the City is likely to consider multimillion -dollar TIF support for the public infrastructure. While we believe this support is justified, it is certainly not the norm for private developments. Additionally, the housing standards have been thoroughly vetted throughout the multi-year planning and approval process and provide for a quality neighborhood and living accommodations for the future residents. While the City has not directly subsidized the housing, it has been made very clear through the comprehensive plan and rezoning processes that significant increases in density and intensity throughout the project were found to be acceptable in order to make the current relocation plan work without direct financial support. On the second request for public ownership of Lot 49 and Outlot D, that was a topic of discussion through the staff review process and rezoning. We do not believe there is a compelling public interest for the City to own that land and recommend that the developer and future homeowners association maintain the property. Homeowner associations commonly care for similar property across the community and we do not see any reasons that distinguish these parcels from dozens and dozens of others maintained by private associations. Item Number: 5. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from Neighborhood & Development Services Director: Strategic Plan Action Item: Review of Affordable Housing Action Plan and New Strategies Description Memo from Neighborhood & Development Services Director: Strategic Plan Action Item: Review of Affordable Housing Action Plan and New Strategies i r III h X. M CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: July 29, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Tracy Hightshoe, Neighborhood and Development Services Director Re: Strategic Plan Action Item: Review of the Affordable Housing Action Plan and New Strategies Introduction: At the May 21, 2019 work session, staff presented a memo on the City's strategies to reinvest in the City's existing housing stock. This review was the first of two items requested of staff to further the goals of the City's Strategic Plan regarding housing policy. The second item was to update the Affordable Housing Action Plan with new strategies to improve the availability and affordability of housing in Iowa City. Providing affordable, safe housing in the community is critical to fulfilling several goals outlined in the Strategic Plan, including encouraging a vibrant and walkable urban core, fostering healthy neighborhoods, promoting environmental sustainability, and advancing social justice and racial equity. Council approved all recommendations outlined in the May 9, 2019 memo to reinvest in the City's existing housing stock. Neighborhood Services staff has started to initiate those recommendations with the start of the new fiscal year on July 1. This memo addresses the second action item and provides staff recommendations on how to update the Affordable Housing Action plan to improve the availability and affordability of housing in the community. Affordable Housing Action Plan Update: The Affordable Housing Action Plan, approved on June 21, 2016, identified 15 action steps to encourage and develop additional affordable housing opportunities. To date, the City has completed 13 of the 15 steps with the final two actions currently in progress. The following table summarizes the steps and their current status. Strategy Status ® 1. Continue to fund existing local FY20 budget includes $200,000 for GRIP & programs including GRIP (owner -occupied $60,000 for the UniverCity program. To date, the housing rehab.) and UniverCity. City has purchased 68 homes for the UniverCity program. 66 have been rehabilitated and sold for homeownership. ® 2. Adopt an Affordable Housing Completed June 2016. Requirement for the Riverfront Crossings To date, entered agreements for 39 affordable District. (10% of total units for 10 years or housing units (29 on-site, 10 fee in lieu of units fee in lieu) totaling $808,720) ® 3. Adopt code amendments that enable Completed June 2016. the FUSE Housing First (Cross Park Place) use in the community. 24 1 - bedroom apartments for persons who are chronically homeless and habitually cycle through mental health services, corrections systems, shelter and support services. July 30, 2019 Page 2 ® 4. FY20 Budget Process: Provide a line FY20 budget includes $1,000,000 for affordable item for affordable housing (goal of housing. $500,000 based on budget conditions). ® 5. Distribution of Affordable Housing The FY20 breakdown of funds: dollars: • $500,000 to be issued to the HTF in August • 50% to the Housing Trust Fund of 2019. Johnson County (HTF) • $250,000 reserved for land banking. ($845,500 • 25% held in reserve for land banking available. Currently evaluating possibilities.) • 5% reserved for emergent situations (if • $50,000 reserved for emergent situations. unused, reserved for land banking) Any remaining balance, as of 6/30/2020, will be • 20% directed through HCDC for LIHTC shifted to land banking. support or supplemental aid for housing • $200,000 directed through HCDC for LIHTC applications support. ® 6. Hold the $1,500,000* million in City Council approved an agreement for Augusta Housing Authority funds for an opportunity Place on 5/2/2017. The City will purchase six to leverage significant private investment units for permanent affordable rental housing at and/or to develop/acquire low income $1,080,000. The City anticipates the building will replacement housing. be completed in August 2019. The developer will also provide 12 affordable off-site units, *$2.5 million was available, $1.0 million affordable to those at 40% median income for a committed to the Chauncey units, for a period of 20 years. balance of $1.5 million) City Council approved a developer's agreement for the Chauncey building on 6/18/2015. The City will purchase five units at $1,000,000 and add these units to the City's public housing program. The City anticipates the building will be completed in August 2019. There is approximately $420,000 remaining to develop/acquire low income replacement housing. ® 7. Consider an annexation policy that Completed 7/17/2018. provides for affordable housing 10% of total units affordable for preferably 20 contributions. years or more. No annexations processed since adoption. ® 8. Consider use of TIF on a case by case Development agreement for Foster Road basis to support residential development approved 7/17/18. Anticipated to generate $2-3 and/or annexation through the provision of million for affordable housing over 10 years. public infrastructure and capture the required LMI set-aside for use throughout the community (Ex: McCollister and Foster Road). ❑ 9. Consider regulatory changes to City • Parking waived in Riverfront Crossings for Code: affordable housing, June 2016. • Waive parking requirements for affordable housing units. Staff initiated a review by soliciting input from • Review possible changes to the multi- the Home Builders Association and the family design standards for all units in Johnson County Affordable Homes Coalition. July 30, 2019 Page 3 an effort to reduce cost and expedite Input received and staff reviewing approvals. recommendations. Presentation to Council • Eliminate minimum size requirements anticipated in fall 2019. for PUDs. • Increase allowable bedrooms from 3 to Opticos is developing recommendations for 4 outside the University Impact Area the allowance of missing middle housing in • Permit more building types by right as the City's existing zoning code. This is being opposed to requiring a PUD process done through a missing middle pilot project on (density, multiplex units, cottage a vacant parcel of ground owned by the City clusters, etc.). on Ronalds Street in the Northside Neighborhood. Completion is expected by the end of 2019. M 10. Pursue a form -based code for the The consultant analysis of a form -based code Alexander Elementary neighborhood and was completed in September 2017. NDS staff the Northside. entered contract with Opticos for the Alexander nei hborhood. Kickoff meeting held in May 2019. ® 11. Strategically seek LIHTC projects RFP scheduled annually. through an RFP process overseen by the • Awarded the Del Ray Ridge LP project HCDC (in conjunction with #5). $330,000 (FY17 & 18 funds). 33 units (29 LIHTC, 4 market rate units) at 628 S. Dubuque Street. The City later awarded an additional $150,000 from the land banking fund balance and $800,000 was awarded by the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. • Awarded IC Housing Group, LLC $200,000 (FY19 funds). 36 units (32 LIHTC, 4 market rate units) located off Herbert Hoover Highway, east of Eastbury Street. An additional $775,000 was awarded by the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County. ❑ 12. Create a committee of staff, Committee of six community members and City developers and other interested staff formed to review tax exemption possibilities. stakeholders to determine the viability and First meeting held 1/17/17. Committee finalized potential parameters of a tax abatement recommendation on 5/17/19. Presented to program that would support affordable Council 6/4/19. Recommendation forwarded to housing. Housing and Community Development Commission for their feedback before Council consideration/approval. ® 13. Exempt the Riverfront Crossings from Completed April 2017 the Affordable Housing Location Model (AHLM) and consider modifications to reduce size of restricted areas and/or account for neighborhood densities (consider University Impacted and Downtown neighborhoods for exclusion as well). ® 14. Tenant Displacement Completed October 2017 • Council approval of major site plans when 12 or more households will be displaced and there is no accompanying rezoning. • Such applications would require a transition plan to better inform August 1, 2019 Page 4 Evaluating the progress of housing initiatives often takes time. Land assembly, zoning changes, identifying and securing funds, acquiring the property, construction, and finally leasing or selling the units can be a multi-year process. As a result, several action steps will require a few years to determine if they are viable, effective tools. Two action steps, #10 and #8, will need to be reviewed over an extended period. Action Step #10 is to pursue a form -based code for the developing neighborhood near Alexander Elementary. If successful, the code will be replicated in other areas of the City ready for development. Opticos was hired and had their kick-off meeting in May. Staff anticipates adopting the new code in spring 2020. Once adopted, staff will review future developments and determine if they are meeting the intent of the code to create neighborhoods with a diversity of housing types and price points. Action Step #8 encourages utilizing tax increment financing (TIF) on a case-by-case basis to support residential development. The full economic benefits of a TIF agreement may not be received for 10 years. Evaluating the effectiveness of these two initiatives may take several years. An important component of any affordable housing action strategy is working with the private sector. One of the two remaining initial action steps includes reviewing the zoning and housing codes to determine if regulatory changes could reduce the cost of housing and support a diversity of housing in all neighborhoods. The City currently has 19,838 rental units. Approximately 1,500 rental units are in active compliance periods due to public subsidies, including the City's Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs. The City and other public funding partners subsidize less than 10% of the rental market in Iowa City. Therefore, over 90% of the rental units in Iowa City are produced through the private market without subsidy. The importance of working on supply with the private sector to increase housing diversity and affordability in Iowa City should not be underestimated. Summary of Recommended Program Changes: Based on a review of past projects, average per unit public subsidies, contracted rents by Housing Choice Voucher tenants in Iowa City, Census/American Community Survey information regarding low- and moderate -income persons, and feedback from human service and affordable housing providers, staff recommends several changes to the existing policies. The focus of many of these changes is to assist housing where people with lower incomes already live, to support changes to promote a diversity of housing types in new developments, and to support new rental construction or acquisition (group/shared housing exempted) only when it leverages significant funds from a non -City source. Staff recommends the following changes: 1) Revise the Affordable Housing Fund distribution. The City allocated $1,000,000 to the Affordable Housing Fund for FY20. Based on the existing methodology the funds would be distributed as follows: • 50% ($500,000) to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTF) • 25% ($250,000) held in reserve for land banking • 5% ($50,000) reserved for emergent situations (if unused, reserved for land banking) residents and the public (requires a comprehensive plan and a site plan ordinance amendment). ® 15. Rent abatement for emergency orders Completed October 2017 when vacation of property is not necessary To date, no emergency orders issued. • Increase education about housing code violations and how to report. Evaluating the progress of housing initiatives often takes time. Land assembly, zoning changes, identifying and securing funds, acquiring the property, construction, and finally leasing or selling the units can be a multi-year process. As a result, several action steps will require a few years to determine if they are viable, effective tools. Two action steps, #10 and #8, will need to be reviewed over an extended period. Action Step #10 is to pursue a form -based code for the developing neighborhood near Alexander Elementary. If successful, the code will be replicated in other areas of the City ready for development. Opticos was hired and had their kick-off meeting in May. Staff anticipates adopting the new code in spring 2020. Once adopted, staff will review future developments and determine if they are meeting the intent of the code to create neighborhoods with a diversity of housing types and price points. Action Step #8 encourages utilizing tax increment financing (TIF) on a case-by-case basis to support residential development. The full economic benefits of a TIF agreement may not be received for 10 years. Evaluating the effectiveness of these two initiatives may take several years. An important component of any affordable housing action strategy is working with the private sector. One of the two remaining initial action steps includes reviewing the zoning and housing codes to determine if regulatory changes could reduce the cost of housing and support a diversity of housing in all neighborhoods. The City currently has 19,838 rental units. Approximately 1,500 rental units are in active compliance periods due to public subsidies, including the City's Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs. The City and other public funding partners subsidize less than 10% of the rental market in Iowa City. Therefore, over 90% of the rental units in Iowa City are produced through the private market without subsidy. The importance of working on supply with the private sector to increase housing diversity and affordability in Iowa City should not be underestimated. Summary of Recommended Program Changes: Based on a review of past projects, average per unit public subsidies, contracted rents by Housing Choice Voucher tenants in Iowa City, Census/American Community Survey information regarding low- and moderate -income persons, and feedback from human service and affordable housing providers, staff recommends several changes to the existing policies. The focus of many of these changes is to assist housing where people with lower incomes already live, to support changes to promote a diversity of housing types in new developments, and to support new rental construction or acquisition (group/shared housing exempted) only when it leverages significant funds from a non -City source. Staff recommends the following changes: 1) Revise the Affordable Housing Fund distribution. The City allocated $1,000,000 to the Affordable Housing Fund for FY20. Based on the existing methodology the funds would be distributed as follows: • 50% ($500,000) to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTF) • 25% ($250,000) held in reserve for land banking • 5% ($50,000) reserved for emergent situations (if unused, reserved for land banking) July 30, 2019 Page 5 • 20% ($200,000) directed through HCDC for Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) support or supplemental aid for housing applications Staff recommends revising the distribution to support additional efforts to place low-income residents in existing housing that is safe and affordable as well as support those efforts to preserve affordability, provide accessibility and improve the health of occupants in those homes. The City currently reserves 25% of the affordable housing funds for land banking. Communities typically use land banking to acquire, hold, manage and develop properties such as vacant lots, abandoned buildings or foreclosures, and transition them to productive uses such as affordable housing developments. In Iowa City, there are limited opportunities to purchase vacant, abandoned or foreclosed properties. The City has been investigating possibilities to acquire lots on the open market or available upon subdividing residential land. The scarcity of available land with willing sellers has produced few opportunities to date. Furthermore, the high cost of land coupled with the rising cost of new construction leads to scenarios that have an exceptionally high public subsidy per unit ratios. Currently, there is $845,500 in the land banking set-aside. The City has signed a purchase agreement to purchase one 6-townhome lot for $204,000. Once purchased, the City will have 641,500 available for land banking purposes. Due to the aforementioned market conditions in Iowa City, staff recommends directing future funds to uses that are more flexible and allow the City to take advantage of various affordable housing opportunities and programs as they arise. The funds reserved for land banking accumulated to date will remain in this fund, but staff proposes the following revised distribution of funds (FY20 amounts based on the $1 million budget): • 70% ($700,000) to the Housing Trust Fund. Of this amount at least 20% ($200,000) must be designated for LIHTC projects. Last year the City merged our LIHTC application process with the HTF. For ease of administration and better transparency, it is recommended that one body review total requested funding for LIHTC projects. The HTF is dedicated to affordable housing and their Board consists of those highly experienced in housing finance and the review of complex projects. They are in a unique position to leverage outside funding and attract private partnerships that can extend the impact of the City's dollars. It is also the staffs hope that the City's contribution to the HTF will help encourage other local governments to contribute so that regional affordable housing solutions can be more effective. The Iowa Finance Authority has scored LIHTC applications higher if they have funding commitments from local trust funds. Currently, funds from the City do not help the applicant score better with the Iowa Finance Authority. If this changes in future LIHTC rounds, the City will retain the 20% contribution so that Iowa City applications are scored higher by providing a direct contribution from the City. Finally, it is important to note that the majority of allocations made by the HTF function as revolving loans. Thus, City contributions to the HTF support future affordable housing projects as loans are repaid. • 7.5% ($75,000) dedicated to an Opportunity Fund. The existing land banking set-aside would be combined with these funds and be utilized as opportunities arise. Possibilities include the purchase of available properties or land for affordable housing, but also new programs that address the affordability, safety and accessibility of existing homes. These funds could enable the City to extend affordability periods and/or further reduce income qualifications and rent levels in existing or future affordable housing projects. Staff would also look for opportunities to further the City Council's other strategic objectives such as improved energy efficiency, renewable energy or electrification projects that benefit low-income families. Similarly, the City July 30, 2019 Page 6 could explore programs that take a more wholistic view of cost burden factors that impact our residents and introduce public transportation subsidies or healthcare improvement strategies that complement our affordable housing efforts. The main concept is that these funds would be flexible and be available for use at the City Council discretion as opportunities arise. Staff would expect to recommend use of these funds to the City Council periodically and we also expect that the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) will also make such recommendations to the City Council as they have done of a few occasions in recent years. 7.5% ($75,000) dedicated to the City's Healthy Homes program. The program provides up to $7,500 in rehabilitation that improves air quality to income eligible renter or owner -occupied households with a child (age 18 & under) with recurrent asthma. The program partners with the College of Nursing to provide in-home asthma education and the Free Medical Clinic for needed services or products. If unspent funds, the program will expand to providing additional assistance to CDBG/HOME or GRIP recipients to improve indoor air quality if a resident in the home has a lung disorder such as asthma or COPD, as verified by their medical professional. Staff feels very strongly that our housing programs need a stronger focus on healthy living environments. We are fortunate to live in a community that has a strong healthcare system and partners that are anxious to join us in this effort. The program will increase the stock of safe, decent housing and improve healthcare outcomes and reduce related costs for our low-income population. 10% ($100,000) dedicated to programs that assist tenants with low incomes and those who may have difficulty securing housing due to various reasons such as prior evictions, criminal histories and low credit scores. • $30,000 to capitalize a landlord risk mitigation fund administered by a local agency. Landlord risk mitigation programs have worked in other communities to house those who have trouble obtaining housing. The funds provide a financial protection for landlords willing to rent to these tenants by covering lost rent or excessive damages incurred beyond the security deposit. There is a local working group studying this type of program here in Johnson County. • $70,000 dedicated to a security deposit program administered by a local agency or agencies to assist renters with low incomes secure housing. A request for proposals will be issued to our local non-profit community to determine who is interested in providing this service and the specifics of their proposed program. After capitalizing the landlord risk mitigation fund the initial year, excess funds not needed for this fund will be directed to the security deposit program(s). 5% ($50,000) reserved for emergent situations (if unused, reserved for Opportunity Fund) 2) CDBG & HOME changes A) Alter the preference and scoring criteria for CDBG/HOME assisted projects to promote housing applications that reduce rent or housing costs for owner -occupied properties that are lower than the HUD maximum limits. HUD limits rent to the Fair Market Rent (FMR) established for the Iowa City area. Current FMRs are comparable or higher (based on bedroom size) than rents for similar properties leased by Housing Choice Voucher participants as demonstrated by the following table: July 30, 2019 Page 7 ICHA Point in Time, HCV Participants Bedroom Size Average Rent HOME FMR, Adjusted' $609 $802 $1,204 'HOME FMR- effective 6/28/2019, adjusted for utilities (assumes $75 for 1- BD, $100 for 2 & 3 BD) There are 7301, 2 & 3 BD Voucher holders in Iowa City (Point in time - May 15, 2019) Does not include individuals in shared/SRO housing. To illustrate the point, a modest two-bedroom unit in a multi -family complex in a neighborhood in Iowa City can be rented for $777 a month without any public subsidy. If the affordable housing provider can purchase this same unit with a CDBG/HOME grant or loan, the application will score better if rent, with subsidy, is lower than $777, even if HUD rules allow the unit to be leased at $802. The application will score better based on how much lower the rent can be based on the subsidy provided. City subsidies should be provided to reduce rents lower than what the private sector can produce to expand housing available to those at lower incomes based on the neighborhood and type of housing proposed (single family detached, townhomes, multi -family, etc.). Staff recommends encouraging reinvestment in existing housing and new housing that promotes rent and total housing costs that are less than the area's Fair Market Rents. B) The City currently offers assistance to homeowners through the CDBG Emergency Rehabilitation program for the correction of major violations of the housing code which make the structure uninhabitable or unsafe. One of the program requirements for all housing rehabilitation programs is that homeowners must have adequate equity in the home to secure the City's financial interest in the project. Occasionally, staff receives an application from a homeowner that has an urgent need but does not qualify due to a lack of equity in the property. Staff proposes an administrative change to allow a waiver of the equity requirement in emergency circumstances at the discretion of the Neighborhood Services Coordinator. Situations where this may be allowable might include replacement or repair of a broken furnace in the winter, leaking or nonfunctioning water heater, storm damage that prevents the owner from occupying the home, or other necessary improvements which would allow the homeowner to remain in their property. A mortgage would still be placed on the home to recover as much of the funds as possible upon the sale of the home. 3) Due to the high costs of acquisition and new construction for family (non -shared) housing as shown in the table below, support only such rental applications that leverage significant dollars from non -City sources such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Households who are low income tend to live in older units as renting or buying newly constructed units is cost prohibitive. Staff recommends the City continue to support the acquisition or construction of SRO or group housing due to the average public investment per assisted unit and to increase the supply of accessible homes in our community. Average Rent Census Census Citywide Tract 17 Tract18 $610 $591 $675 $777 $751 $756 $1,100 $1,160 $1,025 HOME FMR, Adjusted' $609 $802 $1,204 'HOME FMR- effective 6/28/2019, adjusted for utilities (assumes $75 for 1- BD, $100 for 2 & 3 BD) There are 7301, 2 & 3 BD Voucher holders in Iowa City (Point in time - May 15, 2019) Does not include individuals in shared/SRO housing. To illustrate the point, a modest two-bedroom unit in a multi -family complex in a neighborhood in Iowa City can be rented for $777 a month without any public subsidy. If the affordable housing provider can purchase this same unit with a CDBG/HOME grant or loan, the application will score better if rent, with subsidy, is lower than $777, even if HUD rules allow the unit to be leased at $802. The application will score better based on how much lower the rent can be based on the subsidy provided. City subsidies should be provided to reduce rents lower than what the private sector can produce to expand housing available to those at lower incomes based on the neighborhood and type of housing proposed (single family detached, townhomes, multi -family, etc.). Staff recommends encouraging reinvestment in existing housing and new housing that promotes rent and total housing costs that are less than the area's Fair Market Rents. B) The City currently offers assistance to homeowners through the CDBG Emergency Rehabilitation program for the correction of major violations of the housing code which make the structure uninhabitable or unsafe. One of the program requirements for all housing rehabilitation programs is that homeowners must have adequate equity in the home to secure the City's financial interest in the project. Occasionally, staff receives an application from a homeowner that has an urgent need but does not qualify due to a lack of equity in the property. Staff proposes an administrative change to allow a waiver of the equity requirement in emergency circumstances at the discretion of the Neighborhood Services Coordinator. Situations where this may be allowable might include replacement or repair of a broken furnace in the winter, leaking or nonfunctioning water heater, storm damage that prevents the owner from occupying the home, or other necessary improvements which would allow the homeowner to remain in their property. A mortgage would still be placed on the home to recover as much of the funds as possible upon the sale of the home. 3) Due to the high costs of acquisition and new construction for family (non -shared) housing as shown in the table below, support only such rental applications that leverage significant dollars from non -City sources such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Households who are low income tend to live in older units as renting or buying newly constructed units is cost prohibitive. Staff recommends the City continue to support the acquisition or construction of SRO or group housing due to the average public investment per assisted unit and to increase the supply of accessible homes in our community. July 30, 2019 Page 8 FY15-FY19 City Assisted Rental Projects Activity Units Assisted/ Created Average public funds per unit Rental Rehabilitation 85 $13,120 Rental Acquisition (SRO/group housing for persons with disabilities 45 $18,555 Rental New Construction includes LIHTC, IEDA funding) 92 $76,788 Rental Acquisition not including SRO/group housing) 3 $157,627 4) Remove the Housing Trust Fund from the competitive Aid to Agency process and move to a contractual relationship. The HTF administers thousands of dollars of City contributions without a reliable project delivery or administrative fee. They currently must apply and get funded through the competitive Aid to Agency process for non-profit agencies. Their past awards have been $24,000. Due to additional funds allocated to the Aid to Agency process this year, their award for FY20 is $30,000. Staff recommends a project delivery/administrative expense set at 5% of the funds allocated to the Housing Trust Fund. Under this recommendation, the HTF would receive $35,000 to administer the funds. Out of the $700,000 allocation to the HTF, $665,000 would remain available to allocate directly to housing projects. Conclusion: Staff is encouraged by the progress that has been made since the Council adopted the first Affordable Housing Action Plan in 2016. We do not believe a significant change in strategy is necessary. This memo outlines a few changes that we feel will help focus the City's efforts on more cost-effective strategies that will benefit those on the lower end of the income spectrum. This will necessarily require a shift in focus away from new construction and toward the community's existing housing stock. Staff will continue to regularly access and modify programs as the need to do so becomes apparent. We look forward to discussing these proposed changes with the City Council at a future work session. Attachment: FY15-19 Accomplishments Overview cc: Housing & Community Development Commission IOWA CITY HOUSING INITIATIVES The City of Iowa City has increasingly focused on creating new affordable housing opportunities through a variety of funding programs and policies. From 2015 to 2019, the City invested nearly $10 million in affordable housing and neighborhood stabilization projects, leveraging tens of millions of dollars, Including $6.75 million in Low Income Housing Tax Credit funding. In total, this has assisted more than 518 homes (179 for owners; 339 for renters). Programs include: Community Dev. Block Grant and HOME Programs: $4.1 million Economic Development Housing Programs: $2.1 million Afl•ordable Housing Fund: $1.8 million Neighborhood Rehabilitation Programs: $1.7 million The City also supports affordable housing opportunities through partnerships with nonprofit and for-profit agencies, in addition to the Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher Programs. IN TOTAL: $9.94 million invested in 518 homes across Iowa City, leveraging tens of millions of dollars in private and other public funds Of the homes assisted... • 452 for affordable housing • 66 for workforce housing Over $19,000 invested per home Program Goals: To create safe, decent and affordable housing in a range of neighborhoods throughout Iowa City. For more information... Visit www.icgov.org/commdev or contact Neighborhood Services at 319-356-5230 EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY Item Number: 6. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from Senior Center Coordinator: Potential use of Senior Center Kitchen Facility ►_1AG_T67:ILvi14zk1&-5 Description Memo from Senior Center Coordinator: Potential use of Senior Center Kitchen Facility r -z-a-`t,� CITY OF IOWA CITY `;a�w MEMORANDUM Date: July 9, 2019 To: Ashley Monroe, Assistant City Manager From: LaTasha DeLoach, Senior Center Coordinator Re: Potential use of Senior Center kitchen facility Introduction At the April 23, 2019 Council meeting, representatives from the Center for Worker Justice inquired on the feasibility of using the kitchen space located within The Senior Center as a commercial kitchen that could be used by community members and organizations. The Senior Center for several years has considered a community use for the under-utilized kitchen space and since the Center for Worker Justice inquiry, has also been approached by other local groups about community uses for the kitchen. This memorandum will discuss the prospects and challenges of creating a commercial kitchen space for internal and external users. Current State of Equipment and Facility Equipment The Senior Center kitchen is approximately 1,734 square feet and includes a walk-in cooler, a walk-in freezer, a range and ovens with a ventilation hood, a cafeteria -style steam table, and various stainless-steel food preparation counters with tools. Presently, the ovens, hood, tilt steam kettle, and steam table currently function. However, the following repairs and purchases are necessary prior to the space being used as a commercially viable kitchen: 1) the hood will need a commercial kitchen exhaust cleaning service and inspection from the Fire Marshal to be up to code. If the system does not meet current codes, the replacement cost estimate is upwards of $10,000; 2) the walk-in cooler requires moderate repair before it would function at the standards required by the food safety regulators (current estimates place repair cost at approximately $6,800); 3) the walk-in freezer will need a part replacement that is estimated to be completed at low cost (under $1000); 4) the stovetop range will need to be completely replaced with a model conducive to commercial usage ($3,000-$5,000); 5) finally, and most costly, the kitchen floor will need to be replaced with a material that will be slip resistant and able to handle the wash downs required for a commercial kitchen. Without this protection, wash downs would likely flood the ceiling of the Center's ground level ($37,000 - $40,000). The total repair cost could be approximately between $40,000 - $60,000 ($10,000 — $20,000 for equipment replacement/repair and $35,000 to $40,000 for floor fortification). August 1, 2019 Page 2 Horizons offers a congregate lunch at The Center five days a week. At one time, the lunch meals were prepared in the kitchen by their volunteers. Currently, the volunteers only utilize the steam tables and sinks daily, but due to this history, the ovens, range, large stand mixer, and other equipment is owned by Horizons. The Center is finalizing an agreement with Horizons to take ownership of the current equipment at no cost to the City. The Center will maintain storage of the equipment as it has been and can use the equipment in good condition whenever the kitchen is deemed operational. Facility Usage Groups and individuals are permitted to rent space at The Center from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. If no other programming conflicts with the proposed kitchen rental times, a rental agreement could be put in place on a singular or on-going basis. The kitchen is accessible from an outside door near the loading dock, allowing users to function within the kitchen and have access to the rest of the building. This access, especially if arranged after business hours, makes it more difficult to secure the building. The kitchen has standard fire doors which keep potential fires from spreading throughout the building, however the doors allow access to the rest of the building when staff may not be present. If a renter leaves the kitchen, they would not have access back into the kitchen as the fire doors lock when leaving the kitchen. We can provide a new policy and procedure that would allow for a contracting rental agreement to have an internal key to use for emergencies outside normal staff hours. Alternatively, we could consider a keycard access system that would cost approximately $15,000 ($5,000 per door to the kitchen space). Programmed use of the Assembly Room will need to be considered in coordination with usage of the kitchen space. Although the two rooms maintain separation by a door and roll -up window, programs in the Assembly Room may be disturbed by incompatible noise -levels of the kitchen. However, if proposed use of the kitchen is known ahead of time, it may be possible to find compatible uses for events planned at the same time of day. With the next spring program guide, it could be possible for the kitchen to be available 6 a.m. — 11 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. — 9 p.m. Rental use outside of standard operational hours would need further consideration. Time of Access and Usage Current Use Historically, the congregate meal program was initially run by Johnson County and then transferred to Elder Services (now known as Horizons) over the last 35 years. During that time the kitchen was run by a County or Horizons employee who was the Director of Nutrition with additional staff who assisted with preparing and packaging meals. Non-profit staff was needed to maintain the kitchen needs and upkeep. Currently, Horizons staff clean the space they use and mop up daily after congregate meals. The kitchen is used by Horizons and volunteers from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Volunteers access the space via the kitchen door and secure all kitchen access when they leave. Participation in the lunch program has changed over the years and now stands at an average of 31 daily participants with over 150 meals per week. This summer this number has increased slightly with the addition of the free summer lunch program for children. The Assembly Room, immediately adjacent to the kitchen and used for serving meals, is also booked between 11:00 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. for dining setup and teardown. The City's maintenance staff have a cleaning August 1, 2019 Page 3 and maintenance schedule that does not include the kitchen. Use of the kitchen on a regular basis would expand the scope of building maintenance beyond current capacity. The Center would need to attach a kitchen rental fee to cover cleaning by a third -party (estimated annual contract cost is between $5,000 and $15,000). Potential Future Usage The Center's kitchen can significantly add vibrancy to the downtown area and create an even more inclusive environment by further serving people who currently frequent downtown. With access to the remodeled kitchen, this space could be a conduit to bring individuals who normally would not come to the Center or come into the downtown area. Any changes to the current use of the kitchen redesign should include input from staff, members, the Senior Center Commission, and the community. Some ideas that have been generated thus far include nutrition classes for health issues, "cooking for one" classes, a kitchen tool library, culinary kitchen prep classes, and providing a space for more food rescue opportunities. The vision for the space is to be open to the community to use and to support the City's strategic goals which include promoting a strong and resilient local economy, promoting environmental sustainability, and advancing social justice and racial equity. Another goal is to ensure that the kitchen will support sustainability efforts by verifying the items we are purchasing are local, environmentally friendly, prevent food waste, and are cost effective for the patrons. Policies and Approved Usage If the City proposes use of the kitchen facilities by outside entities, several reviews will be necessary. As they have done with other facility uses, the Senior Center Commission would need to weigh in on this use of the facility, as well as any improvements to the space for future programming and usage. The City Attorney's Office will need to review any documents allowing for rental of the kitchen and it is possible that some contracts or agreements may need to be approved by City Council. Additionally, facility use policies will also require updating. Building Needs and Financial Investment The Center is planning to pursue a third -party comprehensive assessment of building needs and ADA requirements. This building space study may also generate additional ideas or use for the kitchen, propose modifying its structure, or using the kitchen for alternative Center programming. Examples could include altering the space for office space, improved kitchen storage, establishing a viable kitchen classroom, and modifying the egress between the kitchen and Assembly Room to better facilitate City and community rental events. The space study will provide alternate designs and improvement cost estimates. The City allocated $50,000 in FY2019, $50,000 in FY2020, and $350,000 in FY2021 Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funds to the Senior Center. There is a great deal of investment planned for The Center but it is uncertain how building needs must be prioritized. For example, in FY2020, funding has been allocated for carpet replacement which would update carpet that is over four decades old, but recent examination of the building envelope will now require repairs August 1, 2019 Page 4 to the outside of the facility beyond funds available, estimated at $50,000 or more. Through the upcoming building assessment, we will get an evaluation of facility needs and prioritize those needs through guidance from Council and our budget process. Additionally, about $30,000 in funding for support of local foods initiatives remains in the budget Staff had considered the potential use of these funds for a renovation of The Center's kitchen, pending its planned usage would directly support economic and environmental Strategic Plan goals. Estimated costs to fully renovate the space have now exceeded the local foods allocation of funding and additional funding sources would need to be identified. Options to Consider As illustrated, a variety of tasks need to be managed prior to use of the kitchen space. Feasibly, use of the kitchen by an outside entity will take several months to initiate, between policy updates, review by The Center's Commission, discussions with Horizons, and equipment repairs. The following provides two options for how we can proceed: 1. Allow the comprehensive building assessment to take place later this year, establishing kitchen updates from costs and opportunities identified in the assessment. The Center has long needed a facility plan which identifies and prioritizes deferred maintenance as well as building and programming enhancements. Council can use the building assessment to prioritize investments in The Center versus needs throughout the City. a. Following the building needs assessment, and pending recommendations to move forward with a renovated kitchen space, the City can prepare and budget for improvements that will create a welcoming and accessible environment for Center programming and rented use. Incorporating improvements for a kitchen and event space could complement other building needs already in the CIP, such as the need to re -floor the adjacent Assembly Room or find a middle ground somewhere within these options. b. During the design and conversion of the space, staff will work with Horizons regarding the shift in lunch program space and placement/use of their equipment, amend applicable Center policies, work with the Senior Center Commission to establish facility use and programming feedback, and work with the City Attorney's Office to create rental agreements for kitchen usage. 2. Establish a "quick fix" for the kitchen space at a cost of between $40,000 - $60,000. a. Staff will pursue repair/replace broken kitchen equipment and finalize acquisition of existing equipment from Horizons. Complete substantial cleaning of the chiller and freezer, kitchen exhaust and all equipment. The floors would need to be repaired or replaced and the space would need to be up to multiple codes. b. Use of the kitchen space could be outside regular business hours 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. or 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. until the next spring program schedule is planned, at which time, additional hours may be available, or, kitchen space can be programmed by The Center. August 1, 2019 Page 5 c. There is a need for frequent, quarterly, and annual upkeep for safe consumption that follow public health codes. Current City staff cannot take on additional daily and weekly cleaning responsibilities. A required cleaning deposit or pass-through rental fee for each rental would ensure that the renters or a third -party keep the kitchen clean. d. Policies and procedures would need to be updated, created, and passed through the Senior Center Commission and City Attorney's Office. Recommendation from Staff Staff recognizes that there is interest in community use of the underutilized kitchen at The Center but recommends completing the impending building assessment prior to investing in kitchen improvements. The study completed by spring 2020 will provide a recommended facility improvement plan. This comprehensive look at The Center will be able to recommend priorities to keep the facility safe, accessible, and providing valued services and amenities. Investing in equipment and flooring prematurely could reduce benefits or compromise necessary facility improvements in the years to come. The RFP for the building assessment should be complete and released soon. Pending Council agreement with this recommendation, staff will return with the completed building assessment report for further guidance. Also, moving ahead prior to building assessment and without more community, member, and commission engagement may prevent consideration of a full scope of services and future programming needs. Many Center members, participants, and community members have expressed excitement for the potential a kitchen could bring by providing new opportunities for cooking and nutritional support, entrepreneur resources, and a future Center revenue stream to serve more older adults in the community. Item Number: 7. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from Media Production Services Coordinator: Future of the Telecommunications Commission ►_1AG_T67:ILvi14zk1&-5 Description Memo to Council: RE ICTC Proposal f^� ®4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: July 22, 2019 To: Ashley Monroe, Assistant City Manager From: Ty Coleman, Media Production Services Coordinator Re: Future of the Telecommunications Commission Introduction: The Iowa City Telecommunications Commission has been asked to consider its role as a commission, given that the local cable TV franchise agreement with Mediacom has expired. History/Background: The City Council formed the Iowa City Broadband Telecommunications Commission at the time of Iowa City's first cable TV franchise agreement with its first cable TV service provider. The Council enacted the Broadband Telecommunications Franchise Enabling Ordinance (later to be known as the Cable Television Franchise Enabling Ordinance), which established standards, regulations, and procedures for the granting of a cable television franchise, as well as defined the Telecommunications Commission and its role (attached). The purpose of the Commission was to recommend policies to the City Council on the regulation, development, and operation of cable television, telecommunications, and communications systems in Iowa City. Many of the Commission's established duties included actions related to the powers of the City as allowed by the local franchise agreement, such as resolving disputes between subscribers and the cable provider, providing recommendations related to basic tier rate regulation, conducting a triennial review of the cable TV system and recommending improvements to the system and amendments to the franchise agreement, establishing and administering sanctions to ensure compliance with the franchise enabling ordinance, and soliciting, reviewing, and providing recommendations to Council for selection of applicants for franchise. Other duties included promoting awareness of the local access channels, educating the public on telecommunications matters affecting consumers, identifying public rights-of-way issues and concerns, and making recommendations regarding development of the local communications infrastructure. In 2007, Iowa adopted a law that created a state franchise process for cable providers. Our local franchise agreement with Mediacom was able to remain in effect until its natural expiration, which took place on August 1, 2018. Mediacom has been operating under a state -issued franchise since this date and it is highly unlikely that a cable TV provider would ever seek a local franchise agreement in the future, though permissible by state law. Discussion of Solutions: Given the lack of a local cable TV franchise, the Telecommunications Commission has been considering its role going forward and how it might envision its potential for providing a valuable service to our community. While members of the Commission have agreed that the group does not have as great a purpose as it once did due to the end of the local franchise and a reduced number of access channels (UI, ICCSD, and ICPL channels have ceased use of their channels), the group has discussed its interest in the development of a municipal broadband advisory board. The Commission's proposal is attached for City Council's review and consideration. The Telecommunications Commission has stated that it will continue to operate as a Commission until it is decided by Council that it should either disband or that a municipal broadband advisory board be formed to explore the potential for creating a municipal broadband system in Iowa City. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission's proposal be reviewed and that the City Council determine whether the Commission should be disbanded, whether to proceed with an advisory board, or whether it is necessary to meet with the Telecommunications Commission to discuss the proposal. Iowa City Telecommunications Commission Municipal Broadband Advisory Board Proposal to Iowa City City Council The Iowa City Telecommunications Commission was originally formed to advise, review, and resolve issues involving cable providers operating under the Iowa City franchise. Iowa City's municipal franchise agreement with Mediacom expired on August 1, 2018. At this time the commission was tasked with identifying future duties and responsibilities. This proposal is the result of that discussion. The Iowa City Telecommunications Commission proposes that the Iowa City City Council form an advisory board to explore creating a municipal broadband network to serve Iowa City. The board shall be established as follows: • The mission of the Municipal Broadband Advisory Board is to assist the City with determining whether a municipal broadband deployment in Iowa City is in the best interest of the community. This includes, but is not limited to: o Identifying the pros and cons of a municipal broadband deployment. o Outlining requirements for municipal broadband. o Financing recommendations and cost estimation. o Achieving diverse stakeholder representation and viewpoints. • The board shall be established for one year. The board will determine frequency of meetings. • The board shall consist of ten (10) members appointed by City Council or chosen by the Telecommunications Commission from a pool of candidates. Board members shall be chosen based on specialty and expertise. Relevant experience includes, but is not limited to: o Information technology, especially networking o Government agencies, especially municipal o Regulated utilities o Non-profit organizations o Institutions, including but not limited to the Iowa City Community School District and the University of Iowa o Small and large businesses o Professional services, for example: accountants, contractors, bankers, lawyers o Students • Board members duties include, but are not limited to: o Gather and present information about existing municipal broadband deployments. o Work with city officials to identify municipal infrastructure that can be utilized for broadband, estimate cost, and address other feasibility concerns. o Assess broadband access throughout the community to help prioritize deployment. o Provide a recommendation to City Council and assist in drafting RFP (if requested). • Board leadership shall consist of the following: o Chair o Secretary The Iowa City Telecommunications Commission has determined that since there is no city franchise agreement it no longer has a purpose. Once City Council has reached a decision on this proposal the Telecommunications Commission will disband unless tasked with advisory board candidate selection. Chapter 4 CABLE TELEVISION Division 1. Enabling Ordinance 12-4-1: SHORT TITLE: This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE ENABLING ORDINANCE. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-2: DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this chapter the following terms, phrases and words and their derivations shall have the meanings specified herein. When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future and words in the singular number include words in the plural number. ACCESS OR PUBLIC, GOVERNMENT, AND EDUCATIONAL ACCESS CHANNELS: Public, educational, government, library, and university access channels. ADDITIONAL SERVICE: A subscriber service provided by the grantee for which a special charge is made based on program or service content, time or spectrum space usage. ANNUAL GROSS REVENUES: All revenue received by the grantee from all sources in connection with the operation of grantee's cable television system. Gross revenues shall include, without limitation, amounts for all cable service, including, but not limited to, basic service and tier service, premium and pay per view services, advertising, leased access, installation and all other revenues derived from the operation of grantee's cable television system. Gross revenues shall not deduct the following: a) any operating expense; b) any accrual, including, without limitation, any accrual for commissions; or c) any other expenditures, regardless of whether such expense, accrual or expenditure reflects a cash payment, but revenue shall be counted only once in determining gross revenue. Gross revenues shall also include the revenue of any affiliate, subsidiary, parent, or any person or entity in which each grantee has a financial interest, derived from the operation of the cable television system for advertising, or for any other business operation of the cable television system, to the extent such revenue is derived through any means that has the effect of avoiding the payment of franchisee fees that would otherwise be paid to the grantor. Revenues of both grantee and an affiliate, subsidiary, parent, or any person or entity in which the grantee has a financial interest that represents a transfer of funds between them and that would constitute gross revenues of both the grantee and the affiliate, subsidiary, parent, or any person or entity in which the grantee has a financial interest shall be counted only once for purposes of determining gross revenues. Gross revenues shall not include franchise fees, any other fee, assessment, sales or other similar tax imposed by law on subscribers or that grantee is legally obligated to collect. BASIC SUBSCRIBER TELEVISION SERVICES OR BASIC SERVICES: A separately available basic service tier to which subscription is required for access to any other tier of service. Such basic service tier shall, at a minimum, consist of the following: All signals carried in fulfillment of the cable act, sections 614 and 615; any public, educational, and governmental access programming required in this chapter or the franchise; any signal of any television broadcast station that is provided by the cable operator to any subscriber, except a signal which is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier beyond the local service area of such station. Additional signals may be added to the basic tier by the grantee. CABLE SERVICE: The one-way transmission to subscribers of: a) video programming; or b) other programming service; and c) subscriber interaction, if any, which is required for the selection (or use) of such video programming or other programming service or as otherwise provided by law or regulation. CABLE TELEVISION CHANNEL: A portion of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum which is used in a cable system and which is capable of delivering a television channel as defined by the federal communications commission. CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM CHANNEL CAPACITY: The highest total number of cable television channels on which television signals from separate sources may be delivered downstream simultaneously to every subscriber in the network. The network may have additional channel capacity for specialized or discrete purposes, but the technical performance specified shall not be materially degraded thereby. CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM OR CABLE SYSTEM (Also Referred To As SYSTEM): A facility, consisting of a set of closed transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception and control equipment that is designed to provide cable service which includes video programming and which is provided to multiple subscribers within a community, but such term does not include: a) a facility that serves only to retransmit the television signals of one or more television broadcast stations; b) a facility that serves subscribers without using any public rights of way; c) a facility of a common carrier which is subject, in whole or in part, to the provision of title II of the cable act, except that such facility shall be considered a cable system to the extent such facility is used in the transmission of video programming directly to subscribers; or d) any facilities of any electric utility used solely for operating its electric utility systems. Cable television system, for the purpose of this chapter, shall include facilities owned or operated by a person providing cable service or multiple channels of video programming to subscribers on private property that receive cable service or multiple channels of video programming in whole or in part via cable, fiber or other wires or lines that are within the public rights of way regardless of whether the person providing cable service or multiple channels of video service from a common carrier pursuant to tariff or otherwise or other person that retains the programming on private property receives video programming transmission services, cable service, or other multiple channel video ownership, control and responsibility for all facilities located outside of the private property line. CHANNEL FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Within a cable television channel, the relationship as measured at a subscriber terminal between amplitude and frequency of a constant amplitude input signal at all specified frequencies within each channel. CITY: The city of Iowa City, Iowa, its officers and employees unless otherwise specifically designated, the area within the territorial city limits of the city and such territory presently outside the city limits over which the city may assume jurisdiction or control by virtue of annexation. CLOSED CIRCUIT OR INSTITUTIONAL SERVICE: Such video, audio, data and other services provided to and between institutional users. These may include, but are not limited to, one-way video, two-way video, voice, audio or digital signals transmitted among institutions and/or to residential subscribers. COMMENCE OPERATION: Operation will be considered to have commenced when sufficient distribution facilities have been installed so as to permit the offering of full network services to at least twenty five percent (25%) of the dwelling units located within the designated service area. COMMISSION: Refers to the Iowa City telecommunications commission. COMMUNICATIONS POLICY ACT OR CABLE ACT: The cable communications policy act of 1984, the cable television consumer protection and competition act of 1992, and the telecommunications act of 1996, as it may be amended or succeeded. COMPLAINT: An oral or written indication from a subscriber of a problem with any aspect of cable service. CONTIGUOUS: Abutting or within two hundred feet (200'). COUNCIL: The city council of the city of Iowa City, and any legally appointed or elected successor or agency. DATA GRADE: Coded transmissions primarily digital in nature. DAYS: Business days. DOWNSTREAM: The direction of transmission over the cable television system from the head end or hub to a subscriber's terminal. DROP: A coaxial connection from feeder cable to the subscriber/user television set, radio or other terminal. FCC: The federal communications commission and any legally appointed or elected successor. FAIR MARKET VALUE: The price that a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller for a going concern based on the system valuation prevailing in the industry at the time. FIBER: A transmission media of optical fiber cable capable of carrying transmissions by means of light wave impulses. FIBER NODE: The local transition point between the fiber distribution portion and the coaxial distribution portion of the upgraded cable communications system. FRANCHISE: A franchise contract entered into voluntarily by the grantee, containing the specific provisions of the franchise granted, including referenced specifications, franchise proposal, applications and other related material. The franchise granted pursuant to this chapter grants the nonexclusive rights to construct, operate and maintain a cable communications system along the streets and public ways and grounds within all or a specified area in the city. Any such authorization, in whatever form granted, shall not mean or include any license or permit required for the privilege of transacting and carrying on a business within the city as required by other ordinances and laws of the city. FRANCHISE AREA: The entire city, or portions thereof, for which a franchise is granted under the authority of this chapter. If not otherwise stated in the franchise, the franchise area shall be the corporate limits of the city, including all territory thereafter annexed to the city. FRANCHISE FEE: The percentage, as specified by this chapter, of the grantee's gross revenues from all sources payable in exchange for the rights granted pursuant to this chapter and the franchise agreement. FULL NETWORK SERVICE: All basic services and additional services offered by the grantee. GRANTEE: All persons including, but not limited to, subsidiaries, parent or affiliate companies, associations or organizations having any rights, powers, privileges, duties, liabilities or obligations, under this chapter, and under the franchise ordinance, collectively called the franchise, and also includes all persons having any title to or interest in the system, whether by reason of the franchise itself directly or by interest in a subsidiary, parent or affiliate company, association or organization by any subcontract, transfer, assignment, management agreement or operating agreement or an approved assignment or transfer resulting from a foreclosure of a mortgage security agreement or whether otherwise arising or created, and shall include the lawful successor, transferee, or an assignee of such franchisee or grantee. HEAD END: The land, electronic processing equipment, antennas, tower, building and other appurtenances normally associated with and located at the starting point of a cable television system, excluding the studio. HUB CONFIGURATION: A cable television system design technology wherein all transmission paths either originate or terminate at a central location within the community. INSTALLATION: The extension and/or construction of the system from the main trunk and/or feeder cable to subscribers' terminals except where such a procedure is required by this chapter without charge when it will mean the extension and/or construction of the system to one point in a designated building. LOCAL DISTRIBUTION CENTER: A facility, within the community remote from but connected to the hub, which distributes signals from the hub to a specified area in the cable television system. LOCAL DISTRIBUTION CENTER: A facility which originates from a local distribution center as opposed to the hub. MAY: Is permissive. NETWORK NOISE: That combination of undesired and fluctuating disturbances within a cable television channel, exclusive of undesired signals of discrete frequency which degrade the reproduction of the desired signal and which are due to modulation processes, thermal effects and other noise producing effects, not including hum. Network noise is specified in terms of its RMS voltage or its mean power level as measured in a four (4) MHz band above the lower channel boundary of a cable television system. NEW HOUSING AREA: Any area containing any newly constructed, rehabilitated, or restored residential or commercial unit which does not exist prior to the effective date of the franchise. OPEN VIDEO SYSTEM: Any channel or a facility consisting of a set of transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception and control equipment that is designed to provide cable television service, which includes video programming, which is provided to multiple subscribers within a community, and which the federal communications commission or its successor has certified as compliant with part 76 of the rules of the federal communications commission, 47 CFR, part 76, as amended from time to time. PERSON: An individual, partnership, association, organization or corporation or any lawful successor transferee. PHYSICAL MILES OF PLANT: Total miles of trunk, feeder, super trunk, and fiber optic cable. PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY OR STREETS AND PUBLIC GROUNDS: The surface, the air space above the surface, and the area below the surface of any public street, highway, lane, path, alley, sidewalk, boulevard, drive, bridge, tunnel, park, parkways, waterways, utility easements or other public right of way now or hereafter held by the city which shall entitle the city and the grantee to the use thereof for the purpose of installing and maintaining the grantee's cable television system. No reference herein, or in any franchise, to the streets and public grounds shall be deemed to be a representation or guarantee by the city that its title to any property is sufficient to permit its use for such purpose, and the grantee shall, by its use of such terms, be deemed to gain only such rights to use property in the city as the city may have the undisputed right and power to give. REASONABLE NOTICE: The provision of notice of contemplated action delivered at least forty eight (48) hours prior to such action. RESIDENT: Any person residing in the city or as otherwise defined by applicable law. RESIDENTIAL SUBSCRIBER: A subscriber who receives a service in an individual dwelling unit where the service is not to be utilized in connection with a business, trade or profession. SALE: Includes any sale, asset exchange or offer for sale. SHALL AND MUST: Each is mandatory. STRAND MILE: Messenger strand as measured from pole to pole without taking into consideration sag or downguys, and for buried plant, actual trench feet. STUDIO: The land, electronic processing equipment, towers, building, cameras, lights and other appurtenances normally associated with and located at the grantee's local origination and/or public access plants of a cable television system, excluding the head end. SUBSCRIBER TERMINAL: An electronic device which converts signals to a frequency not susceptible to interference within the television receiver of a subscriber, and any channel selector which permits a subscriber to view all signals delivered at designated converter dial locations at the set or by remote control. SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETED: Operation will be considered substantially completed when sufficient distribution facilities have been installed so as to permit the offering of full network services to at least ninety percent (90%) of the dwelling units in the service area to which access is legally and reasonably available. SYSTEM FACILITIES: The cable communications system constructed for use within the city, without limitation, the head end, antenna, cables, wires, lines, towers, amplifiers, converters, health and property security systems, equipment or facilities located within the corporate limits of the city designed, constructed or wired for the purpose of producing, receiving, amplifying and distributing by coaxial cable, fiber optics, microwave or other means, audio, radio, television and electronic signals to and from subscribers, in the city and any other equipment or facilities located within the corporate limits of the city intended for the use of the cable communications system; provided, however, such system facilities excludes building, contracts, facilities, and equipment where its sole use is for providing service to other system facilities located outside the city limits. TERMINAL ISOLATION: At any subscriber terminal, the attenuation between that terminal and any other subscriber terminal in that network. UPSTREAM: A signal originating from a terminal to another point in the cable television system including video, audio or digital signals for either programs or other uses such as security alert services, etc. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-3: CABLE TELEVISION ADMINISTRATOR AND IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION: A. Administrator: The city manager is hereby authorized to appoint a cable television administrator for the purpose of exercising the city's continuing administration of the franchise. Such responsibility shall include, but not be limited to, the following matters: 1. Receive and investigate such complaints, disputes or disagreements as may be directed or referred to the city of Iowa City, Iowa, between subscribers or potential subscribers and grantees of a cable television system and other distribution systems interconnected with the cable television system, not first able to resolve their differences. 2. Report recommendations upon complaints, disputes or disagreements after investigation to the Iowa City telecommunications commission for the issuance of finding. 3. Review and audit reports, records, communications and grantee regulations submitted to the city of Iowa City, Iowa, and conducting such inspections of the system as may be necessary in support of such review as provided for in this chapter. 4. Work with the public and the media to assure that all tariffs, rates, charges and rules pertinent to the operation of the cable television system in the city of Iowa City, Iowa, are made available for inspection by the public at reasonable hours and upon reasonable request. 5. Confer and coordinate with the grantee on the interconnection of the city's cable television system with other similar networks. 6. Advise the Iowa City telecommunications commission. 7. Other such duties as the city manager or Iowa City telecommunications commission may assign. 8. Promote usage and understanding of the access channels. 9. Research and recommend new technologies that may be useful to the city, community, and cable system. B. Commission Established: Within thirty (30) days of the granting of the first franchise, there shall be appointed a commission to be known as the Iowa City telecommunications commission. C. Composition And Term: The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall consist of five (5) citizens of the city appointed by the city council for a term of three (3) years; except that the first appointees shall be appointed one for a term of one year, two (2) for a term of two (2) years and two (2) for a term of three (3) years; and thereafter, each shall be appointed for a term of three (3) years. Following system completion, it is recommended that a majority of the members be subscribers to the system at the time of their appointment. D. Commission Powers And Duties: The duties of the Iowa City telecommunications commission shall be as follows: 1. Resolving disputes or disagreement between subscribers, potential subscribers and grantee should such parties be unable first to resolve their dispute. The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall conduct a public hearing upon any petition by any person seeking resolution of a dispute concerning the operation of any franchise granted hereunder. The hearing shall be conducted pursuant to the Iowa administrative code, and following such hearing, the Iowa City telecommunications commission shall issue its finding or determination. Said finding or decision shall be final, and any person aggrieved may seek relief therefrom in the district court of Iowa as provided by state law. 2. Reviewing and auditing reports submitted to the city as required and said such other correspondence as submitted to the city concerning the operation of the cable television system so as to ensure that the necessary reports are completed and fulfilled pursuant to the terms of this chapter. 3. Work with the public and the media to assure that all records, rules and charges pertinent to the cable television system in the city of Iowa City are made available for inspection at reasonable hours upon reasonable notice. 4. Confer with the grantee and advise on the interconnection of the city's cable system with other cable and communications systems. 5. Subsequent to the initial franchise, solicit, review and provide recommendations to the city council for selection of applicants for franchise under this chapter. 6. Initiate inquiries, receive requests for review of rates charged by the grantee and provide recommendation on such actions to the city council. 7. Conduct evaluations of the system at least every three (3) years with the grantee and, pursuant thereto, make recommendations to the city council concerning system improvements and amendments to this chapter or any franchise agreement. 8. Establish and administer sanctions as authorized by the city council to ensure compliance with this chapter. 9. Make recommendations to the grantee of the cable television system and to the educational and governmental users of the educational and governmental access channels. 10. Ensure that the grantee makes the public access channel available to all residents of the city on a nondiscriminatory basis. 11. Assure that the operation of the public access channel be free of program censorship and control. 12. Cooperate with the entities operating access channels as those entities develop rules for such channels. 13. Perform such other duties and functions relative to public access channels as may be appropriate in order to maximize its use among the widest range of individuals, institutions and other organizations within the city. This shall include recommendations to the city council for utilization of the annual franchise payment. E. Rules And Regulations: The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall adopt such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out its functions and to ensure that due notice is given to all parties concerning any hearing on any complaints to said Iowa City telecommunications commission and the hearings are held promptly in accordance with reasonable notice to all parties. The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall also have such powers to include the election of its own officers. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-4: REGULATORY JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURES: A. Continuing Regulatory Jurisdiction: The city shall have continuing regulatory jurisdiction and supervision over the operation of any franchise granted hereunder and may from time to time adopt such reasonable rules and regulations as it may deem necessary for the conduct of the business contemplated thereunder. Provided, however, such exercise of rights or powers subsequent to the effective date of a franchise will not impair the rights of the grantee thereunder, and if locally imposed, place an undue financial burden on such grantee. B. Regulatory Procedures: The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall consider any inquiry or proceeding, excluding those described in subsections B2 and B3 of this section, requiring city council action to be taken in regard to the cable television system or franchise, whether upon application or request by the grantee or any other party or on its own motion, and shall submit such consideration, together with the Iowa City telecommunications commission's recommendation, to the city council. Any action by the city council on any Iowa City telecommunications commission recommendation shall be taken only after thirty (30) days' notice of said proposed action, inquiry or proceeding is published in the official newspaper having general circulation and a copy of said notice is served upon the grantee. The grantee shall have an opportunity to respond at the hearing and/or in writing. Members of the public shall have an opportunity to respond or comment in writing on the proposed action and appear at said proceeding or hearing; however, such hearing or proceeding shall be set no later than ninety (90) days after notice to the grantee and the city council shall act upon this proceeding within one hundred eighty (180) days of the notice of hearing unless such time is extended by agreement between the city council and the grantee. The decision of the city council shall become a final determination. 2. Rate regulation procedures shall be conducted in accordance with the time frame established in division 2, "Rate Regulations", of this chapter. 3. The city shall have one hundred twenty (120) days to act upon any request for approval of a transfer that contains or is accompanied by such information as is required in accordance with FCC regulations and by the city. If the city fails to render a final decision on the request within one hundred twenty (120) days, such request shall be deemed granted unless the requesting party and the city agree to an extension of time. 4. The public notice required by this section shall state clearly the action or proposed action to be taken, the time provided for response, including response by the public, the person or persons in authority to whom such responses shall be addressed and such other procedures as may be specified by the city council. If a hearing is to be held, the public notice shall give the date, location and time of such hearing. The grantee will be provided with reasonable notice for any hearing conducted in regard to its operation. C. Triennial Franchise Review: On or about the third and sixth anniversaries of the effective date of the franchise, the city will schedule a public meeting or meetings with the grantee to review the franchise performance, plans and prospects. The city may require the grantee to reasonably make available specified records, documents and information for this purpose, and may inquire in particular whether the grantee is supplying a level and variety of services equivalent to those being generally offered at that time in the industry in comparable market situations. 2. The city shall first confer with the grantee regarding modifications in the franchise which might impose additional obligations on the grantee, and the grantee may in turn seek to negotiate relaxations in any requirements previously imposed on it which are subsequently shown to be impractical. 3. Within thirty (30) days of the conclusion of such negotiations, the city may direct the grantee to show cause why specified terms and conditions should not be incorporated into the franchise and the grantee may similarly file with the city a written request that specified obligations of its franchise be removed or relaxed. Implementation of such requests shall correspond as nearly as possible with the procedures set forth herein. The Iowa City telecommunications commission will recommend to the council changes in the franchised rights and obligations of the grantee only if it finds from all available evidence that such changes will not impair the economic viability of the system or degrade the attractiveness of the system's service to present and potential subscribers. D. Expiration: Upon completion of the term of any franchise granted under this chapter, the city may in its sole discretion grant or deny renewal of the franchise of the grantee in accordance with the provisions of the cable act. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-5: SIGNIFICANCE OF FRANCHISE: A. Franchise Nonexclusive: Any franchise granted hereunder by the city of Iowa City, Iowa, shall not be exclusive and the city reserves the right to grant a franchise to any person, firm, company, corporation or association at any time. The grant of one franchise does not establish priority for use over the other present or future permit or franchise holders or the city's own use of the streets and public grounds. The city shall at all times control the distribution of space in, over, under or across all streets or public grounds occupied by the cable communications system. B. Franchise Amendable: The scope of any franchise granted hereunder shall be deemed amendable from time to time by mutual consent, to allow the grantee and the city to innovate and implement new services and developments. C. Privileges Must Be Specified: No privilege or exemption shall be inferred from the granting of any franchise unless it is specifically prescribed. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to require the granting of a franchise when in the opinion of the council it would not be in the public interest to do so. D. Authority Granted: Any franchise granted hereunder shall give to the grantee the right and privilege to construct, erect, operate, modify and maintain in, upon, along, above, over and under streets which have been or may hereafter be dedicated and open to public use in the city, towers, antennas, poles, cables, electronic equipment and other network appurtenances necessary for the operation of a cable television system in the city, subject to limitations contained in this chapter. E. Previous Rights Abandoned: A franchise granted hereunder shall be in lieu of any and all other rights, privileges, powers, immunities and authorities owned, possessed, controlled or exercisable by a grantee or any successor pertaining to the construction, operation or maintenance of a cable communications system in the city. The acceptance of a franchise shall operate, as between grantee and the city, as an abandonment of any and all such rights, privileges, powers, immunities and authorities within the city. All construction, operation and maintenance by the grantee of any cable system in the city shall be under the franchise and not under any other right, privilege, power, immunity or authority. F. Subject To Other Regulatory Agencies' Rules And Regulations: The grantee shall at all times during the life of any franchise granted hereunder be subject to all lawful exercise of the police power by the city and other duly authorized regulatory state and federal bodies. G. Pole Use Agreements Required: No franchise granted hereunder shall relieve the grantee of any obligation involved in obtaining pole or conduit use agreements from the gas, electric and telephone companies, or others maintaining poles or conduits in the streets of the city, wherever the grantee finds it necessary to make use of said poles or conduits. H. No Right Of Property: The award of any franchise hereunder shall impart to the grantee no right of property in or on city owned property. I. Franchise Binding: All provisions of this chapter and any franchise granted hereto shall be binding upon the grantee, its successors, lessees or assignees. J. General City Ordinances: Any franchise granted by the city is hereby made subject to the general ordinance provisions now in effect and hereafter made effective. Nothing in the franchise shall be deemed to waive the requirements of the various codes and ordinances of the city regarding permits, taxes, fees to be paid, or manner of construction. K. No Waiver Of Rights: No course of dealing between the grantee and the city nor any delay on the part of the city in exercising any rights hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any such rights of the city or acquiescence in the actions of the grantee in contravention of rights except to the extent expressly waived by the city or expressly provided for in the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-6: THE CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE: No cable communications system, open video system, or person providing cable service shall be allowed to occupy or use the streets of the city or be allowed to operate within the city without a franchise granted pursuant to this chapter. All cable television franchises in the city shall be subject to the terms of this chapter. Any franchise granted for an open video system shall comply with all sections of this chapter, unless precluded from compliance by specific sections of applicable law. A. Franchise Required: No person, firm, company, corporation or association shall construct, install, maintain or operate within any public street in the city, or within any other public property of the city, any equipment or facilities for the distribution of cable service over a cable television system or an open video system to any subscriber unless a franchise authorizing the use of the streets or properties or areas has first been obtained pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, and unless such franchise is in full force and effect. Any franchise granted for an open video system shall comply with all sections of this chapter, unless precluded from compliance with specific sections by federal or state law, rule, or regulation. B. Franchise Applications: Public notice of request for proposals. The city may invite applications for a cable television franchise by means of a public notice advertising the availability of its request for proposals. 1. The public notice shall contain, but need not be limited to: a. A description of the franchise area which is sought. b. A statement that a formal request for proposals is available to prospective applicants from a city official whose name, address, and telephone number are specified. c. A statement that applications for the franchise must be submitted in writing in the form and manner specified in the request for proposals no later than a date certain. d. A statement that all applications will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at a specified location. C. Request For Proposals: Prior to inviting any applications for any television franchise, the city shall prepare a request for proposals that shall contain, but need not be limited to, the following: 1. A description of the cable television system and services desired by the city including any system specifications established by the city. 2. A statement specifying the form that all applications shall follow. 3. A statement indicating the amount of the application fee (if any) to be submitted with the application, and the manner in which such fee is to be submitted. 4. A statement that all applications must contain the information required by the request for proposal. 5. The closing date for the submission of applications. 6. The name, address, and telephone number of the city official(s) who may be contacted for further information. D. Review Of Qualifications: Specific permission to operate a cable television system under the provisions of this chapter may be granted by the city council of the city to any grantee after: a review of the legal, character, financial, technical qualifications; an analysis of adequacy and feasibility of the grantee's construction arrangements; an assessment of whether public, educational and governmental access channel and institutional network capacity, equipment, facilities, services, and financial support are reasonable; a determination of whether the proposal meets the future cable communications needs of the city; and a review of the provision of other such information, equipment, services and support as required by the city, and after the city council has approved the grantee's qualifications as a part of a public proceeding affording due process. E. City Discretion: The city, at its discretion, may reject any application for a franchise. In awarding a franchise, the city: Shall allow the applicant's cable system a reasonable period of time to become capable of providing cable service to all households in the franchise area; may require adequate assurance that the cable operator will provide adequate public, educational, and governmental access channels and institutional network capacity, equipment, facilities, services, and financial support; shall determine the ability of the proposal to meet the future cable communications needs of the city; and may require adequate assurance that the cable operator has the financial, technical, or legal qualifications to provide cable service. F. Requirement For Public Hearing On Reasonable Notice: The city shall conduct a public hearing prior to awarding any cable television franchise. The hearing shall be preceded by reasonable notice to each of the franchise applicants and to the public, and shall be conducted by the city in accordance with the following procedures: 1. There shall be an agenda for the hearing which shall specify the proposal(s) to be considered at the hearing. 2. Every person who has applied for a cable television franchise shall appear at the hearing either in person or by authorized representative. The application of any applicant not so appearing shall not be further considered, except for good cause shown. 3. All applicants shall be given an opportunity to participate in the hearing, but nothing contained herein shall limit the power of the presiding officer to establish reasonable time limits and otherwise limit repetitive statements or questions. 4. The notice of hearing shall: a. Conform to all relevant state and local laws and ordinances. b. Describe the agenda to be considered at the public hearing. c. Indicate that copies of all franchise applications are available for public inspection during normal business hours at a place to be specified in the notice. G. Duration Of Franchise: Upon filing by the grantee of the proper acceptance, the bond and the required insurance and security fund, the franchise shall take effect as provided in section 12-4-10 of this chapter, and shall continue in full force and effect for a term to be set by the council in the franchise. H. Exemptions: Subsections B, C, D, E, and F of this section do not apply to an incumbent operator afforded renewal rights under section 626 of the cable act. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-7: OPERATION OF FRANCHISE: A. Operation To Be In Accordance With Rules: The grantee shall maintain and operate its cable television system in accordance with the rules and regulations of the federal communications commission, the state of Iowa and/or the city as are incorporated herein or may be promulgated. B. Interruption Of Service; Notification: The grantee, whenever it is necessary to interrupt service over the cable television system for the purpose of network maintenance, alteration or repair, shall do so at such time as will cause the least amount of inconvenience to the subscribers, and unless such interruption is unforeseen and immediately necessary, the grantee shall give reasonable notice thereof to the affected subscribers. C. Office And Phone For Complaints: The grantee shall maintain an office within the city limits which shall be open during all normal business hours, including some weeknight and Saturday hours, have a listed local telephone number and be so operated that complaints and requests for repairs or adjustments may be received at any time. D. Service Records Maintained: The grantee shall at all times make and keep a list of all complaints and interruptions or degradation of service received or experienced during the term of franchise. The records maintained above shall also include complaint response time and service restoration period and shall be continuously open to inspection, examination or audit, subject to subscriber privacy rights pursuant to section 631 of the cable act, by any duly authorized representative of the city or member of the public. E. Grantee Rules And Regulations: The grantee shall have the authority to promulgate such rules, regulations, terms and conditions governing the conduct of its business as shall be reasonable and necessary to enable the grantee to exercise its rights and perform its obligations under this chapter and any franchise granted hereunder. 1. Rules To Be In Conformance With Other Regulations: None of such rules, regulations, terms and conditions promulgated under this subsection E shall be in conflict with the provisions hereof or the laws of the state, or the rules and regulations of the federal communications commission or any rules and regulations promulgated by the city in the exercise of their regulatory authority granted hereunder. 2. All Rules To Be Filed With City: Three (3) copies of all rules, regulations, terms and conditions promulgated under this subsection E, together with any amendments, additions or deletions thereto, shall be kept currently on file with the city clerk and another copy thereof shall be maintained for public inspection during normal business hours at grantee's office in the city and the copy shall be provided to the Iowa City telecommunications commission; no such rules, regulations, terms, conditions or amendments, additions or deletions thereto shall take effect unless and until so filed and maintained. This subsection E2 is not intended to apply to the company's personnel and other internal rules and regulations. F. Subscribers' Antennas: The grantee shall not require the removal or offer to remove or provide any inducements for removal of any potential or existing subscriber's antenna as a condition of provision of service. G. Antenna Switch: The grantee, upon request from any subscriber, shall install at a reasonable charge a switching device to permit a subscriber to continue to utilize the subscriber's own television antenna. H. Service Response: The grantee shall provide same day service response, seven (7) days a week for all complaints and requests for repairs or adjustments received prior to two o'clock (2:00) P.M. each day. In no event shall the response time for calls received subsequent to two o'clock (2:00) P.M. exceed twenty four (24) hours. I. State Of The Art: 1. This section shall be reviewed by the city during its triennial reviews whose time frames are set forth in subsection 12-4-4C of this chapter. In the event that the grantee, its parent company, management firm or affiliates have installed state of the art improvements in any system of similar size owned by grantee, its parent company, management firm or affiliates, which increase channel capacity and provide additional cable service, make bidirectional capacity operational from the home, provide improvements in technological performance, provide for interactive services, and/or other substantial improvements, then the grantee shall make said improvements available to the city of Iowa City subscribers within one year. 2. The city shall hold a hearing to determine whether state of the art technology is required hereunder. Such hearing shall afford the grantee an opportunity to make a presentation on the state of the art change and whether the conditions specified herein indicate that a state of the art change is needed. The city may require the grantee to implement state of the art changes which meet the threshold specified herein. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-8: RIGHTS RESERVED TO THE CITY: A. Governing Requirement: At all times during the term of the franchise, grantee shall comply with all laws, rules or regulations of the city, state or federal governments, their regulatory agencies or commissions which are now applicable or may be applicable hereafter to the construction and operation of the cable communications system, including, without limitation, all laws, ordinances, or regulations now in force or hereafter enacted. Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of grantee's right to challenge the validity of any such law, rule or regulation. B. Change In Law Or Regulation: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter to the contrary, the grantee shall at all times comply with all laws and regulations of the local, state and federal governments. In the event that any actions of the state or federal government or any agency thereof, or any court of competent jurisdiction upon final adjudication, substantially reduce in any way the power or authority of the city under this chapter or the franchise, or if in compliance with any local, state, or federal law or regulation, the grantee finds conflict with the terms of this chapter, the franchise, or any law or regulation of the city, then as soon as possible following knowledge thereof, the grantee shall notify the city of the point of conflict believed to exist between such law or regulation and the laws or regulations of the city, this chapter and the franchise. The city, at its option, may notify the grantee that it wishes to negotiate those provisions which are affected in any way by such modification in regulations or statutory authority. Thereafter, the grantee shall negotiate in good faith with the city in the development of alternate provisions which shall fairly restore the city to the maximum level of authority and power permitted by law. The city shall have the right to modify any of the provisions to such reasonable extent as may be necessary to carry out the full intent and purpose of this chapter and the franchise, subject to applicable federal and state law. C. Authority: The city reserves the right to exercise the maximum plenary authority, as may at any time be lawfully permissible, to regulate the cable television system, the franchise and the grantee. Should applicable legislative, judicial or regulatory authorities at any time permit regulation not presently permitted to the city, the city and the grantee shall negotiate in good faith to determine what additional regulation by the city shall be permissible. D. Right Of Amendment Reserved To City: The city may from time to time, add to, modify or delete provisions of this chapter as it shall deem necessary in the exercise of its regulatory powers. Provided, however, such exercise of rights or powers subsequent to the effective date of a franchise will not impair the rights of the grantee thereunder, and if locally imposed, place an undue financial burden on such grantee. Such additions or revisions shall be made only after a public hearing for which the grantee shall have received written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to such hearing. E. Grantee Agrees To City's Rights: The city reserves every right and power which is required to be reserved or provided by an ordinance of the city, and the grantee by its acceptance of the franchise agrees to be bound thereby and to comply with any action or requirements of the city in its lawful exercise of such rights or powers which have been or will be enacted or established, subject to federal and state law. F. City's Right Of Intervention: The city shall have the right to intervene and the grantee specifically agrees by its acceptance of the franchise not to oppose such intervention by the city in any suit or proceeding to which the grantee is a party, provided, however, grantee shall not be obligated to indemnify the city for any such suit. G. Powers Of The City: Neither the granting of any franchise nor any provision governing the franchise shall constitute a waiver or bar to the exercise of any governmental right or power of the city. H. City's Right Of Inspection: The city reserves the right during the life of any franchise granted hereunder to inspect all system facilities and property and supervise all construction or installation work performed subject to the provisions of this chapter and to perform network measurements to ensure compliance with the terms of this chapter. I. City's Right Of Acquisition: Upon expiration of the term of the franchise or revocation or other termination as provided by law, the city shall have the right to purchase the cable television system as specified in subsection 12-4-11 D of this chapter. J. City's Right Of Network Installation: The city reserves the right during the life of any franchise granted hereunder to install and maintain free of charge upon or in the poles and conduits of the grantee any wire and pole fixtures necessary for municipal networks, on the following conditions: that such installation and maintenance thereof does not interfere with the operation of the grantee; that such fixtures be used for governmental and educational purposes, and the city agrees to indemnify the grantee for such use. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-9: APPLICATIONS FOR FRANCHISE: No franchise may be granted until the applicant has successfully completed the application procedure. A. Proposal Bond And Filing Fee: All applicants must provide a proposal bond as required herein and pay a nonrefundable filing fee to the city of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) at the time the application is submitted. This bond and filing fee does not apply to an incumbent operator afforded renewal rights under section 626 of the cable act. B. Request For Proposal: All applicants must complete the request for proposal (RFP) issued by the city which shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Name And Address Of Applicant: The name and business address of the applicant, date of application and signature of applicant or appropriate corporate officer(s). 2. Description Of Proposed Operation: A general description of the applicant's proposed operation, including, but not limited to, business hours, operating staff, maintenance procedures beyond those required in this chapter, management and marketing staff complement and procedures and, if available, the rules of operation for public access. 3. Signal Carriage: A statement of the television and radio services to be provided, including both off the air and locally originated signals. 4. Special Services: A statement setting forth a description of the automated services proposed as well as a description of the funds, services, and production facilities to be made available by the grantee for the public, municipal and educational channels required to be made available by the provisions of this chapter. 5. Schedule Of Charges: A statement of the applicant's proposed schedule of charges as set forth herein. 6. Corporate Organization: A statement detailing the corporate organization of the applicant, if any, including the names and addresses of its officers and directors and the number of shares held by each officer and director. 7. Stockholders: A statement identifying the number of authorized outstanding shares of applicant's stock, including a current list of the names and current addresses of its shareholders holding three percent (3%) or more of applicant's outstanding stock. 8. Intracompany Relationships: A statement describing all intracompany relationships of the applicant, including parent, subsidiary or affiliated companies. 9. Agreements And Understandings: A statement setting forth all agreements and understandings, whether written or oral, existing between the applicant and any other person, firm, group or corporation with respect to any franchise awarded hereunder and the conduct of the operation thereof existing at the time of proposal submittal. 10. Financial Statement: If applicant is a corporation, audited financial statements for the two (2) previous fiscal years. If applicant is a partnership, copies of the U.S. partnership return of income (IRS form 1065) for the two (2) previous fiscal years. If applicant is a sole proprietorship, copies of the U.S. individual income tax return (IRS form 1040) for the two (2) previous fiscal years. 11. Financial Projection: A ten (10) year operations pro forma which shall include the initial and continuous plant investment, annual profit and loss statements detailing income and expenses, annual balance sheets and annual levels of subscriber penetration. Costs and revenues anticipated for voluntary services shall, if presented, be incorporated in the pro forma as required in this chapter, but shall be separately identified in the pro forma. 12. Financial Support: Suitable written evidence from a recognized financing institution, addressed to both the applicant and to the city, advising that the applicant's financial ability and planned operation have been analyzed by the institution, and that the financing institution is prepared to make the required funds available to applicant if it is awarded a franchise. 13. Construction Timetable: A description of system construction including the timetable for provision and extension of service to different parts of the city. 14. Technical Description: A technical description of the type of system proposed by the applicant, including, but not limited to, system configuration (i.e., hub, dual cable), system capacity, two- way capability, etc. 15. Technical Statement: A statement from the applicant's senior technical staff member or consultant advising that he/she has reviewed the network description, the network technical standards, performance measurements, channels to be provided, service standards, construction standards and conditions of street occupancy as set forth in or required by this chapter, and that the applicant's planned network and operations will meet all said requirements. 16. Existing Franchises: A statement of existing franchises held by the applicant including when the franchises were issued and when the systems were constructed and the present state(s) of the system(s) in each respective governmental unit, together with the name and address and phone number of a responsible governmental official knowledgable of the applicant. 17. Convictions: A statement as to whether the applicant or any of its officers or directors or holders of three percent (3%) or more of its voting stock has in the past ten (10) years been convicted of or has charges pending for any crime other than a simple misdemeanor traffic offense, and the disposition of such case. 18. Operating Experience: A statement detailing the prior cable television experience of the applicant including that of the applicant's officers, management and staff to be associated, where known, with the proposed franchise. 19. Franchise Renewal Information: Subject to section 626 of the cable act, if an application is for renewal of a franchise, the proposal must include, in addition to the information required in subsections B1 through B18 of this section: a. A summary of the technical, financial and programming history of the network since the granting of the original franchise. b. A statement and timetable that outlines all proposed changes, expansion or improvements in the system as to services, programming or technical specifications during the forthcoming three (3) year review period. C. Special Interests: In order to maximize the potential of the cable television system, comparative evaluations of applications will reflect the city's special interest in the following areas: 1. Programming And Production Assistance: A proposal for funding facilities, equipment or personnel beyond those required elsewhere to be designated to effect and promote public, educational, and government access, and community programming development. 2. Discrete Carriage Capacity: A proposal for the origination, experimental uses and/or interconnection by or of agencies specified in section 12-4-17 of this chapter for specialized needs and a plan accommodating such future needs as may arise. 3. Bidirectional Capacity: A proposal for effectuating the cable television system's bidirectional capacity and integration of the city's interactive system. 4. Multiorigination: A proposal for system construction in such a way that it is possible to allow occasional simultaneous cablecasting of different programs on the same channel to different parts of the city. 5. University Of Iowa: A proposal for interconnecting the city's cable television system with a University of Iowa cable network as specified by the university so that residents of the city will benefit from the university's resources. 6. Converters: A proposal for inclusion of converters or other subscriber technology as part of the basic service. 7. Institutional Network: A proposal to provide bidirectional interconnection of video, voice, audio and data among public sector locations and interconnect to the subscriber network. 8. Home Interactive: A proposal to provide two-way services to subscribers' homes. D. Additional Requirements: The application for franchise shall respond specifically, and in sequence, to the RFP. Twenty (20) copies of the application shall be supplied to the city. The city may, at its discretion, consider such additional information as part of the application. E. Supplementation To Applications: The city reserves the right to require such supplementary, additional or other information as the city deems reasonably necessary for its determinations. Such modifications, deletions, additions or amendments to the application shall be considered only if specifically requested by the city. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-10: ACCEPTANCE AND EFFECTIVE DATE OF FRANCHISE: A. Franchise Acceptance Procedures: Any franchise awarded hereunder and the rights, privileges and authority granted thereby shall take effect and be in force from and after the sixtieth day following the award thereof, provided that within sixty (60) days following award from the effective date the grantee shall file with the city the following: 1. A notarized statement by the grantee of unconditional acceptance of the franchise; and 2. A certificate of insurance as set forth in section 12-4-14 of this chapter; and 3. A letter of credit as set forth in section 12-4-15 of this chapter; and 4. Reimbursement to the city for the costs of publication of this chapter, and cost of the initial franchising process; and 5. Written notification of the grantee's location and address for mail and official notifications from the city. B. Forfeiture Of Proposal Bond: Should the grantee fail to comply with subsection A of this section, it shall acquire no rights, privileges or authority under this chapter whatever, and the amount of the proposal bond or certified check in lieu thereof, submitted with its application, shall be forfeited in full to the city as liquidated damages. C. Grantee To Have No Recourse: The grantee shall have no monetary recourse whatsoever against the city for any loss, cost, expense or damage arising out of any provision or requirement of this chapter or its regulation or from the city's lawful exercise of its authority to grant additional franchises hereunder. This shall not include negligent acts of the city, its agents or employees. D. Acceptance Of Power And Authority Of City: The grantee expressly acknowledges that in accepting any franchise awarded hereunder, it has relied upon its own investigation and understanding of the power and authority of the city to grant the franchise. E. Inducements Not Offered: The grantee, by accepting any franchise awarded hereunder acknowledges that it has not been induced to enter into the franchise by any understanding or promise or other statement, whether verbal or written, by or on behalf of the city concerning any term or condition of the franchise that is not included in this chapter. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-11: TERMINATION OF FRANCHISE: A. Grounds For Revocation: The city reserves the right to revoke any franchise and rescind all rights and privileges associated with the franchise in the following circumstances: 1. If the grantee should default in the performance of any of its material obligations under this chapter or the franchise and fails to cure the default within sixty (60) days after receipt of written notice of the default from the city, or such longer time as specified by the city. 2. If the grantee should fail to provide or maintain in full force and effect the construction bond, letter of credit and liability and indemnification coverages as required in this chapter. 3. If a petition is filed by or against the grantee under the bankruptcy act or any other insolvency or creditors' rights law, state or federal, and the grantee shall fail to have it dismissed. 4. If a receiver, trustee or liquidator of the grantee is applied for or appointed for all or part of the grantee's assets. 5. If the grantee makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors. 6. If the grantee violates any order or ruling of any state or federal regulatory body having jurisdiction over the grantee, unless the grantee or any party similarly affected is lawfully contesting the legality or applicability of such order or ruling and has received a stay from a court of appropriate jurisdiction. 7. If the grantee evades any of the provisions of this chapter or the franchise. 8. If the grantee practices any fraud or deceit upon the city or cable subscribers. 9. Subject to sections 12-4-19 and 12-4-20 of this chapter, if the grantee's construction schedule is delayed later than the schedule contained in the franchise or beyond any extended date set by the city. 10. If the grantee materially misrepresents facts in the application for a franchise. 11. If the grantee ceases to provide services over the cable communications system for seven (7) consecutive days for any reason within the control of the grantee. 12. If the grantee fails to comply with any material access provisions of this chapter or the franchise. B. Procedure Prior To Revocation: Upon the occurrences of any of the events enumerated in subsections Al, A2, A11, and Al2 of this section, the city council may, after hearing, upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the grantee citing the reasons alleged to constitute cause for revocation, set a reasonable time in which the grantee must remedy the cause. If, during the thirty (30) day period, the cause shall be cured to the satisfaction of the city, the city may declare the notice to be null and void. If the grantee fails to remedy the cause within the time specified, the council may revoke the franchise. In any event, before a franchise may be terminated, the grantee must be provided with an opportunity to be heard before the city council. C. Effect Of Pending Litigation: Unless a stay is issued by a court of appropriate jurisdiction, pending litigation or any appeal to any regulatory body or court having jurisdiction over the grantee shall not excuse the grantee from the performance of its obligations under this chapter or the franchise. Failure of the grantee to perform material obligations because of pending litigation or petition may result in forfeiture or revocation pursuant to the provisions of this section. D. Purchase Of System By City: If a renewal of a franchise held by a grantee is denied and the city acquires ownership of the cable system or effects a transfer of ownership of the system to another person, any such acquisition or transfer shall be: 1. At fair market value, determined on the basis of the cable system valued as a going concern but with no value allocated to the franchise itself; or 2. In the case of any franchise existing on the effective date of this chapter, at a price determined in accordance with the franchise if such franchise contains provisions applicable to such an acquisition or transfer. 3. If a franchise held by the grantee is revoked for cause and the city acquires ownership of the cable system or effects a transfer of ownership of the system to another person, any such acquisition or transfer shall be at an equitable price. E. Restoration Of Public And Private Property: In removing its plants, structures and equipment, the grantee shall refill at its own expense any excavation made by it and shall leave all public ways and places and private property in as good condition as existed prior to grantee's removal of its equipment and appliances, without affecting the electric or telephone cables, wires or attachments. The city shall inspect and approve the condition of the public ways and public places and cables, wires, attachments and poles after removal. Liability insurance, indemnity, the performance bond and security fund provided in this chapter shall continue in full force and effect during the period of removal. F. Restoration By City; Reimbursement Of Costs: If the grantee fails to complete any work required by subsection E of this section or any work required by other law or ordinance within the time established and to the satisfaction of the city, the city may cause such work to be done and the grantee shall reimburse the city the costs thereof within thirty (30) days after receipt of an itemized list of such costs, or the city may recover such costs as provided in this chapter. G. Lesser Sanctions: Nothing shall prohibit the city from imposing lesser sanctions or censures than revocation. H. Expiration; Extended Operation: Upon the expiration of a franchise, the city may, by resolution, on its own motion or request of the grantee, require the grantee to operate the franchise for an extended period of time not to exceed six (6) months from the date of any such resolution under the same terms and conditions as specified in this chapter and the franchise. All provisions shall continue to apply to operations during an extension period. The city shall serve written notice at the grantee's business office of intent to extend under this section at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the original franchise or any extensions thereof. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-12: REPORTS AND RECORDS OF THE GRANTEE: A. Annual Financial Reports Required: The grantee shall file annually with the city clerk not later than three (3) months after the end of its fiscal year during which it accepted a franchise hereunder and within four (4) months after the end of each subsequent fiscal year, two (2) copies of: 1. The report to its stockholders; and 2. An annual, fully audited and certified revenue statement from the previous calendar year for the Iowa City system, including subscriber revenue from each category of service and every source of nonsubscriber revenue. B. Annual Facilities Report Required: Within thirty (30) days of a request by the city, the grantee shall file annually with the city clerk two (2) copies of a total facilities report setting forth the total physical miles of plant installed or in operation during the fiscal year and a strand map showing the location of same. C. Annual Service Record Report Required: The grantee shall make available to the city for its inspection at the grantee's office, a list of all trouble complaints and network downtime received or experienced during the fiscal year. All such submitted data shall also include complaint disposition and response time. D. Annual Measurements Report Required: The grantee shall within thirty (30) days of a request by the city, provide two (2) copies of a report on the network's technical measurements, as set forth herein. E. Tests Required By City: Technical tests required by the city as specified in this chapter and the franchise shall be submitted within fourteen (14) days of notification. F. Annual Operations Reports Required: The grantee shall file annually with the city clerk not later than three (3) months after the end of its fiscal year during which it accepted a franchise hereunder and within four (4) months after the end of each subsequent fiscal year two (2) copies of the following supplemental information: 1. If a nonpublic corporation, a list of all current shareholders and bondholders both of record or beneficial. If a public corporation, a list of all shareholders who individually or as a concerted group hold five percent (5%) or more of the voting stock of the corporation. 2. A current list of all grantee's officers and directors including addresses and telephone numbers. 3. The names of both business and residential addresses and phone numbers of the cable television system resident manager and engineer. 4. Two (2) copies of all types of subscriber agreements. Copies of individual subscribers' agreements are not to be filed with the city. 5. Copies of all rules and regulations promulgated by the grantee during the fiscal year in the conduct of its business in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. 6. A copy of the annual report(s) of the parent firm(s) which own an interest of more than three percent (3%) or more of the voting stock of the grantee; and such other annual report(s) of subsidiaries or divisions of the parent firm(s) as the city deems necessary for the enforcement of this chapter and the franchise. G. Annual Subscriber Notification: Copies of all annual subscriber notifications required by the federal communications commission. H. Application For Certificate Of Compliance: The grantee shall give formal notice to the city that it is seeking a certificate of compliance from the federal communications commission. Within five (5) calendar days upon filing such a request with the federal communications commission, the grantee shall file two (2) copies of its application for certification with the city clerk. Public Availability Of Reports: Such documents and reports as required under this chapter must be available to the public in the office of the city clerk, during normal business hours. Subscribers shall be notified of the availability of such reports in ways approved by the Iowa City telecommunications commission. J. Correspondence: The grantee shall, upon request of the city, file with the city clerk a copy of each petition, application and communications transmitted by the grantee to, or received by the grantee from, any federal, state or other regulatory commissions or agencies having competent jurisdiction to regulate and pertaining to the operations of any cable television system authorized hereunder. K. City's Access To Records: 1. Reasonable Notice: The city reserves the right during the life of any franchise granted hereunder to have access, necessary for the enforcement of this chapter and the franchise, at all normal business hours and, upon the giving of reasonable notice, to all of the grantee's books, necessary for the enforcement of contracts, engineering plans, income tax returns, accounting reports, financial statements and service records and other like materials relating to the property and the operation under the franchise, and to all other records required to be kept hereunder. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the grantee from enjoining the city from reviewing documents relating to proprietary interests not related to its operation under this chapter in the city's regulatory program. 2. Additional Reports: The grantee shall prepare and furnish to the city at the times and in the form prescribed, such additional reports with respect to its operation, affairs, transactions or property, as may be reasonably necessary and appropriate to the performance of any of the rights, functions or duties of the city in connection with this chapter or the franchise. 3. Confidential Information: The grantee acknowledges that the reports, books and records which must be prepared and furnished to the city in connection with this chapter or a franchise granted under this chapter may constitute public records under state law and the grantee may be required to permit examination and copying of such records upon request. If the city receives a demand from any person for disclosure of any information, which the grantee has designated as confidential, the city shall immediately advise the grantee of the request and provide the grantee with a copy of any written request. L. Proof Of Bonds And Insurance: Grantee shall submit to the city the required bond, or a certified copy thereof and all certificates of insurance required by this chapter. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-13: FRANCHISE PAYMENT: A. Filing Fee: Applicants for an initial franchise hereunder shall pay a nonrefundable filing fee to the city of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) which sum shall be due and payable at the time of submission of the application. B. Franchising Compensation: Grantees of a franchise hereunder shall provide an initial payment to the city in an amount equal to the direct costs of granting the initial franchise including, but not limited to, consultant fees, which sum shall be due and payable concurrently with the grantee's acceptance of the franchise, to offset the city's costs in the franchise awarding process. (Ord. 05- 4169, 7-5-2005) C. Annual Franchise Payment: Grantees of a franchise hereunder shall pay to the city an annual fee in an amount equal to five percent (5%) of the "annual gross revenues", as defined herein, in lieu of all other city permits and fees, to be utilized in part by the city to offset its cable television related regulatory and administrative costs and to maximize awareness and use of the public, education, and governmental access and institutional network capacity. If the maximum franchise fee allowed by law is greater than five percent (5%), the city may require the higher amount. The franchise payment shall be in addition to any other payment owed to the city by the grantee and shall not be construed as payment in lieu of municipal property taxes or other state, county or local taxes. The city shall provide the grantee written notice forty five (45) days prior to collection of an increased franchise fee. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005; amd. Ord. 06-4201, 4-4-2006) D. Method Of Computation; Interest: Sales taxes or other taxes levied directly on a per subscription basis and collected by the grantee shall be deducted from the local annual gross revenues before computation of sums due the city is made. Payments due the city under the provisions of subsection C of this section shall be computed quarterly as of March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31 for the respective quarters of each year ending on said dates and shall be paid quarterly within three (3) months after each respective computation date at the office of the city clerk during the city clerk's regular business hours. The payment period shall commence as of the effective date of the franchise. The city shall be furnished a statement with each payment, by the grantee's division controller, reflecting the total amounts of gross revenue and the above charges, deductions and computations, for the quarterly payment period covered by the payment. 2. In the event that any payment is not made as required, interest on the amount due, as determined from the annual gross revenues as computed by a certified public accountant shall accrue from the date of the required submittal at an annual rate of twelve percent (12%). The percentages designated in this section may be amended no more than once each year by the council, consistent with increased costs for municipal facilities and supervision and applicable rules of other regulatory agencies. E. Rights Of Recomputation: No acceptance of any payment by the city shall be construed as a release or as an accord and satisfaction of any claim the city may have for further or additional sums payable as a franchise fee under this chapter or for the performance of any other obligation of the grantee. All amounts paid shall be subject to audit and recomputation by the city. (Ord. 05- 4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-14: LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: A. Indemnification Of Franchise: It shall be expressly understood and agreed by and between the city and any grantee hereunder that the grantee shall save the city harmless from all loss sustained by the city on account of any suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand which the city may legally be required to pay as a result of the enactment of this chapter and the award of a franchise to grantee, except as such suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand may arise from the process or action of selection of a grantee or grantees for award of a franchise as provided herein. B. Indemnification Of City In Franchise Operation: It shall be expressly understood and agreed by and between the city and any grantee hereunder that the grantee shall save the city and its agents and employees harmless from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorney fees sustained by the city on account of any suit, judgment, execution, claim or demand whatsoever arising out of the installation, operation or maintenance of the cable television system by the grantee, its employees or agents, as authorized herein, whether or not any act or omission complained of is authorized, allowed or prohibited by this chapter and any franchise granted hereunder. This provision shall not apply to acts of the city, its agents or employees. C. Reimbursement Of Costs: The grantee shall pay and by its acceptance of any franchise granted hereunder agrees that it will pay all expenses and costs incurred by the city in defending the city with regard to all damages and penalties mentioned in subsections A and B of this section, except as such expenses may arise from the process (as above). Should the city decide to hire its own defense, such expenses will be borne by the city. D. Public Liability Insurance: The grantee shall maintain and by its acceptance of any franchise granted hereunder agrees that it will maintain throughout the term of the franchise, any extensions thereto or as required in this chapter, a general comprehensive liability insurance policy naming as the additional insured the city, its officers, boards, commissions, agents and employees, in a company registered in the state of Iowa, and which maintains a Best's rating of A- or better, in forms satisfactory to the city manager, protecting the city and all persons against liability for loss or damage, occasioned by the operations of grantee under any franchise granted hereunder, in the amounts of: Two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death to any one person, within the limit, however, of three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death resulting from any one accident, and 2. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for property damage resulting from any one accident. E. Automobile Liability Insurance: The grantee shall maintain, and by its acceptance of any franchise granted hereunder specifically agrees that it will maintain throughout the term of the franchise, automobile liability insurance for owned, nonowned, or rented vehicles in the minimum amount of: 1. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury and consequent death per occurrence; 2. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury and consequent death to any one person; and 3. Five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) for property damage per occurrence. F. Insured: At any time during the term of the franchise, the city may request and the grantee shall comply with such request, to name the city as an additional insured for all insurance policies written under the provisions of this chapter or the franchise. G. Inflation: To offset the effects of inflation and to reflect changing liability limits, all of the coverages, limits, and amounts of the insurance provided for herein are subject to reasonable increases at the end of every three (3) year period of the franchise, applicable to the next three (3) year period, at the sole discretion of the city, upon a finding by the city of increased insurance risks requiring such changed limits. H. Notice Of Cancellation Or Reduction Of Coverage: The insurance policies mentioned above shall contain an endorsement stating that the policies are extended to cover the liability assumed by the grantee under the terms of this chapter and shall contain the following endorsement: This policy may not be canceled nor the amount of coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by the City Manager of a written notice of such intent to cancel or reduce the coverage. I. Evidence Of Insurance Filed With City Manager: All certificates of insurance shall be filed and maintained with the city manager during the term of any franchise granted hereunder or any renewal thereof. J. Extent Of Liability: Neither the provisions of this chapter nor any insurance accepted by the city pursuant hereto, nor any damages recovered by the city thereunder, shall be construed to excuse faithful performance by the grantee or limit the liability of the grantee under any franchise issued hereunder or for damages, either to the full amount of the bond or otherwise. K. Insurance For Contractor And Subcontractors: Grantee shall provide coverage for any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction, installation, maintenance or operation of its cable communications system by either obtaining the necessary endorsements to its insurance policies or requiring such contractor or subcontractor to obtain appropriate insurance coverage consistent with this section and appropriate to the extent of its involvement in the construction, installation, maintenance or operation of grantee's cable communications system. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-15: BONDS: A. Proposal Bond: Each applicant for an initial franchise hereunder shall submit a proposal bond in a form acceptable to the city manager or a certified check on a bank that is a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, payable to the order of the city in an amount of twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Said bond shall remain in effect until such time as the applicant accepts the franchise and furnishes both the construction bond and the letter of credit as provided herein. B. Construction Bond: The grantee shall maintain and by its acceptance of any franchise granted hereunder agrees that it will maintain through the rebuild or construction of the cable television system as required by this chapter, a faithful construction bond running to the city, with at least two (2) good and sufficient sureties or other financial guaranties approved by the city manager, in the penal sum total of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) conditioned upon the faithful performance of the grantee in the construction or rebuild of a cable television system complying with related provisions of this chapter and the franchise, and upon the further condition that if the grantee shall fail to comply with any law, ordinance or regulation governing the construction or rebuild of the cable television system, there shall be recoverable jointly and severally from the principal and surety of the bond, any damages or loss suffered by the city as a result, including the full amount of any compensation, indemnification, or cost of repair, construction, removal or abandonment of any property of the grantee, plus a reasonable allowance for attorney fees and costs, up to the full amount of the bond. In addition, failure to meet construction deadlines shall result in forfeiture of said bond or withdrawal from the construction bond. The bond shall contain the following endorsement: This policy may not be canceled nor the amount of coverage thereof reduced until thirty (30) days after receipt by the City Manager of a written notice of such intent to cancel or reduce the coverage. C. Release Of The Bond: Upon the city's determination that the construction or rebuild of a cable television system is complete, the grantee shall be notified by the city that the bond required under this section shall be released. D. Letter Of Credit: The grantee shall obtain, maintain, and file with the city an irrevocable letter of credit from a financial institution acceptable to the city and licensed to do business in the state in an amount of seventy five thousand dollars ($75,000.00), naming the city as beneficiary for the faithful performance by it of all the provisions of the franchise and compliance with all orders, permits and directions of any agency of the city having jurisdiction over its acts or defaults under the contract and the payment by the grantee of any claims, liens and taxes due the city which arise by reason of the construction, operation or maintenance of the system. The letter of credit shall be released only upon expiration of the franchise or upon the replacement of the letter of credit by a successor grantee. 2. Within thirty (30) days after notice to it that any amount has been withdrawn from the letter of credit pursuant to subsection D1 of this section, the grantee shall pay to, or deposit with, the city clerk a sum of money or securities sufficient to restore such security fund to the original amount of seventy five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) up to a total during the franchise term of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00). 3. If the grantee fails to pay to the city any compensation required pursuant to this chapter within the time fixed herein; or, fails, after ten (10) days' notice to pay to the city any taxes due and unpaid; or, fails to repay to the city, within such ten (10) days, any damages, costs or expenses which the city shall be compelled to pay by reason of any act or default of the grantee in connection with the franchise; notice of such failure by the office of the city manager, to comply with any provisions of the contract which the office of the city manager reasonably determines can be remedied by an expenditure of the letter of credit, the city clerk may immediately withdraw the amount thereof, with interest and any penalties, from the security fund. Upon such withdrawal, the city clerk shall notify the grantee of the amount and date thereof. 4. If the grantee wishes to contest withdrawal, the grantee may petition to the Iowa City telecommunications commission for a hearing within ten (10) days from date notice of withdrawal is mailed or otherwise given. E. Replenishment Of Letter Of Credit And Construction Bond: No later than thirty (30) days, after mailing to the grantee by certified mail notification of a withdrawal pursuant to subsections C and D of this section, and after the total amount of funds in the letter of credit is fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00), the grantee shall replenish the letter of credit or construction bond in an amount equal to the amount so withdrawn. Failure to make timely replenishment of such amount to the letter of credit and construction bond shall constitute a violation of this chapter. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5- 2005) 12-4-16: FEES, RATES AND CHARGES: A. Schedule Filings: Subject to federal law, grantee shall file with the city schedules which shall describe all services offered, all rates and charges of any kind, and all terms and conditions relating thereto. No rates or charges shall be effective except as they appear on a schedule so filed. Grantee shall notify the city and subscribers in writing at least thirty (30) days prior to the implementation of any change in services offered, rates, charges, or terms and conditions related thereto. B. Nondiscriminatory Rates: Unless otherwise allowed by FCC regulation, grantee shall establish rates that are nondiscriminatory within the same general class of subscribers which must be applied fairly and uniformly to all subscribers in the franchise area for all services. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit the grantee from offering: 1) discounts to commercial and multiple -family dwelling subscribers billed on a bulk basis; 2) promotional discounts; 3) reduced installation rates for subscribers who have multiple services; or 4) discount for senior citizens and/or low income residents. Grantee's charges and rates for all services shall be itemized on subscriber's monthly bills. C. City Regulation: To the extent that federal or state law or regulation may now, or as the same may hereafter be amended to, authorize the city to regulate the rates for any particular service tiers, service packages, equipment, or any other services provided by grantee, the city shall have the right to exercise rate regulation to the full extent authorized by law, or to refrain from exercising such regulation for any period of time, at the sole discretion of the city. D. Rate Regulation Of The Basic Tier And Charges: The city will follow FCC rate regulations. In connection with such regulation, the city will ensure a reasonable opportunity for consideration of the views of interested parties; and the city attorney, or designee, is authorized to execute on behalf of the city and file with the FCC such certification forms or other instruments as are now or may hereafter be required by the FCC rate regulations. E. Ability To Petition: If applicable, the city shall have the right to petition the federal communications commission or other appropriate agency or organization to obtain rate regulation authority or to petition the federal body to review or regulate rates in the city. F. Notification Of Charges: The grantee may establish charges for its services not specified in subsection A of this section; however, all such charges, including, but not limited to, additional service, leased channel, discrete channel, and production rates shall be made public and two (2) copies of the schedule of charges, as originally and thereafter modified, shall be filed with the city clerk thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of such charges. G. Deposits On Advance Payments To Be Approved: The grantee shall receive no deposit, advance payment or penalty from any subscriber or potential subscriber other than those established in the schedule of charges previously filed with and/or approved by the city council. H. Purchase Of Switch: In the event that the FCC does not regulate antenna switches, and/or that a switch or other appurtenant device is required to permit subscribers to receive full broadcast network service, the grantee shall give the subscriber the option of purchasing the switch at a reasonable cost at the time of initial installation thereof, or of purchasing said switch or other appurtenant device at the then prevailing local installment plan interest rate. The grantee hereby agrees to allow the subscriber to provide a switch or other appurtenant device at its subscriber terminal, provided that such device meets with the approval of the grantee. Such approval shall not be withheld if it is shown that such device does not interfere with the operation of the cable television system. If the subscriber elects not to purchase or provide said switch or other appurtenant device, the grantee may make an additional charge for the rental of such switch or other appurtenant device providing that the additional charge is in accordance with the schedule of charges contained in the grantee's application for a franchise hereunder or hereafter shall be filed with and approved by the city. I. Subscriber Refunds In Addition To Those Authorized By The FCC: 1. If any subscriber of the grantee of less than ten (10) days terminates services due to the grantee's failure to render service to such subscriber of a type and technical quality provided for herein; 2. If service to a subscriber is terminated by the grantee without good cause; or 3. If the grantee ceases to provide service for twenty four (24) hours or more, the cable television system authorized herein for any reason except termination or expiration of a franchise granted hereunder; the grantee shall refund to such subscriber an amount equal to the monthly charge, installation and connection charge paid by such subscriber in accordance with the then existing schedule of charges. J. Disconnection: Except as provided by FCC rate regulations, there shall be no charge for disconnection of any installation or outlet. If any subscriber fails to pay a properly due monthly subscriber fee, or any other properly due fee or charge, the grantee may disconnect the subscriber's service outlet. Such disconnection shall not be effected until forty five (45) days after the due date of said delinquent fee or charge, and after adequate written notice of the intent to disconnect has been delivered to the subscriber in question. Upon payment of charges due and the payment of a reconnection charge, if any, the grantee shall promptly reinstate the subscriber's cable service after request by subscriber. K. Rates Subject To Other Regulations: The grantee in submitting its request for approval of initial rates or any subsequent rates shall do so for basic service and related equipment to be performed to or for subscribers described in this chapter. If FCC rules and regulations, or any other applicable laws or regulations, shall subsequently determine that the city of Iowa City has jurisdiction over other services or service to be offered or performed, said rates shall be subject to approval by the city at that time. L. Reduction Of Fees: If during the term of any franchise or renewal thereof granted hereunder, the grantee receives refunds or if the cost of operation to the grantee is reduced as a result of an order of any regulatory body having competent jurisdiction, the grantee shall pass on to its subscribers on a prorated basis any such savings or reduced costs pursuant to FCC regulations. M. Rate Change Procedures: 1. Limitation On Application For Increase In Rates: The grantee shall not, unless allowed by FCC regulations, file more than one application for an increase in fees, rates or charges during any calendar year except to seek relief from the imposition of federal, state or local taxes or other legally imposed fees not contemplated in the most recent rate determination. 2. Review Of Rates: a. The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall review the grantee's schedule of fees, rates or charges that are within the city's regulatory jurisdiction, upon application by the grantee as herein provided or at any time on its own motion. The Iowa City telecommunications commission shall submit such schedule and any contemplated modifications thereof, together with its recommendations, to the city council as expressed in such a resolution. The city council may, pursuant to FCC regulations, reduce or increase such fees, rates or charges adopted for this purpose and, unless allowed by FCC regulations, no change in the grantee's schedule of fees, rates or charges shall be effective without prior action of the Iowa City telecommunications commission and the approval of the city council. b. No such resolution shall be adopted without prior public notice and opportunity for all interested members of the public, including the grantee, to be heard, subject to the procedures set forth in this chapter. No change in city regulated fees, rates and charges shall take effect until thirty (30) days after the approval of the rates by the city council. 3. Documentation Of Request For Increase: Any increase requests, in addition to other factors described in this section, shall be supported by a showing of increased costs for the existing services or proposed services and shall be filed in two (2) copies with the city clerk. If a grantee requests a change, it shall present in detail in writing the statistical basis, in addition to other requirements as set out in this section, for the proposed fee change in accordance with FCC rules. 4. Records To Be Made Available: For the purposes of determining the reasonableness of grantee fees, rates or charges, grantee records relating the same shall be made available to the city. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-17: PUBLIC, EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT CONNECTION TO CABLE TELEVISION SYSTEM: The grantee shall provide, upon request within the city one connection and monthly service for basic service and all nonpay services to such public, parochial and nonprofit private schools, the University of Iowa, city designated public access facility, city and other government buildings and other agencies, provided such designated locations are within two hundred feet (200') of any network cable route. Initial installation shall be without charge. Rates for monthly service to residential or living units within such entities may be negotiated with each such entity. The grantee may charge for any excess footage on the basis of time and material for any such locations beyond the two hundred foot (200') limitation if such connection is designated by the city. The city reserves the right for itself and the above entities at their individual expense to extend service to as many areas within such schools, buildings and agencies as it deems desirable without payment of any additional installation fee or monthly fee to grantee. All such extensions, however, shall be accomplished in such a way so as not to interfere with the operation of the cable television system. Institutions receiving free drops will consult with grantee on the technical standards to be used for such extensions. The grantee shall comply with the public, educational and government access requirements specified in the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-18: INTERCONNECTION OF NETWORK: The grantee shall be interconnected with other communities and cable companies as specified in the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-19: CONSTRUCTION TIMETABLE FOR INITIAL CONSTRUCTION: A. Permit Application: It is hereby deemed in the public interest that the system be extended as rapidly as possible to all residents within the city. Within ninety (90) days of the effective date of a franchise granted hereunder, the grantee shall file with the appropriate authorities and utilities all initial papers and applications necessary to comply with the terms of this chapter including the application for franchise and any additions or amendments thereto and shall thereafter diligently pursue all such applications. After the grantee has diligently pursued the acquisition of necessary pole attachment contracts, or other necessary easements, and where such necessary contracts have not been executed or easements obtained after a reasonable period of time as determined by the city, the city may, at its discretion, provide assistance to ensure the extension of the system to all residents. B. Commencement Of Construction: Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date of FCC certification, the grantee shall initiate construction and installation of the cable television system. Such construction and installation shall be pursued with reasonable diligence. C. Commencement Of Operation: Within twelve (12) months of the effective date of FCC certification, the grantee shall commence operation within the meaning set forth in this chapter. D. Sustained Completion Of Construction: Within the time specified in the franchise agreement, the grantee shall have substantially completed construction of the service area within the meaning set forth in this chapter. E. Provisions Of Basic Service: Within the time specified in the franchise agreement, the grantee shall have placed in use sufficient distribution facilities so as to offer basic service to one hundred percent (100%) of the dwelling units in the service area to which access is legally and reasonably available. F. Delays And Extension Of Time: The city council may in its discretion extend the time for the grantee, acting in good faith, to perform any act required hereunder. The time for performance shall be extended or excused, as the case may be, for any period during which the grantee demonstrates to the satisfaction of the city council that the grantee is being subjected to delay or interruption due to any of the following circumstances if reasonably beyond its control: 1. Necessary utility rearrangements, pole change outs or obtaining of easement rights. 2. Governmental or regulatory restrictions. 3. Labor strikes. 4. Lockouts. 5. War. 6. National emergencies. 7. Fire. 8. Acts of God. G. When Certain Operations Are To Commence: If FCC certification is not required for a franchise granted under this chapter, all time periods specified in subsections A, C, D and E of this section shall commence with the effective date of a franchise granted hereunder. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-20: CONSTRUCTION TIMETABLE FOR REBUILD CONSTRUCTION: A. Compliance With Construction And Technical Standards: Grantee shall construct, rebuild, install, operate and maintain its system in a manner consistent with all laws, ordinances, construction standards or guidelines, governmental requirements, FCC technical standards, and detailed technical standards provided for in the franchise. B. Construction Timetable: The grantee shall construct and complete the system rebuild in accordance with the timetable set forth in the franchise. C. Delays And Extension Of Time: The city council may in its discretion extend the time for the grantee, acting in good faith, to perform any act required hereunder. The time for performance shall be extended or excused, as the case may be, for any period during which the grantee demonstrates to the satisfaction of the city council that the grantee is being subjected to delay or interruption due to any of the following circumstances if reasonably beyond its control: 1. Necessary utility rearrangements, pole change outs or obtainment of easement rights. 2. Governmental or regulatory restrictions. 3. Labor strikes. 4. Lockouts. 5. War. 6. National emergencies. 7. Fire. 8. Acts of God. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-21: NETWORK DESCRIPTION: A. System Bandwidth Capability: The grantee shall install a cable network according to the following specifications: The initial system shall be designed to a capacity equivalent to a minimum of seven hundred fifty (750) MHz and as specified in the franchise. The grantee at its option may provide for this increased capacity at the time of initial construction. 2. As total bidirectional capacity is a priority goal of the city, applicants for a franchise hereunder may propose greater channel capacities and more sophisticated two-way capabilities than the minimums set forth herein. However, such proposal shall describe the particular community needs to be served thereby and shall detail, as part of the financial projection and support required in this chapter the associated costs and revenues. B. System Configuration: The grantee shall design and construct the network using fiber to the node architecture, or better, in such a way as to provide maximum flexibility and to provide service to the fewest number of homes per fiber node as economically feasible. C. Protection Of Subscriber Privacy Mandatory: Grantee shall at all times protect the privacy of subscribers, as provided in this chapter and other applicable federal, state, and local laws. D. Notice Of Privacy Provisions: At the time of entering into an agreement to provide any cable service or other service to a subscriber, and at least once a year thereafter, grantee shall provide notice consistent with and in accordance with federal law in the form of a separate written statement to each subscriber which clearly and conspicuously informs the subscriber of: 1. The privacy rights of the subscriber and the limitations placed upon grantee with regard to this chapter and all other applicable federal, state, and local subscriber privacy provisions. 2. The nature of personally identifiable information collected or to be collected with respect to the subscriber and the nature of the use of such information. 3. The nature, frequency, and purpose of any disclosure which may be made of such information, including an identification of the types of persons to whom the disclosure may be made. 4. The period during which such information might be maintained by the cable operator. 5. The times and place at which the subscriber may have access to such information in accordance with this chapter and other applicable federal, state, and local law. 6. A request for the subscriber signature allows for use of personally identifiable information. E. Collection Of Personally Identifiable Information Prohibited: Grantee shall not use or permit the use of the cable system to collect personally identifiable information concerning any subscriber, except as necessary to render a cable service or other service provided by the cable operator to the subscriber. Grantee shall not install or permit the installation of any special terminal equipment in any subscriber's premises for the two-way transmission of any aural, visual, or digital signals without the prior written consent of the subscriber. Grantee shall not tabulate, nor permit others to tabulate, any subscriber use of the cable system which would reveal the opinions or commercial product preferences of individual subscribers, whether residential or business, or of any occupant or user of the subscriber's premises without written authorization from the subscriber for his or her participation in a shop at home or similar service. When providing such service, the grantee may tabulate only those responses essential to the functioning of that shopping or other service, and may not use any such tabulation of individual preferences for any other purposes. Tabulations of aggregate opinion or preference are permitted, provided the aggregations are sufficiently large to assure individual privacy. F. Disclosure Of Subscriber Information Prohibited: Grantee shall not without the specific written authorization of the individual subscribers involved, sell or otherwise make available to any party any list of the names and addresses of individual subscribers, any list which identifies the viewing habits of individual subscribers, or any personal data, social security number, income and other data the grantee may have on file about individual subscribers, except as necessary to render or conduct a legitimate business activity related to a cable service or other service provided by the cable operator to the subscriber, provided, however, that such disclosure shall not reveal directly or indirectly the extent of viewing or other use by the subscriber of a cable service or other service provided by the cable operator, or the nature of any transaction made by the subscriber over the cable system. G. Notices Of Monitoring: Grantee shall report to the affected parties, the city and other appropriate authorities, any instances of monitoring or tapping of the system, or any part thereof, of which it has knowledge, which is not authorized under this section whether or not such activity has been authorized by grantee. Grantee shall not record or retain any information transmitted between a subscriber or user and any third party, except as required for lawful business purposes. Grantee shall destroy all subscriber or user information of a personally identifiable nature after a reasonable period of time, unless retention of such information is authorized by the affected subscriber or user. H. Polling By Cable: No poll or other upstream response from a subscriber shall be conducted or obtained except as part of a program that contains an explicit disclosure of the nature, purpose and prospective use of the results of the poll or upstream response and where the program has an informational, entertainment or educational function which is self-evident. Grantee or its agents shall release the results of upstream responses only in the aggregate and without individual references. I. Monitoring Devices: Grantee shall provide written notice to each subscriber when equipment is to be installed on the system which would permit the recording or monitoring of individual viewing habits of a subscriber or household; such equipment shall be installed only after prior written permission has been granted by the subscriber. Such permission may be valid for one year only and may be renewed by permission of the subscriber. In no event shall such permission be obtained as a condition of service or continuation thereof. Grantee shall give each subscriber annual written notice of any such monitoring and of the subscriber's right to terminate the monitoring in accordance with the terms and conditions of the subscriber's contract with grantee. J. Personally Identifiable Information: Grantee shall not predicate regular subscriber service on the subscriber's grant or denial of permission to collect, maintain or disclose personally identifiable information. A subscriber may at any time revoke any permission previously given by delivering to the grantee a written statement of that intent. K. Correction Policy: Each subscriber shall be provided access to all personally identifiable information regarding such subscriber that grantee collects or maintains or allows to be collected or maintained, and such subscriber shall be provided the opportunity to correct any error in such information. L. Viewing Habits: Any information concerning individual subscriber viewing habits or responses, except for information for billing purposes, shall be destroyed within sixty (60) days of collection. Information for billing purposes shall be kept for two (2) years and then destroyed unless otherwise required to be kept by law. M. System Performance: This section is not intended to prohibit the use or transmission of signals useful only for the control or measurement of system performance. N. Subscriber And User Contracts: 1. This section shall be enforceable directly by every aggrieved subscriber or user and by every aggrieved person seeking to become a subscriber or user. Grantee shall include the following provision in every contract or agreement between grantee and any subscribers or user: The subscriber/user, as part of this contract, has certain rights of privacy prohibiting the unauthorized monitoring of service and publication of personal information under the control of (Name of Grantee), including without limitation, information regarding program selections or service uses. (Name of Grantee) shall make available upon the request of the subscriber/user further description of said rights as established in its ordinance and franchise with the City of Iowa City. 2. Grantee shall not allege or contend that any actual or potential subscriber or user may not enforce this chapter by reason of lack of privacy. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-22: NETWORK TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: Each cable television system must be so designed, installed and operated as to meet FCC technical standards and standards set forth in the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-23: PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS: A. General Requirements: Test procedures utilized shall be in accordance with those promulgated by the FCC and the National Cable Television Association. B. Additional Tests And Inspections: The city reserves the right to: 1. Require additional tests for cause at specific terminal locations at the expense of the grantee; and 2. Conduct its own inspections of the cable television system on its own motion at any time during normal business hours with reasonable advance notice. C. Report Of Measurements Combined: To the extent that the report of measurements as required above may be combined with any reports of measurements required by the FCC or other regulatory agencies, the city shall accept such combined reports, provided that all standards and measurements herein or hereafter established by the city are satisfied. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-24: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: A. Antennas And Towers: Antenna supporting structures (towers) shall be designated for the proper loading zone as specified in the Electronics Industry Association's specifications as amended from time to time. B. Compliance With Aviation Requirements: Antenna supporting structures (towers) shall be painted, lighted, erected and maintained in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the federal aeronautical agency, the state aeronautics board governing the erection and operation of supporting structures or television towers, and all other applicable local or state codes and regulations. C. City Approval Of Construction Plans: Prior to the erection of any towers, poles or conduits or the upgrade or rebuild of the cable communications system under this chapter, the grantee shall first submit to the city and other designated parties for review, such information as specified in the franchise. No erection or installation of any tower, pole, underground conduit, or fixture or any rebuilds or upgrading of the cable communications system shall be commenced by any person until approval, therefor, has been received from the city. D. Contractor Qualifications: Any contractor proposed for work of construction, installation, operation, maintenance, and repair of system equipment must be properly licensed under laws of the state, and all local ordinances. In addition, the grantee shall submit to the city, every two (2) years, a plan to hire persons locally for the construction, installation, operation, maintenance and repair of the system equipment. E. Minimum Interference: The grantee's system and associated equipment erected by the grantee within the city shall be so located as to cause minimum interference with the proper use of streets, alleys, and other public ways and places, and to cause minimum interference with the rights and reasonable convenience of property owners who adjoin any of the said streets, alleys or other public ways and places. No pole or other fixtures placed in any public ways by the grantee shall be placed in such a manner as to interfere with normal travel on such public way. F. City Maps: The city does not guarantee the accuracy of any maps showing the horizontal or vertical location of existing substructures. In public rights of way, where necessary, the location shall be verified by excavation. G. Quality Of Construction: Construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of the cable communications system shall be performed in an orderly and workmanlike manner, in accordance with then current technological standards. All cables and wires shall be installed, where possible, parallel with electric and telephone lines. Multiple cable configurations shall be arranged in parallel and bundled with due respect for aesthetic and engineering considerations. H. Construction Standards: The construction, installation, operation, maintenance, and/or removal of the cable communications system shall meet all of the following safety, construction, and technical specifications and codes and standards: Occupational safety and health administration regulations (OSHA). National electrical code. National electrical safety code (NESC). National cable television standard code. AT&T manual of construction procedures (blue book). Bell telephone systems code of pole line construction. All federal, state and municipal construction requirements, including FCC rules and regulations. Utility construction requirements. All building and zoning codes, and all land use restrictions, as the same exist or may be amended hereafter. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-25: ERECTION, REMOVAL AND COMMON USE OF POLES: A. Approval For Poles: No poles shall be erected by the grantee without prior approval of the city with regard to location, height, types and any other pertinent aspect. However, no location of any pole or wire holding structure of the grantee shall give rise to a vested interest and such poles or structures shall be removed or modified by the grantee at its own expense whenever the city determines that the public convenience would be enhanced thereby. B. Requirements To Use Existing Poles: Where poles already exist for use in serving the city and are available for use by the grantee, but grantee does not make arrangements for such use, the city may require the grantee to use such poles and structures if it determines that the public convenience would be enhanced thereby and the terms of the use available to the grantee are just and reasonable. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-26: CONSTRUCTION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: A. Progress Reports: Within thirty (30) days of the granting of a franchise pursuant to this chapter, the grantee shall provide the city with a written progress report detailing work completed to date and a schedule for completion of construction. Such report shall include a description of the progress in applying for any necessary agreements, licenses, or certifications and any other information the cable television administrator may deem necessary. The content and format of the report will be determined by the cable television administrator and may be modified at the administrator's discretion. B. Time Frame For Reports: Such written progress reports shall be submitted to the city on a bimonthly basis throughout the entire construction or rebuild process. The cable television administrator may require more frequent reporting if the administrator determines it is necessary to better monitor the grantee's progress. C. Subscriber Information: Prior to the commencement of any major system construction, the grantee shall produce an informational document to be distributed to all residents of the area to be under construction, which shall describe the activity that will be taking place. The informational document shall be reviewed by the cable television administrator prior to its distribution. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5- 2005) 12-4-27: CHANNELS TO BE PROVIDED: A. Leased Access Channel: The grantee shall maintain at least one specifically designated channel for leased access uses. In addition, other portions of its nonbroadcast bandwidth, including unused portions of the specifically designated channels, shall be available for leased uses. On at least one of the leased channels, priority shall be given to part time users. B. Television Broadcast Signal Carriage: The grantee shall carry those television broadcast signals which are in accordance with part 76, section 76.63 of the FCC rules and regulations as such rules are amended from time to time. The provision of additional television broadcast signals as provided for in part 76, section 76.63(a) shall also be required as amended from time to time. C. Basic Service: Channels to be included on the first tier of service not requiring a converter or other appurtenance shall include: All television signals described in subsections A, B and D of this section. As the maximized use of the total channel capacity is of great interest to the city, applicants for a franchise hereunder may submit proposals to utilize channels beyond the basic service. Such a proposal may include the use of convertors at no additional charge to subscribers. D. Access Channels: Grantee shall provide the public, educational and governmental access channels as specified in the franchise. The entities operating access channels shall, in cooperation with the Iowa City telecommunications commission, develop rules for such channels. Such rules shall be placed on file with the city clerk. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-28: CONDITIONS OF STREET OCCUPANCY: A. Approval Of Proposed Construction: The grantee shall first obtain the approval of the city prior to commencing construction on the streets, alleys, public grounds or places of the city as specified in the franchise. B. Permits: A grantee shall obtain construction permits in conformance with all city rules and regulations. C. Changes Required By Public Improvements: The grantee shall, at its expense, protect, support, temporarily disconnect, or relocate in another public place any property of the grantee when required by the city by reason of traffic conditions, public safety, street vacation, street construction, change or establishment of street grade, installation of sewers, drains, water pipes, city owned power or signal lines, and tracts or any other type of structure or improvement by public agencies. D. Use Of Existing Poles Or Conduits: Nothing in this chapter or any franchise granted hereunder shall authorize the grantee to erect and maintain in the city new poles where existing poles are servicing the area. The grantee shall require permission from the city before erecting any new poles, underground conduit or appurtenances where none exist at the time the grantee seeks to install its network. E. Underground Installation: All installations shall be underground in those areas of the city where public utilities providing either telephone or electric service are underground at the time of installation. In areas where either telephone or electric utility facilities are aboveground at the time of installation, grantee may install its service aboveground, provided that at such time as those facilities are required to be placed underground by the city or are placed underground, the grantee shall likewise place its services underground without additional cost to the city or to the individual subscribers so served within the city. Where not otherwise required to be placed underground by this chapter or the franchise, the grantee's system shall be located underground at the request of the adjacent property owner, provided the excess cost over the aerial location shall be borne by the property owner making the request. All cable passing under the roadway shall be installed in conduit. F. Pedestals: When housing minihubs, switching or other equipment are to be utilized on the public right of way, such equipment must be completely buried beneath streets or sidewalks. Any pedestals located in the public right of way shall comply with city ordinances or regulations. All such buried equipment shall be shown in plan and cross section on the design plans for permits. G. Facilities Not To Be Hazardous Or Interfere: All wires, conduits, cables and other property and facilities of the grantee shall be so located, constructed, installed and maintained as not to endanger or unnecessarily interfere with the usual and customary trade, traffic and travel upon the streets and public places of the city. The grantee shall keep and maintain all its property in good condition, order and repair. The city reserves the right hereunder to inspect and examine at any reasonable time and upon reasonable notice, the property owned or used, in part or in whole, by the grantee. The grantee shall keep accurate maps and records of all its facilities and furnish copies of such maps and records as requested by the city. A grantee shall not place poles or other equipment where they will interfere with the rights or reasonable convenience of adjoining property owners or with any gas, electric or telephone fixtures or with any water hydrants or mains. All poles or other fixtures placed in a street shall be placed in the right of way between the roadway and the property, as specified by the city. H. Method Of Installation: All wires, cables, amplifiers, and other property shall be constructed and installed in an orderly manner consistent with the trade. All cables and wires shall be installed parallel with existing telephone and electric wires whenever possible. Multiple cable configurations shall be arranged in a parallel and bundled, with due respect for engineering and safety considerations. All installations shall be underground in those areas of the city where public utilities providing telephone and electric service are underground at the time of installation. All underground installations of wires and cable shall be buried at least twelve inches (12") belowground, and no trenching or other underground installation shall be commenced without notice to the city forester. All underground installation shall be performed in compliance with city forester directions. Protection Of Facilities: Nothing contained in this section shall relieve any person, company or corporation from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid injuring the grantee's facilities while performing any work connected with grading, regrading or changing the line of any street or public place or with the construction or reconstruction of any sewer or water system. Any person, company or corporation intending to perform any of the above described work in an area where grantee's facilities are located shall notify grantee at least twenty four (24) hours prior to performing said work. J. Requests For Removal Or Change: The grantee shall, on the request of any person holding a building moving permit, temporarily raise or lower its wires to permit the moving of said building. The expense of such temporary removal, raising or lowering of wires shall be paid by the person requesting the same, and the grantee shall have the authority to require such payment in advance. The grantee shall be given not less than ten (10) working days' notice of any move contemplated to arrange for temporary wire changes. K. Authority To Trim Trees: The grantee may trim trees upon and overhanging streets, alleys, sidewalks and other public places of the city so as to prevent the branches of such trees from coming in contact with the wires and cables of the grantee. No trimming shall be done except under the supervision and direction of the city forester, upon the explicit prior written notification and approval of the city forester and at the expense of the grantee. The grantee may contract for such services; however, any firm or individual so retained shall receive city forester approval prior to commencing such activity. L. Restoration Or Reimbursement: In the event of disturbance of any street or private property by the grantee, it shall, at its own expense and in a manner approved by the city and the owner, replace and restore such street or private property in as good a condition as before the work causing such disturbance was done. In the event the grantee fails to perform such replacement or restoration, the city or the owner shall have the right to do so at the sole expense of the grantee. Payment to the city or owner for such replacement or restoration shall be immediate, upon demand, by the grantee. All requests for replacement or restoring of such streets or private property as may have been disturbed must be in writing to the grantee. M. Office And Records In City: The grantee shall, at all times, make and keep at an office maintained by the grantee in the city full and complete plans and records showing the exact location of all cable television system equipment installed or in use in the streets or other public places of the city. The grantee shall furnish the city complete maps upon request, compatible with the city's geographic information system, showing all of the cable television system equipment installed and in place in streets and other public places of the city. Such maps shall be updated annually. N. Emergency Removal Of Plant: If, at any time, in case of fire or disaster in the city, it shall become necessary in the reasonable judgment of the city to cut or move any of the wires, cables, amplifiers, appliances or appurtenances thereto of the grantee, such cutting or moving may be done and any repairs rendered necessary thereby shall be made by the grantee, at its sole expense, provided such repairs are not necessitated by negligent act of the city, in which case, cost for repairs shall be borne by the city. O. Alternate Routing Of Plant: In the event continued use of a street is denied to the grantee by the city for any reason, the grantee will make every reasonable effort to provide service over alternate routes. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-29: UNAUTHORIZED CONNECTIONS OR MODIFICATIONS: A. Unauthorized Connections Prohibited: It shall be unlawful for any firm, person, group, company, corporation or governmental body or agency, without the expressed consent of the grantee, to make any connection, extension or division, whether physically, acoustically, inductively, electronically or otherwise, with or to any segment of a franchised cable television system for any purpose whatsoever, except as provided in this chapter. B. Removal Or Destruction Prohibited: It shall be unlawful for any firm, person, group, company, corporation or governmental body or agency to wilfully interfere, tamper, remove, obstruct or damage any part, segment or content of a franchised cable television system for any purpose whatsoever. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-30: PREFERENTIAL OR DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES PROHIBITED: A. Prohibited Employment Practices: 1. The grantee shall not commit any of the following employment practices and agrees to prohibit the following practices in any contracts or subcontract entered into or effectuating the operation of the franchise: a. To discharge from employment or refuse to hire any individual because of their race, color, religion, creed, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or sexual orientation. b. To discriminate against any individual in term, conditions or privileges of employment because of their race, color, religion, creed, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or sexual orientation. 2. The grantee shall be an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer adhering to all federal, state or municipal laws and regulations. Pursuant to 47 CFR, section 76.311 and other applicable regulations of the FCC, grantee shall file an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action program with the FCC and otherwise comply with all FCC regulations with respect to equal employment/affirmative action opportunities. B. Employment Policy: Grantee shall take affirmative action to employ, during the construction, operation and maintenance of the cable communications system minorities and females as set forth in the franchise. Upon request by the city, grantee shall submit to the city annual reports indicating such compliance. C. Procurement: For all services, materials or equipment purchased for the construction, operations or maintenance of the cable communications system, grantee shall wherever possible, purchase from competitively priced and otherwise qualified minority owned, or female owned businesses located in the city of Iowa City, as set forth in the franchise. D. Local Employment And Procurement Practices: Whenever possible, all services, personnel, hardware and supplies for the construction, maintenance and operation of the system shall be procured locally. E. Services To Be Equally Available: The grantee shall not refuse cable television services to any person or organization who requests such service for lawful purpose, nor shall a grantee refuse any person or organization the right to cablecast pursuant to provisions of this chapter. The grantee shall not, as to rates, charges, service facilities, rules, regulations or in any other respect, make or grant any unreasonable preference or advantage, nor subject any person to any prejudice or disadvantage. The grantee shall take affirmative steps to disseminate the information concerning the availability of its services to all minority and other underrepresented groups. This provision shall not be deemed to prohibit promotional campaigns to stimulate subscription to the system or other legitimate uses thereof, nor shall it be deemed to prohibit the establishment of a graduated scale of charges and classified rate schedules to which any customer coming within such classifications shall be entitled, provided such schedules have been filed with and approved by the city as provided in this chapter. F. Fairness Of Accessibility: The entire system of the grantee shall be operated in a manner consistent with the principle of fairness and equal accessibility of its facilities, equipment, channels, studios and other services to all citizens, businesses, public agencies or other entities having a legitimate use for the system. No one shall be arbitrarily excluded from its use. Allocation of use of said facilities shall be made according to the rules or decisions of regulatory agencies affecting the same, and where such rules or decisions are not effective to resolve a dispute between conflicting users or potential users, the matter shall be submitted for resolution by the Iowa City telecommunications commission. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-31: INSTALLATIONS, CONNECTIONS AND OTHER SERVICES: A. Standard Installations: Standard installation shall consist of a service not exceeding one hundred fifty feet (150) from a single point or pedestal attachment to the customer's residence. Service in excess of one hundred fifty feet (150) and concealed wiring shall be charged at such cost as exceeds normal installation costs. The desire of the subscriber as to the point of entry into the residence or commercial establishment and location of pedestal shall be observed whenever possible. Runs in building interiors shall be as unobtrusive as possible. The grantee shall use due care in the process of installation and shall repair any damage to the subscriber's property caused by said installation. Such restoration shall be undertaken within no more than ten (10) days after the damage is incurred and shall be completed as soon as possible thereafter. B. Deposits: Any deposit required by grantee shall bear interest at the current lending rate. C. Lockout Devices: The grantee shall provide to the potential subscriber, as part of its promotional literature, information concerning the availability of a lockout device for use by a subscriber. The lockout device described herein shall be made available to all subscribers requesting it beginning on the first day that any cable service is provided. D. Reconnection: Grantee shall restore service to customers wishing restoration of service provided customer shall first satisfy any previous obligations owed. E. Free Disconnection: Subscribers shall have the right to have cable service disconnected without charge. A refund of unused service charges shall be paid to the customer within sixty (60) days from the date of termination of service. F. Downgrade And Upgrade Fees: Any downgrade or upgrade fees shall conform with FCC rules. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-32: SERVICE CALLS AND COMPLAINT PROCEDURES: A. Business Office Staffing: Grantee shall provide all subscribers or users with at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice of a change in business office hours. The business office shall maintain a staff adequate to process complaints, requests for installation, service or repairs, and other business in a timely and efficient manner. Grantee shall add additional telephone lines and service representatives when existing lines are substantially utilized or when a pattern of subscriber complaints reflect a need for additional service employees. Additional offices and payment stations provided by the grantee shall be included in the franchise. B. Telephone Service: The grantee shall have a listed, locally staffed telephone number for service calls available twenty four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week. Said number shall be made available to subscribers and the general public. The grantee shall provide an unlisted locally staffed telephone number to the city and utility companies to enable the city or utility companies to reach the grantee in case of emergency on a twenty four (24) hour, seven (7) days a week basis. C. Grantee Rules: The grantee shall prepare and file with the city copies of all of its rules and regulations in connection with the handling of inquiries, requests and complaints. The grantee shall, by appropriate means, such as a card or brochure, furnish information concerning the procedures for making inquiries or complaints, including the name, address and local telephone number of the employee or employees or agent to whom such inquiries or complaints are to be addressed, and furnish information concerning the city office responsible for the administration of the franchise, including, but not limited to, the address and telephone number of said office. D. Equipment Service: The grantee shall service or replace without charge all equipment provided by it to the subscriber, provided, however, that the grantee may charge a subscriber for service to or replacement of any equipment damaged due to negligence of such subscriber. E. Subscriber Solicitation: Grantee shall provide the city with a list of names and addresses of all representatives who will be soliciting within the city and the area in and the dates within such solicitations shall take place. Each such representative and all other employees entering upon private property shall be required to wear an employee identification card issued by grantee and bearing a picture of said representative. Grantee shall notify the general public of its solicitation in a manner calculated to reach residents in the areas to be solicited in advance of such solicitation. F. Sales Information: Grantee shall provide to all subscribers annually and all prospective subscribers or users with complete written information concerning all services and rates provided by grantee upon solicitation of service and prior to consummation of any agreement for installation of service. Such sales material shall clearly and conspicuously disclose the price and other information concerning grantee's least costly service. Such information shall be written in plain English and shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following: all services, tiers, and rates; deposits if applicable; installation costs; additional television set charges; service upgrade or downgrade charges; lockout devices; and information concerning the utilization of videocassette recorders (VCRs) with cable service(s) and the cost for hooking up such VCRs so that they function as manufactured. G. Billing Practices Information: Grantee shall inform all subscribers annually and all prospective subscribers or users of complete information respecting billing and collection procedures, procedures for ordering changes in or termination of services, and refund policies, upon solicitation of service and prior to the consummation of any agreement for installation of service. Such information shall be written in plain English. H. Notice Of Complaint Procedures: Grantee shall periodically, and at various times of the day, present its business office address and publicly listed local telephone number by means of alpha -numeric display on a local origination channel. Investigation And Remedial Action: For recurrent complaints regarding service deficiencies (other than total or partial loss of service, such as ghosting, weak audio signal, distortion, and the like), the cable television administrator may require the grantee to investigate and report to the causes and cures thereof, and the cable television administrator may also conduct an investigation. Thereafter, the cable television administrator may order specified remedial action to be taken within reasonably feasible time limits. If such action is not taken, or is ineffective, or if within thirty (30) days the grantee files with the city a notice of objection to the order, the city may conduct a hearing and may, if the evidence warrants a finding of fault on the part of the grantee, take appropriate action pursuant to the terms of this chapter. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-33: TRANSFER: A. Transfer Of Franchise: A franchise shall not be assigned or transferred, either in whole or in part, or leased, sublet, or mortgaged in any manner, nor shall title to the cable system, legal or equitable, or any right, interest or property therein, pass to or vest in any person without the prior written consent of the city, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. Except that no consent shall be required for any sale, transfer, or assignment of ownership to an affiliate under common control with grantee, provided that prior to such transfer, grantee provides to the city verifiable information to establish that such transferee has the financial, legal and technical ability to fully perform all obligations of the franchise. No such consent shall be required, however, for a transfer by mortgage to a federally licensed lending institution in order to secure indebtedness. Within thirty (30) days of receiving the request for transfer, the franchising authority shall, in accordance with FCC rules and regulations, notify the grantee in writing of the information it requires to determine the legal, financial and technical qualifications of the transferee. If the franchising authority has not taken action on the grantee's request for transfer within one hundred twenty (120) days after receiving such requested information, consent by the franchising authority shall be deemed given. B. Transfer Of Ownership: The grantee shall not sell, transfer or dispose of thirty percent (30%) or greater ownership interest in the grantee or more at one time of the ownership or controlling interest in the system, or thirty percent (30%) cumulatively over the term of the franchise of such interests to a corporation, partnership, limited partnership, trust or association, or person or group of persons acting in concert without the consent of the city. Every sale, transfer, or disposition of thirty percent (30%) or greater ownership interest as specified above in the grantee shall make the franchise subject to cancellation unless and until the city shall have consented thereto. C. Transfer Of Control: The grantee shall not change control of the grantee in whatever manner exercised without the prior written consent of the city. D. City Approval: Every change, transfer, or acquisition of control of the grantee shall make the franchise subject to cancellation unless and until the city shall have consented thereto. For the purpose of determining whether it shall consent to such change, transfer, or acquisition of control, the city may inquire into the legal, financial, character, technical and other public interest qualifications of the prospective transferee or controlling party, and the grantee shall provide the city with all required information. The city reserves the right to impose certain conditions on the transferee as a condition of the franchise to ensure that the transferee is able to meet existing ordinance and franchise requirements. E. Assumption Of Control: Any financial institution having a pledge of the franchise or its assets for the advancement of money for the construction and/or operation of the franchise shall have the right to notify the city that it will take control and operate the cable television system. If the financial institution takes possession of the cable communications system the city shall take no action to effect a termination of the franchise without first giving to the financial institution written notice thereof and a period of six (6) months thereafter (unless otherwise provided herein below): 1) to allow the financial institution or its agent(s) to continue operating as the grantee under the franchise; and 2) to request the city, and for the city to determine whether, to consent to the assignment of the grantee's rights, title, interest and obligations under the franchise to a qualified operator. The city acknowledges that in order for the financial institution to realize upon the collateral accorded to it by the loan documents, the financial institution must be entitled to a reasonable period of time after taking possession of the franchise under the loan document to obtain the city's consent to an assignment of the franchise to a qualified operator. The city agrees that such reasonable period of time is six (6) months after the financial institution takes possession of the cable communication system and, further, agrees that the city shall use its best efforts to decide upon the assignment of the franchise to the new operator proposed by the financial institution within such period of time. The financial institution shall be entitled to such possession and other rights granted under this subsection until such time that the city determines whether to consent to such assignment (the extended time). If the city finds that such transfer, after considering the legal, financial, character, technical and other public interest qualifications of the applicant are satisfactory, the city will consent to the transfer and assign the rights and obligations of such franchise as in the public interest. During the six (6) month period or extended time, the financial institution shall enjoy all the rights, benefits and privileges of the grantee under the franchise, and the city shall not disturb such possession by the financial institution, provided the financial institution complies in all respects with the terms and provisions of the franchise and this chapter. The various rights granted to the financial institution under this subsection are contingent upon the financial institution's continuous compliance with the terms and provisions of this chapter and the franchise during the entire aforementioned six (6) month period or extended time, if applicable. For example, should an agent of the financial institution take possession of the cable communication system pursuant to rights granted to the financial institution under this subsection, and such agent fails to comply with the level of service requirements set forth in this chapter or the franchise, the rights granted to the financial institution under this chapter and the franchise shall automatically terminate. F. No Waiver Of City Property Rights: The consent or approval of the city or any other public entity to any transfer of the grantee shall not constitute a waiver or release of the rights of the city in and to the public property or public rights of way, and any transfer shall, by its terms, be expressly subordinate to the terms and conditions of this chapter and the franchise. G. Transfer Time Periods: In the absence of extraordinary circumstances, the city will not approve any transfer or assignment of the franchise prior to construction or the completion of the rebuild of the system. Subject to the conditions of section 617 of the cable act, the city shall not approve a transfer if the grantee has not held the franchise for a period of three (3) years. H. Right To Review Purchase Price: Based upon public information, the city reserves the right to review the purchase price of any transfer or assignment of the cable system. Signatory Requirement: Any approval by the city of transfer of ownership or control shall be contingent upon the prospective party becoming a signatory to the franchise agreement. (Ord. 05- 4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-34: PUBLICATION COSTS: The grantee shall assume the cost of publication of the franchise ordinance as such publication is required by law. A bill for the publication costs shall be presented to the grantee by the city upon the grantee's filing of acceptance and shall be paid at that time. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-35: ORDINANCES REPEALED: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this chapter are hereby repealed. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-36: SEPARABILITY: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this chapter is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-37: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE TO THIS CHAPTER: Whenever this chapter shall set forth any time for any act to be performed by or on behalf of the grantee, such time shall be deemed by the essence any failure of the grantee to perform within the time allotted shall always be sufficient grounds for the city to invoke an appropriate penalty including possible revocation of the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-38: NO WAIVER OF RIGHTS: No course of dealing between the grantee and the city nor any delay on the part of the city in exercising any rights hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any such rights of the city or acquiescence in the actions of the grantee in contravention of rights except to the extent expressly waived by the city or expressly provided for in the franchise. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) Division 2. Rate Regulations 12-4-39: RATE REGULATION PROCEEDINGS: Any rate regulation proceedings conducted under this division shall be in accordance with FCC rate regulations. A. 1. In the course of the rate regulation proceeding, the city may request additional information from the cable operator that is reasonably necessary to determine the reasonableness of the basic service tier rates and equipment charges. Any such additional information submitted to the city shall be verified by an appropriate official of the cable television system supervising the preparation of the response on behalf of the entity, and submitted by way of affidavit or under penalty of perjury, stating that the response is true and accurate to the best of that person's knowledge, information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry. The city may request proprietary information, provided the city shall consider a timely request from the cable operator that said proprietary information shall not be made available for public information, consistent with the procedures set forth in section 0.459 of the FCC rules and regulations. 2. Furthermore, said proprietary information may be used only for the purpose of determining the reasonableness of the rates and charges or the appropriate rate level submitted by the cable operator. The city may exercise all powers under the laws of evidence applicable to administrative proceedings under the laws of the state to discover any information relevant to the rate regulation proceeding, including, but not limited to, subpoena, interrogatories, production of documents and depositions. B. Upon termination of the rate regulation proceeding, the city shall adopt and release a written decision whether the rates or proposed rate increase are reasonable or unreasonable, and, ii unreasonable, its remedy, including prospective rate reduction, rate prescription and refunds. C. The city may not impose any fines, penalties, forfeitures or other sanctions, other than permitted by the FCC rules and regulations, for charging an unreasonable rate or proposing an unreasonable rate increase. However, the city may impose fines or monetary forfeitures on a cable operator that does not comply with a rate decision or refund order of the city, directed specifically at the cable operator, pursuant to the laws of the state and this code. D. Consistent with the FCC rules and regulations, the city's decision may be reviewed only by the FCC. E. The city shall be authorized, at any time, to gather information as necessary to exercise its jurisdiction as authorized by the laws of the state, the cable act, and the FCC rules and regulations. Any information submitted to the city shall be verified by an appropriate official of the cable television system supervising the preparation of the response on behalf of the entity, and submitted by way of affidavit or under penalty of perjury, stating that the response is true and accurate to the best of that person's knowledge, information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry. (Ord. 05- 4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-40: CERTIFICATION: The city shall file with the FCC the required certification as necessary. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-41: NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES: With regard to the cable programming service tier, as defined by the cable act and the FCC rules and regulations, and over which the city is not empowered to exercise rate regulation, the cable operator shall give notice to the city of any change in rates for the cable programming service tier or tiers, any change in the charge for equipment required to receive the tier or tiers, and any changes in the nature of the services provided, including the program services included in the tier or tiers. Said notice shall be provided to the city at least thirty (30) business days prior to any change becoming effective. (Ord. 05-4169, 7-5-2005) 12-4-42: CABLE OFFICIAL: The city may delegate its power to enforce this division to the Iowa City telecommunications commission or to employees or officers of the city, to be known as the cable official. The cable official shall have authority to: A. Administer oaths and affirmations; B. Issue subpoenas; C. Examine witnesses; D. Rule upon questions of evidence; E. Take or cause depositions to be taken; F. Conduct proceedings in accordance with this division; G. Hold conferences for the settlement or simplification of the issues by consent of the parties; and H. Take actions and make decisions or recommend decisions in conformity with this division. (Ord. 05- 4169, 7-5-2005) Item Number: 8. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Letter from Climate Action Advisory Board: Recommendation for Climate Action Commission Description Letter from Climate Action Advisory Board: Recommendation for Climate Action Commission Iowa City Climate Action Advisory Board August 1, 2019 RE: Recommendation for a Climate Action Commission Iowa City City Council Members, In September 2018, the Iowa City City Council adopted the Iowa City Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, and at the same time dissolved the climate action steering committee of community stakeholders that assisted in development of the plan with Iowa City staff and a third -party consultant. This action was taken in accordance with the resolution that formed the committee and its purpose. At the time, the members of the steering committee recommended the formation of a community-based, self -governed, self-sustaining board, the Iowa City Climate Action Advisory Board, for a trial period of one-year to assist Iowa City staff with the arduous process of starting implementation of the plan. We are now approaching the one-year mark for the trial period, and have observed the following successes and challenges: • Formed four working groups to give focus to the issues of Buildings, Transportation, Communications, and Equity. The working groups have had partial successes but have also been slow to produce results as they rely on volunteer time. • Established a Communications Strategic Plan, which has just begun to be activated. • Started community outreach and awareness, but not at the frequency or visibility needed for the broader public to see and understand the impact. • Inspired new partnerships and programs such as the Johnson Clean Energy District. • Assisted city staff in review and development of a number of key programs including an Equity Fellow, mapping tools, a regional electric vehicle network, and a Climate Festival. • Recommended Iowa City engagement in the University of Iowa's public-private partnership for the university's utilities. • The board is not currently an official entity, can't raise funds, doesn't employ staff, and has no specific governing authority. To provide for these items and create a self- sustaining organization would require much greater involvement of time, finances, and influence. It has become apparent now to the board members at the end of the one-year trial period that with limited volunteer time and resources, the focus of the effort of the board and its members should be on the implementation work of the climate action plan, and the focus should not be on sustaining an independent non-profit organization. It is the board's recommendation the Iowa City City Council appoint a new Climate Action Commission to align with the declaration of a climate crisis in our community. Further details of the make-up of the commission and their role is attached to this letter. A Climate Action Commission would garner the credibility, influence, and greater capacity of a city council appointed organization with the support of city staff, budgets, and public transparency. It would allow commission appointees to provide focus on developing key community partnerships, formal review and recommendation of proposed policy and programs, and advising on the best course of future actions. Understanding the limitations of a volunteer - based commission and capitalizing on their strengths is critical to the success of the overall plan. Implementation of the climate action plan is a full-time job and more than any one person can undertake. It is the board's recommendation the required financial and personnel resources be allocated for this effort. That includes staffing a full-time coordinator(s), a champion of champions, that can do the day-to-day work such as meeting with key community stakeholders and partners, researching and writing policy and program proposals, coordinating with local and regional entities on behalf of the City of Iowa City, and tracking and measuring performance of the actions implemented. The climate action steering committee made a similar recommendation in September 2018 during the adoption of the plan and it has become even more apparent now, approximately one-year later. Current staff efforts have been successful in focusing on municipal efforts — the actions the City itself can take on its own, as well as managing the greenhouse gas inventory data and reporting; however, that has not allowed capacity for facilitating expanded outreach into the community. More can and should be done to influence action in the community. The members of the Climate Action Commission play an important part of that effort, but it needs an individual(s) championing activities on a daily basis. Further details on proposed actions by different stakeholders in the implementation effort are attached to this letter. The members of the Climate Action Advisory Board support the decision of the Iowa City City Council to declare a climate crisis and are prepared to continue the challenging work ahead. Signed, Iowa City Climate Action Advisory Board Members: Chair - Matt Krieger, Architect, Neumann Monson Architects Secretary - Katie Sarsfield, Site Engineering Leader, Procter & Gamble Oral Care Grace Holbrook, Student, University of Iowa John Fraser, Management Consultant GT Karr, Greater Iowa City Homebuilders Association Liz Maas, Assistant Professor, Kirkwood Community College Martha Norbeck, Owner and Architect, C -Wise Design and Consulting Eric Tate, Assistant Professor, University of Iowa Recommendations for the Climate Action Commission A Climate Action Commission should consist of community members and stakeholders with the backgrounds and expertise needed to advise on the issues outlined in the climate action plan and to represent the populations impacted, similar to the original steering committee. The Iowa City Climate Action Advisory Board recommends the commission consist of at least nine members with preference given to the following types of representation: • Local businesses (small and large) • Design and construction industry • Utility provider • Institutions including public schools, colleges, and universities • Students in higher education • Community non -profits • Bankers/economists • Lawyers • At -large neighborhood representative It is recommended the commission members serve three-year terms with a limit of two consecutive terms to balance the need for institutional knowledge and expertise on the issues with the desire for new perspectives and defined community service periods. Working groups or sub -committees focused on specific topics and issues are critically important to maintain progress on the key action areas of the plan and they facilitate engagement of community stakeholders not represented or with more specific expertise than those appointed to the commission. The board recommends the groups be established at the start of the commission's work to build upon current efforts. Recommendations for Stakeholder Roles The following are recommended roles and actions each type of stakeholder might take as part of the implementation of the Iowa City Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (referred to as "the plan " below) going forward. Iowa City City Council and Iowa City Staff combined roles • Review and decide on recommended modifications to the plan. • Set policy. • Develop, operate, and maintain programs, policies, and other actions at the recommendation of and review by the Climate Action Commission. • Assign resources — personnel, material, and financial — to the recommended actions. o At this time, that should include a climate action coordinator, additional building inspectors, and possibly a sustainability communications assistant to provide greater public awareness of climate action activities. • Establish a means for review through the `lens' of climate action the actions by other Iowa City boards and commissions. This could be an evaluation tool like a checklist or some other method. Develop and report annual greenhouse gas inventory. Coordinate with other communities on combined efforts — legislative, programmatic, etc. Coordinate and collaborate with and provide support where needed to community partners and stakeholders. Climate Action Commission roles • Review, prioritize, advise, and make recommendations to the Iowa City City Council on any modifications required to the plan. The plan should be updated every five years with annual reporting on progress. • Review, prioritize, advise, and make recommendations to the Iowa City City Council and Iowa City staff on actions to meet the reduction targets outlined in the plan. • Participate in working groups/sub-committees focused on the plan's action areas. • Coordinate with Iowa City staff on the development of community partners related to the plan. Develop awareness and support of partners. Where applicable, develop new programs with partners in alignment with the plan's actions. • Participate in community engagement and outreach activities. • Advocate as needed on policy at the municipal, state, and federal levels of government. • Assist Iowa City staff in review of evaluation and tracking tools. • Review annual reports on progress of the plan developed by Iowa City staff. • Assist in recruiting new applicants for the commission and its working groups/sub- committees. • Assist Iowa City staff in review of applications and development of programs related to climate action, including but not limited to: climate action ambassador program, climate action grants, etc. Communily partners roles • Engage Iowa City staff, the Climate Action Commission and its working groups in actions related to the plan. • Assist in building public awareness of the plan and the actions that relate to their own work/mission. • Request support where and when applicable to advance progress on their own actions in support of the plan. • Participate, get involved, influence others to do the same. 4 Item Number: 9. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Memo from City Clerk: Listening Post Update ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from City Clerk: Listening Post Update r.® CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: August 1, 2019 To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Kellie K. Fruehling, City Clerk Re: Listening Post Update In 2018 Council held four listening posts: • Thursday, February 22, 4:30-6:00 p.m., Kirkwood Community College – IC Campus (Mayor Pro tem Taylor and Council member Mims) • Saturday, June 9, 9:30-10:00 a.m., Washington Street Farmers Market (Mayor Pro tem Taylor and Council member Cole) • Thursday, August 16, 6:00-8:00 p.m., Willow Creek Park – Party in the Park (Council member Mims and Council member Thomas) • Thursday, November 29, 5:30-7:00 p.m., Irving Weber Elementary, 3850 Rohret Rd (Mayor Throgmorton and Mayor Pro tem Taylor) In 2019 the following listening posts have been held: • Monday, February 11, 5:30-7:00 p.m., Iowa Memorial Union, Black Box Theatre – Room #360 — 125 N Madison Street (Council member Cole and Council member Salih) • Wednesday, May 29, 6:30-8:00 p.m., Lemme Elementary School Library, 3100 E. Washington St (Council member Thomas and Council member Teague) No additional dates are currently scheduled. Suggested quarterly posts are February, May, August, and November. Suggested sites include: o Farmer's Market (Wednesday or Saturday) o Party in the Park o Uptown Bill's o Pheasant Ridge Neighborhood Center, 2651 Roberts Road o Senior Center Lobby &1isteningpost/locationmemo — August 2019.doc Item Number: 10. CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Email from Big Ten Property Management LLC: Letter from City Manager [Staff response included] /_AAGIT61:ILvi14i III1&- 1 Description Email from Big Ten Property Management LLC: Letter from City Manager [Staff response included] -A 3:p)0 Kellie Fruehling From: Big Ten Property Management LLC <rentals@bigteniowacity.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 3:35 PM Late Handouts Distributed To: Sue Dulek Cc: Geoff Fruin; *City Council Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager (Date) Sue The addresses you have police calls on the reports you sent are not all owned by Barkalow Investments. Also odd you never contacted us but I did hear that you were asking people about us and this at the court house but did not have time to call us? We are a bit shocked that you contacted the University but never picked up the phone to contact us. In the future maybe a good idea to contact the property owners when there are issues not wait for 8 months later to bring it up. Seems a bit odd and selective on enforcement seems like you are trying to target Barkalow Investments and not handle the matters at hand properly and impartially. Just out observation and it's a share observation with our attorneys. In the future if there is a problem at a property managed by our office please pick up the phone we had a very productive conversation with the University and they have our support on this matter too bad you were looking to smear us or blame us for something rather than deal with the problem professionally and properly. Respectfully, Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 121h Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentals(dDBi¢TenlowaCity.com Website: www.BigTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker *All lease pricina, terms and conditions can chanae at anytime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Sue Dulek [mailto:Sue-Dulek@iowa-city.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 2:26 PM To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC' 1 Cc: Geoff Fruin; *City Council Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Mr. Barkalow- The Office of Student Life dealt with this issue on behalf of the University. We understand that you have already been in touch with Dr. Shivers. Last fall city staff observed extremely large parties in the back yards of properties owned by Barkalow Investments Inc. at 223, 228, 300, 302, and 310 Melrose Ct. In their investigations, persons told police officers that the backyards had been rented by fraternities on game days. City staff believed the most effective way to address this dangerous activity was to contact University officials. For further details, please see the document I previously emailed you entitled "Melrose Ct with video info." City staff has not sent a similar letter to any other property owner as investigations showed the activity was occurring on properties owned by Barkalow Investments, Inc. Susan Dudek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulekCaiowa-city.org Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. From: Big Ten Property Management LLC [mailto:rentals@bigteniowacity.com] Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2019 8:56 AM To: Sue Dulek <Sue-Dulek@iowa-city.org> Cc: Geoff Fruin <Geoff-Fruin@iowa-city.org>; Rockne Cole <Rockne-Cole@iowa-city.org>; Susan Mims <Susan- Mims@iowa-city.org>; MazahirSalih<Mazahir-Salih@iowa-city.org>; Pauline Taylor <Pauline-Taylor@iowa-city.org>; Bruce Teague <Bruce-Teague@iowa-city.org>; John Thomas <John-Thomas@iowa-city.org>; Jim Throgmorton <Jim - Th rogmorton @ iowa-city.org> Subject: RE: Redetter from City Manager Importance: High Sue - we never got a response to our previous emails who is the contact person for the University of Iowa relating to our email and letter that we can talk to about a positive solution? Who is in charge of overseeing the Iowa Football activities at the University of Iowa? Do you have a contact or even know? Also one thing we find odd or very ironic is the fact that you in your current letter state that the City of Iowa City wants Citizens to follow Court Orders yet your office is advising the City of Iowa City to not follow the Iowa Supreme g Court Order from June 2018 that we have in our favor on North Dodge and North Governor properties. Seems very one sided way of doing things to us especially when the City of Iowa City is now violating an Iowa Supreme Court Order. Also have you sent out this similar letter to any other property owner on the list you provided us that had other calls for service on Gameday's or are you targeting our office? I would like a list of properties you sent this letter too other than our office? Also as stated in my previous email the information you provided to the Press last year is not accurate and you have not even contacted us until July 2019 to discuss why is that? Talk soon Thank you Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 121' Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentals@BigTenlowaCitv.com Website: www.BigTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker •AII lease pricing. terms and conditions can chance at anytime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Big Ten Property Management LLC fmaflto:rentalsCalbigteniowacitv.coml Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2019 8:46 AM To: 'Sue Dulek' Subject: RE: Re: letter from City Manager Importance: High Sue We never got a response to our previous emails who is the contact person for the University of Iowa relating to our email and letter that we can talk to about a positive solution? Who is in charge of overseeing the Iowa Football activities at the University of Iowa? Do you have a contact or even know? Also one thing we find odd or very ironic is the fact that you in your current letter state that the City of Iowa City wants Citizens to follow Court Orders yet your office is advising the City of Iowa City to not follow the Iowa Supreme Court Order from June 2018 that we have in our favor on North Dodge and North Governor properties. Seems very one sided way of doing things to us. Talk soon Thank you Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 12th Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentals@BiRTenlowaCity.com Website: www.BiRTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker 'All lease Pricina. terms and conditions can chance at anytime Prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Sue Dulek [mailto:Sue-Dulek@)iowa-city.orol Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 3:56 PM To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC' Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Please see attached. This information was compiled in late 2018 and provided to the University of Iowa officials. It has also been provided to members of the media and others that requested it following stories regarding the Uofl actions with respect to certain fraternities. Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulekl?ajowa-citv.org Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. -----Original Message ----- From: Big Ten Property Management LLC [mailto:rentals(a bigteniowacity.coml Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 5:30 PM To: Sue Dulek <Sue-Dulek(a)iowa-citv.or¢> Subject: ReJetter from City Manager Sue - What exact property address did the Iowa City Police Department take such action at last fall? Please send us a copy of the Iowa City Police Department Police Report on the issue along with the Officer or Officer(s) name(s) and contact information that handled the matter you are referring to in your letter. We would also like copies of any Notices of Violations, Civil Citations or any kind written documents Issued at anytime to anyone on this matter by the City of Iowa City, Iowa City Police Department or on behalf of the City of Iowa City. And any further proof you have that your statements are true and accurately represented relating to any of our managed properties referred to in your email or letter. Also why did this occur last year as you claim and today July 9, 2019 is the first time you or anyone from the City has contacted our office? We look forward to your timely response to our questions on this matter. Respectfully Big Ten Property Management LLC Office: 250 12th Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Mail: PO Box 1490 Iowa City IA 52244 htty://www.BigTenIowaCiiy.com Owner is an Iowa Broker -----Original Message ----- Subject: letter from City Manager From: "Sue Dulek" <Sue-Dulek(a.iowa-citv.or¢> To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC" <rentalsebi¢teniowacitv.com> Date: 2019/07/09 22:37:28 Attached is a letter from the City Manager to Tracy Barkalow. A hard copy was put in the U.S. mail today. Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulekaa.iowa-citv.ore Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. H9Virus -free. www.avast.com Ip 410 Kellie Fruehling From: Sue Dulek Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 2:26 PM To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC' Cc: Geoff Fruin; *City Council Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Mr. Barkalow - The Office of Student Life dealt with this issue on behalf of the University. We understand that you have already been in touch with„Dr. Shivers. Last fall city staff observed extremely large parties in the back yards of properties owned by Barkalow Investments Inc. at 223, 228, 300, 302, and 310 Melrose Ct. In their investigations, persons told police officers that the backyards had been rented by fraternities on game days. City staff believed the most effective way to address this dangerous activity was to contact University officials. For further details, please see the document'j previously emailed you entitled "Melrose Ct with video info.” City staff has not sent a similar letter to any other property owner properties owned by Barkalow Investments, Inc. , Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street . Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulek(i ,iowa-city.org showed the activity was occurring on Notice: / Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secu e. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable�th such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with theCiity Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication PrivocyAct 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, Is Intended only for the use of the person to whom it Is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. i From: Big Ten Property �anagement LLC [mailto:rentals@bigteniowacity.com]., Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2019 8:56 AM To: Sue Dulek <Sue-Dk@iowa-city.org> Cc: Geoff Fruin <Geoff Fruin@iowa-city.org>; Rockne Cole <Rockne-Cole@iowa-city.org>; Susan Mims <Susan- Mims@iowa-city.org>; Mazahir Salih <Mazahir-Salih@iowa-city.org>; Pauline Taylor <Pauline-Taylor@iowa-city.org>; Bruce Teague <Bruce-Teague@iowa-city.org>; John Thomas <John-Thomas@iowa-city.org>; Jim Throgmorton <Jim - Th rogm o rto n @ i owa-ci ty. o rg> Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Importance: High Sue- We never got a response to our previous emails who is the contact person for the University of Iowa relating to our email and letter that we can talk to about a positive solution? Who is in charge of overseeing the Iowa Football activities at the University of Iowa? Do you have a contact or even know? Also one thing we fin letter state that the your office is advisi: Court Order from June Governor properties. when the City of Iowa i odd or very ironic is the fact that you in your current City of Iowa City wants Citizens to follow Court Orders yet ig the City of Iowa City to not follow the Iowa Supreme 2018 that we have in our favor on North Dodge and North Seems very one sided way of doing things to us especially City is now violating an Iowa Supreme Court Order. Also have you sent out this similar letter to any other property wner on the list you provided us that had other calls for service on Gamed 's or are you targeting our office? I would like a list of properties you ent this letter too other than our office? Also as stated in my previous email the information you rovided to the Press last year is not accurate and you have not even contacted us until July 2019 to discuss why is that? Talk soon Thank you Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 25012`^ Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentals@Bi¢TenlowaCitv.com Website: www.BigTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby noted that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Big Ten Prope Management LLC [mailto:rentals@bigteniowacity.com] Sent: Saturday, July 22019 8:46 AM To: 'Sue DuleW Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Importance: High Sue We never got a response to our previous emails who is the contact person for the University of Iowa relating to our email and letter that we can talk to about a 2 positive solution? Who is in charge of overseeing the Iowa Football activities at the University of Iowa? Do you have a contact or even know? Also one thing we find odd or very ironic is the fact that you in your current letter state that the City of Iowa City wants Citizens to follow Court Orders yet your office is advising the City of Iowa City to not follow the Iowa Supreme Court Order from June 2018 that we have in our favor on North Dodge and North Governor properties. Seems very one sided way of doing things to us. Talk soon Thank you Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 j Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 25012th Avenue Ste 150 / Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentals0ftTenlowaCity.com Website: www.BigTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker *All lease oricina. terms and conditions can chance at anytime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Sue Dulek [mailto:Sue-Dulek0iowa-citv.org] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 3:56 PM To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC' Subject: RE: Re:letter from City Manager Please see attached. This information was compiled in late 2018 and provided to the University of Iowa officials. It has also been provided to members of the media and others that requested it following stories regarding the Uofl actions with respect to certain fraternities. Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulekna,iowa-citv.ora Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's Office and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such messages are secure. You should be careful in 3 transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you consider confidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the City Attorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. -----Original Message ----- From: Big Ten Property Management LLC [ Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2019 5:30 PM To: Sue Dulek <Sue-Dulek66owa-citv.ore> Subject: Re:letter from City Manager Sue- \\ What exact property address did Iowa City Police artment take such action at last fall? Please send us a copy of the Iowa City lice Dep ent Police Report on the issue along with the Officer or Officer(s) name(s) and contact informatio that dled the matter you are referring to in your letter. We would also like copies of any Notices of lations, Civil Citations or any kind written documents Issued at anytime to anyone on this matter by the Ci of Io a City, Iowa City Police Department or on behalf of the City of Iowa City. And any further proof you have that your statements are\matter. sented relating to any of our managed properties referred to in your email or letter. Also why did this occur last year as you claim and todaytime you or anyone from the City has contacted our office? We look forward to your timely response to our question Respectfully / Big Ten Property Management LLC Office: 250 12th Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Mail: PO Box 1490 Iowa City IA 52244 http://www.BigTenlowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Broker -----Original Message ----- Subject: letter from City Manager From: "Sue Dulek" <Sue-DulekQiowa-city.org> To: "Big Ten Property Management LLC" <rentals _.bieteniowaci .com> Date: 2019/07/09 22:37:28 Attached is a letter from the City Manager to Tracy Barkalow. A hard copy was put in the U.S. mail today. Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorney 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 319-356-5030 319-356-5008 Fax sue-dulek(i0owa-city.ore Notice: Since e-mail messages sent between you and the City Attorney's O ice and its employees are transmitted over the internet, the City Attorney's Office cannot assure that such mes s are secure. You should be careful in transmitting information to the City Attorney's Office that you considervpnfidential. If you are uncomfortable with such risks, you may decide not to use e-mail to communicate with the City Attorney's Office. Without written notification that you do not wish to communicate with the City Attorney's Office via e-mail communication, the CityAttorney's Office will assume you assent to such communication. This message is covered by the Electroni6 Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2515, is intended only for the use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and subject to the attorney-client privilege. It should not be forwarded to anyone else without consultation with the originating attorney. If you received this message and are not the addressee, you have received this message in error. Please notify the person sending the message and destroy your copy. Thank you. Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Ad ID Virus -free. www.avast.com Item Number: 11. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Quarterly Investment Report: April 1 to June 30, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Quarterly Investment Report: April 1 to June 30, 2019 CITY OF IOWA CITY QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT April 1, 2019 to June 30, 2019 Finance Department Prepared by: Brian Cover Senior Accountant OVERVIEW The City of Iowa City's investment objectives are safety, liquidity and yield. The primary objective of the City of Iowa City's investment activities is the preservation of capital and the protection of investment principal. The City's investment portfolio remains sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet operating requirements that cash management procedures anticipate. Investments purchased by the City of Iowa City for the fourth quarter of this fiscal year had an average return of 2.413%. Rates on new investment purchases in our operating cash portfolio for the fourth quarter were 61 basis points higher than investments purchased at this time last year. The increase is due to the higher interest rates of the new investments. In investing public funds, the City's cash management portfolio is designed with the objective of regularly exceeding the average return on the six month U.S. Treasury Bill. The Treasury Bill is considered a benchmark for riskless investment transactions and therefore comprises a minimum standard for the portfolio's rate of return. Since the city's investments are mostly between the six month and twelve month range, the yield curve for the twelve month U.S. Treasury Bill has been added to the chart. The rolling average return on the six month U.S. Treasury Bill for the prior 365 days was 2.393% and the twelve month return was 2.467°/x. The investment program seeks to achieve returns above this threshold, consistent with risk limitations and prudent investment principles. The rate of return on the City's entire portfolio for the quarter was 2.348%. (See exhibit A) City of Iowa City vs. 6 and 12 Month Treasury Bill 3.0 2.5 m c 2.0 _ _. m ea +° 1.5 u CL 1.0 _. _..... -- 0.0 1V h —+—City of Iowa City 6 Month T-bill 12 Month T-bill Treasury bills and fed funds are competing investments in the money market. The federal funds rate is highly influential and often has a direct effect on the U.S. economy, because it serves as a base for interest rates offered by various financial and credit institutions to businesses and consumers. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which banks lend to each other. In the June 19th meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee, the decision was made to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 2.50 percent. The Committee will closely monitor the implications of incoming information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial and international developments. Federal Funds Rate 3.0- i 2.0 Co i� 1.0 s `F 0.0 c K c ,� c C m tea, 4) $ LANDFILL RESERVE Z% HEALTH INSURANCE RESET 39 EQUIPME RESERV 3% City of Iowa City Investments by Fund Type June 30, 2019 SEWER RESERVE GO BOND 2`Y PROCEEDS 1% WATER RESERVE 1% PARKING OPERATIONS 88% 6130/19 6/30/18 FUND INVESTMENT INVESTMENT TYPE AMOUNT AMOUNT OPERATING EQUIPMENT RESERVE HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE LANDFILL RESERVE LANDFILL CLOSURE SEWER RESERVE GO BOND PROCEEDS WATER RESERVE PARKING OPERATIONS PARKING RESERVE TOTAL $185,271,443.89 $178,160,090.14 $ 6,000,000.00 $ 6,000,000.00 $ 6,000,000.00 $ 4,000,000.00 $ 4,000,000.00 $ 4,000,000.00 $ - $ 2, 000, 000.00 $ 3,510,000.00 $ 4,625,000.00 $ 2,364,540.00 $ 7,093,624.00 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 2,500,000.00 $ 602,843.00 $ 602,843.00 $ - $ 2,000,000.00 $ 209,748,826.89 $ 210,981,557.14 BANKER'S TRUST 8% HILLS BANK & TRUST 3% City of Iowa City Investments by Institution June 30, 2019 US BANK 1% TWO RIVERS BANK 0% REGIONS BANK 2% U OF 1 COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION 3% CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST 8% GREAT WESTERN RANI_ 14% IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST 18% INSTITUTION NAME BANKER'S TRUST CBI BANK & TRUST CEDAR RAPIDS BANK & TRUST FARMERS & MERCHANTS SAVINGS BANK GREAT WESTERN BANK HILLS BANK & TRUST IOWA PUBLIC AGENCY INVESTMENT TRUST MIDWESTONE BANK NXT BANK PIPER JAFFRAY & CO REGIONS BANK TWO RIVERS BANK U OF I COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION US BANK TOTAL MIDWESTONE BANK 29% PIPER ]AFFRAY & CO 14% 6130/19 INVESTMENT AMOUNT 6/30/18 INVESTMENT AMOUNT DEPOSITORY LIMIT $ 15,811,770.90 $ 246,649.86 $ 20,000,000.00 $ - $ 6,500,000.00 $ 15,000,000.00 $ 16,000,000.00 $ 11,022,835.05 $ 50,000,000.00 $ - $ 250,000.00 $ 15,000,000.00 $ 29,419,876.63 $ 10,011,643.94 $100,000,000.00 $ 6,099,177.83 $ 6,098,642.74 $ 25,000,000.00 $ 36,829,427.81 $ 51,027,482.68 N/A $ 61,885,730.72 $ 68,551,459.87 $100,000,000.00 $ - $ 5,000,000.00 $ 10,000,000.00 $ 29,500,000.00 $ 32,070,000.00 N/A $ 5,000,000.00 $ - $100,000,000.00 $ 602,843.00 $ 12,602,843.00 $ 15,000,000.00 $ 6,600,000.00 $ 7,600,000.00 $ 50,000,000.00 $ 2,000,000.00 $ - $ 65,000,000.00 $ 209,748,826.89 $ 210,981,557.14 Item Number: 12. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Civil Service Examination: Communications Aide ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Communications Aide � r �13 IT CITY OF IOWA CITY 41Q East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-J826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX vtiwvw, icgov,org July 26, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Communications Aide Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Communications Aide. Marlen Mendoza IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION G Rick Wys , Chair Item Number: 13. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Civil Service Examination: Senior Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Examination: Senior Engineer r 1 rlll� CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX VVww icgov.org July 26, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Senior Engineer Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Senior Engineer_ Jason Reichart IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION f Rick Wy s, Chair Item Number: 14. It i r = _ 12ft Z % r"=0 CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Human Rights Commission: July 16 ATTACHMENTS: Description Human Rights Commission: July 16 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission City Hall, Helling Conference Room July 16, 2019 Members Present: Jeff Falk, Adil Adams, Noemi Ford, Cathy McGinnis, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara Kutzko. Members Absent: Jonathon Munoz, Bijou Maliabo, Tahuanty Pena. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendation to Council: No. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:33 PM. Approval of the June 18, 2019 meeting minutes: Item will be placed on next meeting agenda when a majority number of Commissioners are present to vote (five or more) on it. Kutzko abstained from voting because she was not at the meeting and Ford was not present at the time a motion was made. Approval of the July 3, 2019 meeting minutes: McGinnis made a motion, it was seconded by Kutzko. Motion passed 5-0. (Ford not present). Restorative Community Partners and Ed Collaborators Funding Request: The Captivate Conference will have course offerings on race relations, equity and inclusion. The requested amount is $4000.00. Commissioners declined the request due to the amount asked for, the lack of information provided, and the late date of the request from the event date. Commissioners suggested that the Social Justice Racial Equity Grant may be a better fit for such a project. Johnson County Americans with Disabilities Act Celebration: Commissioners present will not be available on the date the Celebration is being held. Staff will send an email out to those Commission members not present at this meeting to inquire on their availability to participate. Latino Festival: This event will be held on August 24 from noon to nine on the Ped Mall. Ferdig will request more detailed information from planners of the event. Ferdig is available to host a table on behalf of the Commission at the event. This item will be on the next meeting agenda. Committee Updates: There are four committees that assist in advancing the strategic plan. The four committees are Housing (*Falk, Adams, Pena); Public Safety (*McGinnis, Maliabo, Munoz); Education (*Ferdig, Falk, Kutzko, Pena); and Community Outreach (*Adams, Falk, Munoz). Asterisks designates chairs of the committees. Page 1 of 4 Housing: Falk encouraged other Commissioners to fill out the City Steps survey currently available on line. Public Safety: No report. Education: Has reached out to former Commission member Kim Hanrahan. Kim currently serves on the Equity Committee for the Iowa City Community School District. It is believed that there will be opportunities to work together on topics of joint interest. The committee is also learning more about the Head Start program. Community Outreach: No report. Human Rights Breakfast: This annual award ceremony is scheduled for October 23. Dr. Melissa Shivers, University of Iowa's Vice President for Student Life will be the keynote speaker. Nominations are currently being accepted for honorees. Commission Announcements: McGinnis attended a presentation at the African American Museum of Iowa by Professor Simon Balto (University of Iowa) who spoke on his book that looks at policing and race in Chicago, between 1919 and the early 1970s. Kutzko represented the Commission at the annual Juneteenth event. Adams attended the Juneteenth event on behalf of the Commission. He also went to a presentation at the Sudanese Community Center that discussed the current political deadlock in Sudan. Falk attended a rally in Cedar Rapids outside the US District Court protesting the detention of immigrants and asylum -seekers at the southern US borders. Ford participated in a professional development workshop on Refugee Mental Health. The workshop focused on refugees from Latin America, Asia, and African Countries. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:38 PM. Page 2 of 4 Member Attendance Sheet Member Term Exp. 1/8 1/24 2/19 3/19 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/03 7/16 8/20 9/17 Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Excused McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Munoz 1/2021 Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Excused Excused Kutzko 1/2020 Present Present Present Present Present Excused Excused Present Present Falk 1/2020 Present I Present Present I Present I Present Present I Present Present Present Pena 1/2020 Present Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present Excused Adams 1/2022 Excused Present Present Present Present Absent Present Excused Present Ferdig 1/2022 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Ford 1/2022 Present Excused Present Excused Present Present Present Excused lPresent Item Number: 15. jr ;;rw®J� CITY OC IOWA CITY www.icgov.org August 1, 2019 Parks & Recreation Commission: July 10 ATTACHMENTS: Description Parks & Recreation Commission: July 10 IOWA CITY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION PRELIMINARY MINUTES JULY 10, 2019 RECREATION CENTER — MEETING ROOM B Members Present: Suzanne Bentler, Ben Russell, Luke Foelsch, Cara Hamann, Angie Smith, Jamie Venzon, Brianna Wills, Joe Younker Members Absent: Steve Bird Staff Present: Zac Hall, Juli Seydell Johnson Others Present: Nancy Footner, Connie Roberts CALL TO ORDER Chairman Younker called the meeting to order at 5 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): Reviewed December motion regarding playground locations and surfacing. No changes made. The December motion was as follows: Moved by Fett, seconded by Russell, that the Parks and Recreation Commission recommend to Council as follows: 1) the current distribution of various playground surfaces is adequate; 2) inclusivity and accessibility issues, however, should be reviewed on a regular basis; and 3) the review should include the consideration of a variety of features to address inclusivity and accessibility issues. The Council should know that the Commission is committed to review issues relating to the inclusivity and accessibility of local parks on at least an annual basis. Passed 7-0 (Hamann & Laurian Absent). Moved by Wills. seconded by Smith that Citv Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the south district of Iowa City: 1) Utilize the Open Space Ordinance whereby the City accepts land in lieu of fees when offered through future development. 2) Increase outreach to the community making the public aware of options that are currently available in the south district. 3) Consider installation of traditional play equipment in the south district. Motion passed 8-0 Bird absent). Moved by Bentler. seconded by Foelsch, that Citv Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the southeast district of Iowa City: 1) Add new connection to underpass at American Legion Road to expand access around the new Hoover Elementary. 2) Add to current Iowa City Bike Map to include routes to Mercer from adjacent neighborhoods. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). Moved by Bentler. seconded by Wills, that Citv Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the west district of Iowa City: 1) As per Open Space Ordinance, consider land made available through future development to be used for placement of a new parks and recreation center in the west central district. 2) Keep apprised of development of the Johnson County Poor Farm for possible trail connection opportunities. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). Moved by Bentler, seconded by Foelsch, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the central district of Iowa City: Revise the current assessment of parkland and open space to include both University and Iowa City School District properties. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 2 of 5 Moved by Wills, seconded by Russell, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the west district: 1) Maintain progress on parks currently in development. 2) Increase outreach to make public aware of Black Springs Circle Park in this district. 3) Expand on outreach regarding the Ashton House. 4) Consider parkland and trail connections as Manville Heights Neighborhood continues to change. Passed 8-0 Bird absent) Moved by Bentler. seconded by Venzon, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the north district of Iowa City: 1) Reassess potential bike connectivity as area develops. 2) Remove need for park facilities near Scott Blvd. and Rochester Ave. from plan recommendations. Passed 8-1 Bird absent). Moved by Wills, seconded by Russell, to consider continued development of plans for an eastside sports complex in the southeast district. Moved by Hamann, seconded by Venzon, that Council recommend staff pursue a master planning process to include athletic fields and facilities, recreation facilities and aquatic facilities. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). OTHER FORMAL ACTION: Amendments to the minutes requested as follows: Bentler referred to page 3, paragraph 4 and asked to revise statement she made regarding biodegradable bags. Cara Hamann noted that the minutes listed her as being present, however, she was absent from the May meeting. Moved by Bentler, seconded by Wills, to approve the May 9, 2019 minutes as amended. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). PUBLIC DISCUSSION Nancy Footner and Connie Roberts, members of the public, were present to express their concerns regarding a change in hours at City Park Pool. Footner noted that she arrived at the pool on a Saturday evening to find that it was closed. She later discovered that the City no longer offers twilight swim on Saturday and Sunday evenings but rather opened it up for private rentals from 6-8 p.m.. Footner expressed her disappointment in this decision, explaining that the twilight swim was such a great time to visit the pool as it is much quieter and not as busy. She further noted that when she arrived at the pool that Saturday evening, there was no party taking place and felt I was a shame that the pool was closed. She wanted to bring her concern to the Commission and requested that the board discuss further. Roberts also expressed her disappointment in the change. She explained that Sunday evenings are such a wonderful time to swim. It is a time where those who want a quiet time to swim and don't want to sunbathe can enjoy the pool. She agreed with Footner that a private party at a public pool does not seem okay. Seydell Johnson explained that the staff did change the hours this summer. She understands that while the twilight swim provided a very relaxing atmosphere, the number of swimmers averaged less than 25. The policy states that if there are fewer than 25 people at the pool, it can close. However, she further noted, that the pool does not often close unless it is cold and rainy. The low attendance one Saturday and Sunday nights was the reason that aquatics staff chose to make the- change. Staff also increased the lap swim hours on PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 3 of 5 weekday mornings at the same time which has proven quite successful. She reported that to date there have been five private party rentals with more on the books. Seydell Johnson said that staff will reevaluate at the end of the summer. She also explained that typically schedule changes are determined by the Recreation Superintendent and the facility supervisors and that Commission doesn't usually get involved. Footner said that she understands closing for weather, but why close when there are low numbers. She asked if that is the case at the Recreation or Mercer Pools, or even the library. Seydell Johnson said the closing due to low numbers had not been implemented during evening swims but that there are often less than 25 people present. She said that staff attempts to tailor schedules and uses based on when most people are using the facility. Seydell Johnson reported that these private parties bring in over 100 people. Wills noted that there may not yet be many private party rentals as with most new schedules etc., the public is not yet aware of the changes. As the word gets out, she believes that more groups will take advantage of the opportunity to rent the pool. Footner suggested that when there is not a party scheduled at the pool, that staff open it up to the public. Seydell Johnson explained that this then becomes problematic because there is not consistency. Venzon asked if there are more rentals on Saturdays than Sundays. Seydell Johnson said she would have to check with staff. Roberts noted. that if low numbers were the catalyst, why not have private parties and open swim at the same time. Seydell Johnson said the groups want exclusive use when renting the pool. Footner asked if the twilight swim was advertised enough. Wills noted that Parks & Recreation staff do a very good job with their programs and with subsidizing swim lessons for children, they are doing great things to offer programming to the underserved population. Staff is offering services that appeal to many groups at different times. Younker asked commission members for their input. Bentler said she likes the idea of posting online if it is open for twilight swim due to no party being scheduled. She believes that people are more attuned to looking online for information than they were in the past. Smith asked Footner and Roberts what time they like to swim and if they swim the full two hours, wondering if there may be a happy medium. Both stated they swam the full two hours during twilight swim. Younker said that while Commission doesn't usually get involved with staff scheduling, he does agree that this may be worth further discussion. He would like to see how this summer goes and then place this item on the October Commission agenda. GATHER HERE -2017 PARK MASTER PLAN UPDATE — JULI SEYDELL JOHNSON Seydell Johnson explained that tonight's presentation is to give a brief overview of recommendations made in the 2017 master plan and then will address areas where location inequities have been identified. After that overview, she will go through each district of the city and ask for Commission input for each of those areas. She reviewed the mission statement of the masterplan explaining that it focuses on diversity and inclusivity of park spaces. She shared that there were many diverse focus groups that took part in the process, as well as commission members. The plan also included an inventory and accessibility audit of the parks and recreation system. She reviewed some of the changes that have already occurred with the mission in mind. For example, the City has added nongender restrooms to many of the parks and recreation facilities. Staff took it a step further by adding large changing tables at the request of service providers of adults. This need was learned during the public input process. The Iowa City Parks Master Plan strategy includes access, play, restore, educate, sustain, and measure. The plan also fosters equity by identifying the neighborhoods and their cultural identity, equity in park facilities and services in all area, be aware of transportation barriers, work to dismantle systemic barriers and more. Seydell Johnson shared that a report from The Trust for Public Land reported that 83% of Iowa City residents live within a 10 -minute walk of a park. She shared a map of identified areas of the city where the plan found them to be lacking in parkland and playgrounds. She explained that in many of these areas there PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 4 of 5 are obstacles. For example, one of the areas identified is the land near the airport. Another area identified is hindered by railroad tracks, etc. Seydell Johnson also suggested some topics that need to be included in a future recreation facilities master plan. These included athletic fields and facilities, recreation centers, aquatic facilities, the development of an eastside sports master plan and the lower city park master plan. Wills asked why these items were not included in the 2017 master plan. The priority of the council was park focused. Much of the plan looked at accessibility issues and was focused on playgrounds and shelters. Seydell Johnson shared a map that was color coded based on playground surfacing. Hall reported that he has been talking with the school district who is going through their process of resurfacing playgrounds. Map shows that the City has a pretty good distribution of playgrounds however, there is not a lot of parkland available in the northwest portion of the City. Seydell Johnson explained to commission that the goal this evening is to review their recommendation from Decembers meeting. If commission is still satisfied with that motion, they she would ask that they affirm or add to it at this point. She will present each area of the city in a district format (districts created specifically for this master plan and does not follow other city processes) and ask for commission input. Seydell Johnson's presentation is attached to these minutes. Below are the recommendations from Commission to Council. Reviewed December motion regarding playground locations and surfacing. No changes made. The December motion was as follows: Moved by Fett, seconded by Russell, that the Parks and Recreation Commission recommend to Council as follows: 1) the current distribution of various playground surfaces is adequate; 2) inclusivity and accessibility issues, however, should be reviewed on a regular basis; and 3) the review should include the consideration of a variety of features to address inclusivity and accessibility issues. The Council should know that the Commission is committed to review issues relating to the inclusivity and accessibility of local narks on at least an annual basis. Passed 7-0 (Hamann & Laurian Absent). SOUTH DISTRICT Seydell Johnson noted that more parkland will become available as the development at McCollister Blvd. progresses. She also noted that this area has a very organized and active neighborhood association. Hall stated that the south district offers the most diverse park amenities. Moved by Wills, seconded by Smith that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the south district of Iowa City: 1) Utilize the Open Space Ordinance whereby the City accepts land in lieu of fees when offered through future development. 2) Increase outreach to the community making the public aware of options that are currently available in the south district. 3) Consider installation of traditional play equipment in the south district. Motion passed 8-0 Bird absent). SOUTHEAST DISTRICT Seydell Johnson believes that the underpass at American Legion Road will open connectivity opportunities. The master plan suggests the need for better connectivity to Mercer Park, however, there isn't much that can be done in this area. Younker proposed that the Iowa City Bicycle Map could be updated to include a route to Mercer. Foelsch agreed that with the cul-de-sac type neighborhoods, there really is not good opportunity for a through route to Mercer. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 5 of 5 Some discussion ensued regarding an eastside sports complex. It was determined by commission that this is an item that should be discussed in more depth and should be added to a future agenda. Moved by Bentler, seconded by Foelsch, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the southeast district of Iowa City: 1) Add new connection to underpass at American Legion Road to expand access around the new Hoover Elementary. 2) Add to current Iowa City Bike May to include routes to Mercer from adiacent neighborhoods. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). 1,•/1.111[N - &IYY:71a11163 0 11 1104 N Seydell Johnson stated that this area is somewhat of a challenge as there are not as many opportunities to add parkland in this district. While there are neighborhood open space funds available, the neighborhood surrounding land on Camp Cardinal Road made it clear that they don't want a park in this space. They agreed that Borlaug School is near the development and serves as a playground. Walden Green Park is included in this district and will include community garden spaces. Hunters Run Park will be updated in 2023. The space that is north of U of I Sports complex provides a lot of space. City will need to pursue open space land when is becomes available. The Johnson County Poor Farm continues to develop and may offer some open space in this area, although is county property. There is some talk of a large development going in west of Highway 218 that will likely include space for a large park and potentially another recreation center. Froesch thought there was some offerings from the churches west of Mormon Trek for parkland. Seydell Johnson said that the there was hope when completing the masterplan that there would be opportunity for a partnership with a couple of the churches. However, issues with liability insurance hindered these proposals. Wills asked for more information about the Johnson County Poor Farm regarding its relationship as a county entity with the City. Moved by Bentler, seconded by Wills, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the west district of Iowa City: 1) As per Open Space Ordinance, consider land made available through future development to be used for placement of a new parks and recreation center in the west central district. 2) Keep apprised of development of the Johnson County Poor Farm for possible trail connection opportunities. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). CENTRAL DISTRICT Seydell Johnson stated that this is the most densely populated area in the city. Commission determined that it would be wise to reassess the map for this area as it should include University of Iowa property as well as the school district. Moved by Bentler, seconded by Foelsch, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the central district of Iowa City: Revise the current assessment of parkland and open space to include both University and Iowa City School District properties. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 6 of 5 WEST DISTRICT Bentler mentioned that Black Spring Circle Park is in this district but feels that much of the public is not aware that it exists. Moved by Wills, seconded by Russell, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the west district: 1) Maintain progress on parks currently in development. 2) Increase outreach to make public aware of Black Springs Circle Park in this district. 3) Expand on outreach regarding the Ashton House. 4) Consider parkland and trail connections as Manville Heights Neighborhood continues to change. Passed 8-0 Bird absent) NORTH DISTRICT Seydell Johnson announced that there will be a Party in the Park event held at Happy Hollow Park on Thursday, July 11. There will also be the opportunity for public input regarding the park upgrades. She also shared that Terrill Mill Skate Park is well used. The masterplan listed a need for more parkland west and north of Dodge St. Moved by Bentler, seconded by Venzon, that City Council consider the following improvements in response to location inequities noted in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan for the north district of Iowa City: 1) Reassess potential bike connectivity as area develops. 2) Remove need for park facilities near Scott Blvd. and Rochester Ave. from plan recommendations. Passed 8-1 Bird absent). FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS Moved by Wills, seconded by Russell, to consider continued development of plans for an eastside sports complex in the southeast district. Moved by Hamann, seconded by Venzon, that Council recommend staff pursue a master planning process to include athletic fields and facilities, recreation facilities and aquatic facilities. Passed 8-0 Bird absent). EASTSIDE SPORTS COMPLEX DISCUSSION: Seydell Johnson said that there is currently a group who is interested in bringing this facility to fruition. Josh Schaumburg, from the Convention and Visitors Bureau, has agreed to fund an update to the 2015 Eastside Sports Master Plan. Hitchcock Design Group has been hired by the CVB to complete a design concept. Hitchcock will also look at an update of Mercer Park ballfields. Hitchcock Design Group will be present for the August Commission Meeting. There will be a public focus group meeting with Hitchcock immediately following the Commission Meeting. Wills noted that even thought this is an east side project, a complex such as this will become a regional usage complex. It will bring in tournaments, be used by Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, and other cities. It will be a driver for economic development. We do not expect the City of Iowa City to fund exclusively. The local kids and economy will benefit as well. Younker suggested that the topic of playing fields be added to a future agenda. He would like to get an overall sense of what consensus is of the playing fields in Iowa City. Are people happy or unhappy. He understands that there are some fields that are older and have infrastructure issues and are difficult to drain during the rainy season. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 7 of 5 Moved by Wills, seconded by Russell, to consider continued development of plans for an eastside sports complex in the southeast district. Moved by Hamann, seconded by Venzon, that Council recommend staff pursue a master planning process to include athletic fields and facilities, recreation facilities and aquatic facilities. Passed 8-0 (Bird absent). REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF Parks & Recreation Director — Juli Seydell Johnson: Seydell Johnson reminded Commission of the Riverfront Crossings Grand Opening event on Saturday, July 20. All are encouraged to attend. Parks Division Superintendent — Zac Hall Hall noted that after a very wet spring and early summer, the parks are now very dry CHAIRS REPORT: No report. COMMISSION TIME: Hamann asked for an update on the proposed space for nonprofit groups at the Recreation Center. Seydell Johnson reported that the Bike Library declined the offer for various reasons. Public Space One has moved into a house so won't be using the space either. Now the plan is to renovate as a generic recreation space. The design process is not in process with construction planned to start in December. Luke Foelsch announced that this is his last meeting has he is moving out of state. He will notify the City Clerk's Office who will advertise the position. Smith asked why there is not a composting program offered at the Farmers Market. Seydell Johnson and Neumann explained that it has been discussed in detail. It is necessary to have staff or volunteers at every receptacle to make sure that the compost is not contaminated. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Bentler, seconded by Russell, to adiourn the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Motion passed 8-0 (Bird absent). PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION July 10, 2019 Page 8 of 5 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD NAME o0 00 0000 0000 00 o\ 0� °, °�` °�` � � TERM 0000 � e4 O o ti fq N M ~ M O ~ N ~ N O 00 O� eq N M kn [� EXPIRES Suzanne 12/31/20 X X X X X X NM X O/E X LQ X Bentler Steve Bird 12/31/21 X X X X X X NM X X X LQ O/E Wayne Fett 12/31/18 X X O/E X X * * Lucas 12/31/22 * * * * * x NM X X O/E LQ X Foelsch Cara 12/31/19 O/E X O/E X O/E X NM X X X LQ X Hamann Lucie 12/31/18 O/E X X X O/E Laurian Ben Russell 12/31/21 X X X X X X NM X X X LQ X Angie Smith 12/31/21 O/E X X X X X NM X X X LQ X Jamie 12/31/20 X X X O/E X X NM X O/E O/E LQ X Venzon Brianna 12/31/22 * * * * * O/E NM X X X LQ X Wills Joe Younker 12/31/19 X X X X X X NM X X X LQ X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM= No meeting LQ = No meeting due to lack of quorum * = Not a member now